THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2019-20

Assessee by: Shri Mehul Thakkar, A.R.

Revenue by: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr. D.R.

Date of hearing : 01-12-2025 Date of pronouncement : 16-01-2026 आदेश/ORDER This is an appeal filed against the order dated 24-06-

2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2019-20.

2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in reopening the assessment under section 147 of the Act. The reopening is bad in law and void ab initio.

2. The Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in issuing notice under section 148A(b) without furnishing complete relied-upon documents and without disposing of the objections of the appellant by way of a reasoned and speaking order.

3. The order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act by the Ld. Assessing Officer is bad in law, as it has travelled beyond the scope of the Show Cause Notice by treating the alleged escapement of income at (cid:1)10,00,000/- instead of (cid:1)5,00,000/- as originally alleged.

4. The order passed under section 148A(d) of the Act by the Ld. Assessing Officer is bad in law, as sanction under section 151 of the Act was obtained only in respect of alleged escapement of (cid:1)5,00,000/-, whereas the order under section 148A(d) refers to alleged escapement of (cid:1)10,00,000/-, thereby travelling beyond the sanction accorded.

5. The sanction granted under section 151 of the Act is bad in law, as in the case of reopening beyond three years from the end of the relevant assessment year, the competent sanctioning authority is the Principal Chief Commissioner or Principal Director General or Chief Commissioner or Director General. In the present case, approval was accorded only by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), rendering the entire proceedings invalid.

6. The initiation of reassessment proceedings is bad in law, as the Show Cause Notice was issued under section 148A(b) of the Act despite the fact that the provisions of section 148A were not applicable to the appellant's case, which prima facie falls within clause (c) of the proviso to section 148A of the Act.

7. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of (cid:1)5,00,000/- for the donation made to the Rashtriya Samajwadi Party (Secular) and more particularly:

-That the above addition was confirmed disregarding the evidence produced by the appellant.

-That the above addition was confirmed without appreciating the fact that the addition was made solely on the basis of unverified and uncorroborated extracts of the alleged third-party statements recorded under section 132(4), without providing copies thereof to the appellant, in gross violation of principles of Audi Alteram Partem.

-This further resulted into inability of the appellant to seek cross- examination of the third parties whose statements have been heavily relied upon while rejecting the claim of deduction under section 80GGC of the Act.

-That the order under section 147 has been issued by mechanically adopting the findings of the Investigation Wing without independent enquiry or analysis, thereby acting on "borrowed satisfaction," which is impermissible in law.

8. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of 5,00,000/- for the donation made to the Apna Desh Party and more particularly:

-That the disallowance of donation of (cid:1)5,00,000/- made to Apna Desh Party was confirmed, despite the fact that the Investigation Wing's report, relied upon by the AO, pertained only to Rashtriya Samajwadi Party (Secular) and had no reference to Apna Desh Party, thereby rendering the addition baseless, mechanical, and without jurisdiction.

-That the ad