TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our of assessee. - I.T.A No. 2668/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 21-2-2020 - Shri S.S. Godara, JM And Dr. A.L. Saini, AM For the Appellant : Shri Anil Kochar, Adv. S.L. Kochar, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, JCIT. ORDER Per Shri S. S. Godara: This assessee s appeal for assessment year 2014-15 arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kolkata s order dated 27.09.2018 passed in case no. CIT(A), Kol-6/10221/2016-17 involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). Heard both the parties. Case file persued. 2. The assessee s delay of 18 days in filing of the instant appeal stated to be attributable to communication gap and compilation of ne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... % of the aggregate sum of Rs.6,00,00,000/- (Rs,2,00,00,000 + Rs,4,00,00,000) donated to these two institutes which were approved by the Central Government for the purposes of section 35(l)(ii) of the Act read with Rule 5C and5E of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. In the assessment year 2013-14, the assessee claimed weighted deduction of Rs.4,81,25,000/- under section 35(1) (ii) of the Act, which is 175% of the amount of donation being the sum of Rs.2,75,00,000/- in respect of the donation given to The School of Human Genetics and Population Health . We note that the Notifications to this effect, that these two institutions viz: Matrivani and SHG , were approved by the Central Government for the purpose of section 35 (1) (ii) of the Act, was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us amounts donated to these two institutions. We note that in the statements, of key persons and alleged brokers recorded by the Investigation Wing in course of survey proceedings, in their cases and the extracts of which was provided to the assessee in the show cause notice, the name of the assessee firm does not appear anywhere. It is to be noted that none of those persons implicate the assessee to have made bogus donations and that cash was paid to the donors assessee in lieu of the alleged bogus donation after deducting their commission. We note that the statements of the various parties and persons were recorded behind the back of the assessee and the Assessing Officer did not allow opportunity of cross examination. We note tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure was in receipt of the donation and it has not given any refund in cash, then the sole basis of disallowance of claim as a matter of fact disappeared. It should be remembered suspicion howsoever strong cannot take the place of evidence. The confirmation from Shri Swapan Ranjan Dasgupta fortifies the claim of the assessee for weighted deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The sole basis of the addition/disallowance based on statement recorded on oath during survey cannot be allowed as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kader Khan sons (supra). Moreover, we note that if the AO was hell bent determined to disallow the claim of the assessee, then he should have granted an opportunity to cross examine Shri Swapan Ranjan Das Gupta and Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quasi judicial in nature. Second, there was no express provision in the Act vesting the CIT with power of cancellation of registration till 01.10.2004; and lastly, Section 21of the General Clauses Act has no application to the order passed by the CIT under Section 12A because the order is quasi judicial in nature and it is for all these reasons the CIT had no jurisdiction to cancel the registration certificate once granted by him under Section 12A till the power was expressly conferred on the CIT by Section 12AA(3) of the Act w.e.f. 01.10.2004. We hold that the ratio decidendi of the aforesaid judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court would squarely be applicable to the facts of the instant case. In fact the assessee's case herein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
