9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion to the extent of Rs. 13,53,600/-. He, therefore, asked the assessee to substantiate the same with documentary evidences in the shape of copy of ledger account, copy of bills/receipts issued and copy of confirmation of the parties. According to the Assessing Officer, the assessee simply filed copy of the ledger account maintained by the assessee. Since, according to him, the confirmations were not filed from any of the parties, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 13,53,600/- to the total income of the assessee. 3. Similarly, the Assessing Officer found from the balance sheet that the assessee has shown loans and advances to the extent of Rs. 60 lakhs, the bifurcation of which is as under:- S.No. Name Amount 1. Ashwani Shah 100000 2. Asha Gupta 100000 3. Asha Sharma 100000 4. Harinder kaur 100000 5. Pushpa Saini 100000 6. Reena Joon 100000 7. Urmila Gupta 100000 8. Lakhi Ram Shiv Narayan 2000000 9. Murli Enterprises 300000 10. Radhe Sham Ajay Kumar 1200000 11. Radhe Sham Ajay Kumar - Plot 800000 12. Rishi Prakash Garg 300000 13 Vash Bhatta Company 700000 TOTAL 6000000 4. He noted that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unts were advanced were given. 6.1.4 In the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Thiruvananthapuram v. Shree P. Subramoniam Religious Trust [(2009) 179 Taxman 144 (Kerala)], the Hon'ble Kerala High Court have, inter alia, held as under in Para 3 of the order: "3. ...There is nothing wrong in advancing funds for purchase of cement, if the cement is to be utilised for construction purpose for the trust. However, in this case except payment made to a trader, there is nothing to indicate as to the terms or the time for purchase of cement. The trader has no doubt confirmed receipt of advance for supply of cement. However there is nothing to indicate that any approval permission is granted or is expected within a reasonable time for construction to justify the advance made to the trader. We are of the view that this advance is only siphoning off funds of the trust and there is no immediate requirement of cement as no concrete proposal was there for construction of pilgrim centre. Even at the time of hearing appeals by the CIT (Appeals) which is after 5-6 years of expiry of the assessment year the assesses has no case that the finds advanced were in fact utilised for the purpose fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecting the additional evidences file during the course of proceedings. b) Rejecting application made by the assessee under rule 46A even without any opportunity and also without any reason. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) eared in holding that the amount of advances given of Rs. 53,00,000/- was investment or deposit even when the same has been received back as evidenced by the books of accounts. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was incorrect and unjustified in holding that the amount of Rs. 53,00,000/- was taxable since it was in-violation of section 13(l)(d) and also it was not one of the modes as specified u/s 11(5). 4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was incorrect and unjustified in dismissing the ground of appeal relating to corpus donations of Rs. 13,53,600/- received during the relevant period. 5) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) was incorrect and unjustified in sustaining the addition of Rs. 13,53,600/- made by the assessing officer even without considering various submissions dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... services being provided by the parties to whom loans and advances were given. Similarly, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 13,53,600/- being the corpus donation received from 54 members on the ground that the assessee was unable to file any confirmation of any of the parties. We find the ld.CIT(A) rejected the additional evidences filed before him in shape of affidavits of all members giving corpus donation. He also rejected the submissions giving the nature and details of the advances and upheld the action of the Assessing Officer, the reasons for which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. It is the submission of the ld. counsel that the amount of Rs. 53 lakhs being given as advances to different parties for some construction purposes were returned back in the subsequent year and there is no misappropriation of funds since the exemption u/s 11 has not been denied and, therefore, the addition of the same is not correct. Similarly, an amount of Rs. 13,53,600/- being corpus donation received by the assessee from its own members being a capital receipt cannot be considered as income of the assessee. 10. So far as the addition of Rs. 53 lakh made by the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The ground of appeal No.2 and 3 filed by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 11. So far as the addition of Rs. 13,53,600/- being corpus donation received from the members of the society are concerned, we find the Assessing Officer disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee did not file any confirmation from the said persons. We find the ld.CIT(A) did not accept the additional evidences in the shape of affidavits filed before him and sustained the addition so made by the Assessing Officer. We find merit in the submission of the ld. counsel for the assessee that corpus donation from members cannot be treated as income of the assessee. However, the same needs to be substantiated in the shape of confirmations from the member donors of the society. We, therefore, restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant opportunity to the assessee to file the confirmations of the said donors and, in case the assessee is able to furnish the confirmations of the donors, the Assessing Officer shall consider the allowability of the same as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The other grounds raised by the assessee being g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
