TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present appeal against the order dated 05.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-21 (for short the CIT(A), Mumbai, for the assessment year 2012-13, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ). 2. In this case, the assesse filed its return of income for the assessment year under consideration declaring the total income of ₹ 4,02,09,744/-. The AO completed the assessment u/s 143 (3) of the Act. Subsequently, information was received from Kolkata Directorate of Investigation to the effect that the three institutions, namely School of Human Genetics Population Health (SHG PH), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment and as the said issue would go to the root of the matter, the order passed by the CIT (A) may be set aside. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the appellant prays that your honour hold that the reopening of assessment on the alleged ground that the donation given by the appellant to the School of Human Genetics Population Health amounting to ₹ 1,00,00,000/- was bogus donation, is bad in law. B) Principles of natural justice violated 4 The learned CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in holding that the principles of natural justice were not violated on the AO not giving the appellant an opportunity to cross examine the parties whose statements the AO was relying on. 5 As the principles of natural justice are violated, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n Health amounting to ₹ 3,00,000/- and claimed deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act amounting to ₹ 5.25 lacs and its return of income. The AO relying on the report of enquiry conducted by DDIT rejected the claim of the assesse on the ground that the donation received by the School of Human Genetics and Population Health were never utilized for the purpose of scientific research and setting up of new infrastructure. The first Appellate Authority confirmed the findings of the AO. However, in the further appeal, the Tribunal deleted the addition confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A). The contention of the assessee s in the said case was that at the time of making donation to the said institution, the institution was having all requisite certi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Mahesh C. Thakker vs. ACIT (supra), the coordinate Bench has decided the identical issue in favour of the assesse holding as under:- 6. In view of the above submissions, it was claimed that exactly on identical issues the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal B Bench Kolkata in the case of DCIT vs. Maco Corporation (India) Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 16/Kol/2017 vide order dated 14.03.2018 for AY 2013-14 has considered the issue in regard to very same trust i.e. SGHPH and holds that prior to the date of donation under cancellation of registration has happened and there is absolutely no provision of withdrawal of recognition under section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. Hence, allowed the claim of the assessee by observing in Para 8.1 and 8.5 as und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d if the recognition granted to the payee had been withdrawn subsequent to the date of contribution by the assessee. Hence no disallowance u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act could be made in the instant case. 7. Similarly, the another co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, in the case of P.R. Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 529/JP/2019 vide order dated 05.07.2018 for AY 2014-15 has considered the same Trust/ institute i.e. SHG PG and allowed the claim of the assessee. The facts and circumstances are exactly identical in the present case also, respectfully following the decision of co-ordinate Bench, we allow the claim of deduction under section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. 8. Similar, are the facts in AY 2014-15, hence taking a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
