TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 795X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 014 the Prescribed Authority was designated to be the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) as per Board s Notification Dated 05.03.2015. Therefore, contention of Learned Counsel for the Assessee has no merit and is accordingly rejected. Assessee also contended that as per Section 115BBC(2) the assessee need not to get approval under section 10(23C)(v) of the I.T. Act because in case anonymous donations is received by the Trust/Institution created or established wholly for religious purposes. However, it is not a case of the Revenue that assessee received any anonymous donations or if any addition have been made on that account under section 115BBC of the I.T. Act, 1961. Therefore, this contention of the Learned Counsel for the Assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - during assessment year under appeal. It was also observed that the assessee has not filed income tax return for the assessment year under appeal. The A.O. called for explanation of assessee. The assessee stated that it has not filed its return of income for the assessment year under appeal. The A.O. noted that assessee has not filed return of income and huge cash was deposited in its bank account. The A.O, therefore, initiated the re-assessment proceedings under section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and after getting approval, issued notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961, which were duly served upon the assessee. The assessee in response to the notice under section 148, submitted return of income Dated 28.10.2018. The A.O. issued sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8,943/- and directed to charge tax @ 30%. 3.3. The assessee challenged the addition before the Ld. CIT(A) on merit as well as charging of income tax @30% on the assessed income. The Ld. CIT(A) considering the explanation of assessee, deleted the addition of ₹ 88,943/- and as such there were no question of charging income tax @ 30%. This ground of appeal of assessee was allowed. 3.4. The assessee as regards denial of exemption under section 10(23C)(v) of the I.T. Act, contended before the Ld. CIT(A) that the requirement of approval under section 10(23C)(v) of the I.T. Act was provided by Rule 2C of I.T. Rules w.e.f. 15.11.2014 and hence, there were no requirement for approval by the Prescribed Authority. The Ld. CIT(A), however, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ette. It is noteworthy that no documentary evidence with regard to notification by the Central Government for the purpose of section 10(23C)(v) has been submitted during the appellate proceeding also. Hence, in absence of any notification of the Central Government or approval of the prescribed authority for the purpose of section 10(23C)(v), the finding of the Assessing Officer that the assessee is not approved for the purpose of section 10(23)(v) is upheld. Grounds of appeal nos. 2 and 5 are dismissed. 4. Learned Counsel for the Assessee reiterated the submissions made before the authorities below and submitted that there were no requirement for approval by the Prescribed Authority in assessment year under appeal as it was provided w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ised for ensuring that the income accruing thereto is properly applied for the objects thereof. 6.1. Rule 2C of the I.T. Rules, 1962 provides as under: [Guidelines for approval under sub-clauses (iv) and (v) of clause (23C) of section 10. 2C. (1) The prescribed authority under subclauses (iv) and (v) of clause (23C) of section 10 shall be the Chief Commissioner or Director General, to whom the application shall be made as provided in sub-rule (2). (2) The application to be furnished under sub-clauses (iv) and (v) of clause (23C) of section 10 by a fund, trust or institution shall be in Form No. 56. Explanation.-For the purposes of this rule, Chief Commissioner or Director General means the Chief Commissioner or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prescribed Authority before claiming exemption under such provision. It is only on 15.11.2014 the Prescribed Authority was designated to be the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) as per Board s Notification Dated 05.03.2015. Therefore, contention of Learned Counsel for the Assessee has no merit and is accordingly rejected. Learned Counsel for the Assessee also contended that as per Section 115BBC(2) the assessee need not to get approval under section 10(23C)(v) of the I.T. Act because in case anonymous donations is received by the Trust/Institution created or established wholly for religious purposes. However, it is not a case of the Revenue that assessee received any anonymous donations or if any addition have been made on that accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
