TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Lalit P. Jain, Sr. D.R. ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, J.M. 1. These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee are directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax ( hereinafter called CIT(A) ) order no. CIT(A)- 4/10317/2017-18 order dated 23/10/2018 arising out of assessment order dated 18/08/2017. Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income tax Appeals erred in disallowance of deduction under section 35(1 )(ii) of the Act. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income tax Appeals erred and uphold the order of assessment under section 143(3) read with Section 147, when there was no reason to reopen the completed / abated assessment. 3. The order of the Learned Commissioner of Income tax Appeals and Assessing officer has passed the order overlooking apparent Proviso (A) and (B) of Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The learned CIT Appeals grossly erred in ignoring the fact that the institution was time being approved as eligible institute under Section 35(l)(ii) of the Act. 4. The revocation of Notification with retrospective effect is unlawful for the reason that of the notification inter-alia states tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f appeal and same does not require any kind of interference at our end. 5. In the result, this ground relating to reopening are dismissed. 6. Now we come to merit of the case. These relating to disallowance of deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of ₹ 8,00,000/-. The assesse has claimed to have made donation of ₹ 5,00,000/- to School of Human genetics Population Health (SHG PH). It is submitted that the said donee was an approved institute u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act vide Notification No 35/2008 dated 14.03.2008 and was valid during F.Y. 2010-11 relevant to A.Y. 2011-12 in which assesse made donation to the institute and said donation was made through Banking Channel and notification was rescinded by the CBDT, vide notification no. 82/2016 dated 15.09.2016 with retrospective effect on the basis of enquiries conducted in the case of the institute i.e. SHGPH. Thereafter a survey was carried out by the department u/s 133A of the Act in the case of donee and during the survey Treasures of the institute made statement that since 2002 to the institute made statement that source of income for this organization is mainly out of donation from corporate bodies as well as from individuals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as given on 11th March, 2014 and 18th March, 2014 to the amount of ₹ 13 lacs. Relevant part of the decision of Co-ordinate Bench on same issue and identical facts in the case of the CIT vs. Thakkar Govindbhai Ganpatlal HUF (ITA No. 2318/Ahd/2017 dated 17/07/2019) is reproduced as under:- 5. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. In the case of S.G.Vat care P.Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal has recorded the following finding: 2. In the first ground of appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of ₹ 8,75,000/- on account of alleged bogus donation to Herbicure Healthcare Bio-Herbal Research Foundation. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed return of income on 20.11.2014 declaring total income at ₹ 4,47,910/-. On scrutiny of the accounts, it revealed that the assessee-company has given donation to Herbicure Healthcare BioHerbal Research Foundation, Calcutta. A survey action was carried out at the premises of the donee wherein it revealed to the Revenue that this concern was misusing the benefit of notification issued by the Income Tax Department. It h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in dispute is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. Respectfully following the order of the ITAT in the case of S.G.Vat care P.Ltd., we do not find any merit in the appeal of the Revenue. It is dismissed. Respectfully following the above cited decision and finding of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT on similar facts and identical issue, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 11. And in another matter, similar facts and circumstances of the case Co-ordinate Bench in ITA No. 1943/Ahd/2017 for Assessment Year 2014-15, Co-ordinate Bench granted relief to the appellant and relevant para is reproduced hereunder: 6. We have duly considered rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. The AO is harping upon an information supplied by the survey tem of Calcutta. He has not specifically recorded statement of representatives of the donee. He has not brought on record a specific evidence wherein donee has deposed that donations received from the assessee was paid back in cash after deducting commission. On the basis of a general information collected from the donee, the donation ITA No.1943/Ahd/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
