9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laimed in respect of donation made by the Appellant 1.1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as "the Ld. CIT(A)"') was not justified and erred in not granting a complete deduction in respect of donations of INR 9,00,000 made by the Appellant to Ms. Sahara Health & Education Society, being an eligible project notified by the Government of India, without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 1.2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case,the Ld. CIT(A) erred in restricting the deduction to 10 percent of Gross Total Income in respect of the donations made by the Appellant to M/s. Sah ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to allow deduction u/s 80GGA of the Act instead of u/s 80G of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee for allowing deduction u/s 80GGA of the Act and he allowed the deduction u/s 80G of the Act to the extent of Rs.86,124/- computed by under the provisions of section 80G(2) and section 80G(1)(ii) of the Act. Before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee again reiterated its claim for allowing deduction u/s 80GGA of the Act. But the Ld. CIT(A) also rejected the claim of the assesseee. According to the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not file revise return of income u/s 139(5) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) also held that in view of decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (2006) 284 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue-in-dispute and perused the relevant material on record. The assessee in the return of income made claim for deduction u/s 80G of the Act in respect of donation of Rs.9,00,000/- to M/s Sahara Health and Education Society. Under section 80G of the Act, the deduction is allowed limited to 10% of gross total income. During the assessment proceeding, the assessee submitted for revising its claim of deduction u/s 80GGA of the Act wherein 100% deduction is allowable. However, the same was not accepted by the Assessing Officer. The assessee again made this claim before the Ld. CIT(A) but the Ld. CIT(A) also rejected on the ground that he does not have power to entertain fresh claim. We find that identical issue has been decided by the Hon'ble Bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is to entertain for the first time a point of law provided the fact on the basis of which the issue of law can be raised before the Tribunal. The decision does not in any way relate to the power of the Assessing Officer to entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return. In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the civil appeal. However, we make it clear that the issue in this case is limited to the power of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Incometax Act, 1961. There shall be no order as to costs." [emphasis supplied] It is clear to us that the Supreme Court did not h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
