9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aring total income of Rs..1,25,43,176/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act"). The case was re-opened u/s 147 of the Act by issue of notice u/s 148 dated 18.03.2016 after recording the reasons and with the prior approval. Notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response Authorised Representative of the assessee attended and submitted the relevant information as called for. 3. Assessee vide letter dated 04.04.2016, requested to provide reasons for reopening and the same was provided vide letter dated 16.06.2016. The relevant reasons recorded are reproduced below: - "In this case, information has been received from Pr.DIT (Investigation)-1. vide letter dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ust, not even a single purchase bill could be found at the office premise and it was stated that they were not maintained by the trust. When the details of the parties from whom expenses were booked, their addresses were booked and their addresses were asked, it was stated that they were entry providers and details were not known. Based on the findings unearthed by the search parties he has treated that donation made by the assessee as non-genuine accordingly, he disallowed the same. 6. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and after considering the detailed submissions Ld.CIT(A) also treated the above donation as non-genuine and dismissed the ground raised by the assessee. 7. Aggrieved assessee is in appeal before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) failed to appreciate that at the time when the donation of Rs.15,00,000/- was made by the appellant, the proper Approvals/Exemptions were in force and in favour of the said Trust i.e. Navjeevan Charitable Trust 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.Commissioner of income tax (A) erred in confirming the order of assessing officer without appreciating that the cancellation of approval in the subsequent year which was earlier granted to the trust u/s.35AC to avail exemption of donation made by the appellant does not affect the availability and genuineness of the claim made by the appellant company as held by Hon supreme court in case of Chotatingrai Tea & Ors Etc., 258 ITR 529. The appellant craves leaves to ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the orders of the lower authorities and he argued that the funds given to the Trust is only a bogus and it is found that trust was never carried any charitable activities. 10. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record, we observe from the record that assessee has raised grounds challenging the reopening as well as on merit. Since the issue involved is covered in favour of the assessee on merits, we do not intend to go into jurisdictional issue at this stage. We kept open this ground open. 11. Coming on merits, we observe that assessee has made the donation on 30.01.2009 and assessee has submitted all the relevant information with regard to payment of donation and all these donations were made through banking chann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r going through documents on record, it could be seen that the assessee had given donation on 21/06/2004 against valid receipt issued by the Trust. The donation was made through cheque which got cleared from assessee's bank account. The assessee was issued requisite Form No.58A by the trust. The trust had valid registration at the time of making of donation. The approval was withdrawn only subsequently vide notification dated 30/11/2016. Further, it is evident from the assessment order that the deduction has been denied to the assessee only in the basis of allegations that the donations were bogus donations and the amount so donated has flown back to the assessee. However, except for statement of trustee of the society, we find that there i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore making disallowance and did not brought on record any fact to establish that donation given by the assessee was subsequently returned back in cash except mere allegations. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s A and A Bakery P. Ltd. (2008 302 ITR 51) to support the conclusions. Finally, the disallowance was deleted. We find that fact to be pari-materia the same in this year. The assessee has duly discharged the onus casted upon him and it was incumbent upon Ld. AO to refute the same. However, no such inquiry has been conducted and the disallowance has been made on mere allegations. Therefore, respectfully following the earlier order, we delete the disallowance as made by Ld. AO. Therefore, we dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
