9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 961X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of natural justice." 3. Facts in Brief:- The assessee is registered as a Public Charitable Trust under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, and it is also registered under section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). The assessee trust also accorded recognition under section 80G of the Act. The assessee trust is carrying out 100% non-commercial activities benefitting the poorest of the poor in the society. Since its inception, the assessee trust is fully devoted for the relief of the poor and other charitable objects. As a part of the objectives, the assessee trust is implementing various programs to support rural women, tribal folks and marginal farmers and rural youth. For the year under consideration, the assessee trust filed its return of income on 28/10/2017, declaring total income at Rs. nil. The case was selected for complete scrutiny through "CASS". During the scrutiny assessment, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 2,10,99,102, which was added to the total income of the assessee. The said amount of Rs. 2,10,99,102, relates to the advance received from NABARD towards implementation of on-going tribal development projects and farmers' welfare projects. The as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eating the same as anonymous donation, the learned CIT(A) referring to Para-5.3 of the order passed by the Assessing Officer, upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer by observing as under:- "6.4. From the observation of the Id. AO, it is clear that the appellant has not maintained proper record of the donors. As seen from the above, the donation of Rs. 56000/-, Rs. 269104/- and Rs. 508276/- remains unverified due to donation denied by the persons, insufficient address and no reply received from the donors. Therefore, it is clear that the total donation of Rs. 8,33,380/- are not genuine and remains unexplained. Thus, it is evident that the appellant has failed to establish the genuineness of donation. The evidence available on record are overwhelmingly against the appellant. Merely stating that all the records are properly maintained is not enough. The appellant is required to demonstrate whatever is being stated. 6.5. The appellant has relied on the judgment of the DIT(Exemptions) vs Keshav Social & Charitable Trust 278 ITR 152 (DEL). In this case it was held that complete list of donors and their addresses should be maintained so as not to attract the provision of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that out of 23,136 donors, the Assessing Officer selected 205 donors randomly and out of 205 donors, 89 donors attended the office of the Assessing Officer and their statements were recorded, but 76 persons did not attend the office of the Assessing Officer, but confirmations were filed; 22 persons neither attended nor submitted any written reply; in case of 12 persons, summons were returned back to the office of the Assessing Officer by the Postal Department with remark "unserved". Regarding 89 donors, they appeared before the Assessing Officer their statements were recorded and out of these 89 donors, except 2 persons, the Assessing Officer has not doubted having paid donation to the assessee. We further find that out of 89 persons appeared before the Assessing Officer, 2 persons namely Shri Pankaj Parasram Nandeshwar and Shri Sudhir Mahadeo Kathane, denied payment of donation and hence, the Assessing Officer has doubted the entire donations. Insofar as these 2 persons are concerned, who denied having paid donation to the assessee, we find that the assessee has submitted all the details in respect of these 2 persons namely Shri Pankaj Parasram Nandeshwar and Shri Sudhir Mahade ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unserved summons to the donors may be due to the reason that the donors have left the address or the donors must have changed their address. However, it was the duty of the Assessing Officer to call the assessee to find out the whereabouts of the donors but the Assessing Officer failed to do so. Once the donations are received by the assessee, it is not the duty of the assessee to have a watch on the donors about their whereabouts whether they are staying in the same place which the addresses were given at the time of payment of donation. The donors are not under the control of the assessee, they may shift anywhere or change their residence. It was the duty of the Assessing Officer to ask the assessee to produce those 12 person before him which the Assessing Officer failed to do so. 18. In view of the forgoing discussions and by considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 115BBC of the Act for the only reason of doubting the genuineness of the donors. The assessee has discharged the onus casted upon it and, therefore, if at all the Assessing Officer is having any doubt, he should ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... donation made with a specific direction that such donation is for any university or other educational institution or any hospital or other medical institution run by such trust or institution. (3) For the purposes of this section, "anonymous donation" means any voluntary contribution referred to in sub-clause (iia) of clause (24) of section 2, where a person receiving such contribution does not maintain a record of the identity indicating the name and address of the person making such contribution and such other particulars as may be prescribed." 19. Insofar as the anonymous donations are concerned, the assessee maintained the record of the identity and address of the persons who are making contribution and other particulars and, therefore, provisions of section 115BBC of the Act are not applicable. In the present case, the assessee has maintained identity of the donors i.e., complete details such as name, address, PAN card details, Aadhar details and, hence, provisions of section 115BBC of the Act are not applicable to the assessee Trust. We find that the assessee has given all the details of the donors including names, address, PAN card details, Aadhar details, etc. Thus, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Petroleum Technology is not accepted by the Department and the appeal filed against the aforesaid case is pending for adjudication before the Hon'ble Allahabad High Cour,. Lucknow Bench. 4 The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or omit any or all the grounds of appeal." 10. Facts in Brief:- The assessee is registered as a Public Charitable Trust under the BPT Act, 1950 and is also registered under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") vide order dated 22/07/2004, passed by the CIT-I, Nagpur. The assessee filed its return of income for the year under consideration on 28/10/2017, declaring its total income at Rs. nil. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. On a perusal of the account statements, the Assessing Officer observed that for the year under consideration, the assessee had received grants for various projects at Rs. 78,08,171, donation from general public at Rs. 48.62.600, service charges at Rs. 83,47,541, and interest from bank at Rs. 23,36,365. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had shown Rs. 2,15,92,973, as unspent grant in its Balance Sheet, but the same was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing the total income of the assessee at Rs. 1,89,29,460, and anonymous donation under section 115BBC(1) of the Act at Rs. 5,90,250. Aggrieved with the order so passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 12. The learned CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee's appeal deleting the addition of Rs. 2,10,99,102, against which the Revenue has filed the appeal. 13. Ground no.1 & 2, relate to addition of Rs. 2,10,99,102, being unspent grant shown in the Balance Sheet, but not shown as income in the Income & Expenditure Account. After considering the assessee submission and the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, the learned CIT(A) observed that the sum of Rs. 2,10,99,102, constitutes advance received from NABARD towards specific purpose of implementation of on-going Tribal Development Projects and farmers' welfare projects with certain specific conditions. As per the terms of NABARD, if the grant is not fully utilised for the purpose for which the same had been sanctioned, the assessee is liable to refund the balance amount. Even the interest received on such grants had to refunded back to NABARD. The learned CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
