INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING CORPORATION,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE (1),, AHMEDABAD

The solitary ground of appeal is pertained to the issue of disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s. 35(1)(iii) of Rs. 8,75,000/-.

The fact in brief is that assessment u/s. 143(3) of the act was finalized on 30th December, 2016. During the course of assessment, the assessing officer has noticed that assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the act @175% i.e. Rs. 8,75,0000/- on donation of Rs. 5 lacs given to Hervicure 1999 and Agarwalla & Sons Ltd. vs. CIT & Others (1994) 208 ITR 863 dated 5th July, 1993. On the other hand, ld. departmental representative has supported the order of lower authorities.

We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The assessee has claimed deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the act at the rate of I.T.A No. 2446/Ahd/2017 A.Y. 2014-15 Page No 3 175% on giving donation of Rs. 5,00,000/- to Herbicure Bio Herbal Research. The assessing officer has disallowed the claim of deduction on the basis of admission of the assesee that donation was fictitious and the donated amount was returned to the assessee by cash. In the light of the aforesaid undisputed facts, the facts of the case of the assessee are distinguishable from the facts pertained to the judicial pronouncement referred by the assessee since the assessee has admitted before the assessing officer that the impugned addition was made fictitiously which was returned in cash to the assessee. The assessee could not controvert these facts during the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) and also failed to disprove the admission made before the assessing officer with any relevant supporting material at the time of appellate proceedings before us. In view the above facts, we consider that assessee has categorically admitted before the assessing officer during the course of assessment proceedings that donation was fictitious and the same was returned to it in cash, therefore, we do not find any substance in the appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is rejected.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.