KHASDAR SANSKRUTIK MAHOTSAV SAMITI,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, EXEMP, NAGPUR

ITA 286/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 July 2026AY 2019-202016 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee had discharged its initial burden by providing evidence of identity, genuineness, and banking channels for the donations. The Revenue failed to provide cogent material to rebut this evidence, and the addition was also considered a double taxation as the income was already accounted for.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, received donations of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- which were added to its income by the AO under Section 68 as unexplained cash credits. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, citing the donor companies' weak financial position.

What were the issues?

Whether donations received by a charitable trust can be added as unexplained cash credits under Section 68 when the assessee provides evidence of identity, genuineness, and banking channels, and whether such an addition amounts to double taxation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 115BBE,Section 148A,Section 151A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 254(2A),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. Moryani, Adv, Shri Rachit Thakar, Adv, Shri Sanjay Thakar, Adv. &, Shri Bhavesh Moryani, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Hearing: 18.06.2026Pronounced: 14.07.2026

PER KHETTRA MOHAN ROY, AM:

The present Stay Application has been filed by the assessee seeking stay of recovery of the outstanding

SA No. 05/NAG/2026 & demand of Rs. 94,63,424/-, arising pursuant to the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. The petition has been considered along with the submissions made by the assessee. It is noticed that assessee has not complied with the mandatory requirement of the provisions of section 254(2A) making the prescribed pre-deposit of 20% of the outstanding disputed demand while seeking stay of recovery. In the absence of such compliance and

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →