SHREE JAIN SWETHAMBAR MURTI PUJAK SANGH,CHENNAI vs. ITO, EXEMPTIONS WARD-4,, CHENNAI

Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a trust. For the assessment year 2019-20, the return of income was filed declaring total income of Rs.1,51,551/-. The assessment was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued on 28.09.2020. During the course of assessment proceedings, in response to notice issued u/s.142(1) of the Act, assessee had only submitted partial information. The assessment was completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide order dated 27.08.2021. In the said assessment order, the AO made addition of Rs.1,26,453/- as anonymous donations since assessee did not submit the requisite details of the donors.

Aggrieved by the assessment order making addition of Rs.1,26,453/- assessee filed appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). The FAA confirmed the addition made by the AO. The relevant finding of the FAA reads as follows:- 8. Ground No.3: During the assessment proceedings, the appellant was specifically asked to furnish complete details of donation received during the year under consideration, however assessee failed to comply with the notice issued. Appellant accepted in its submission and stated that the details of the donors for all the donation received during the relevant year were recorded in the books of the appellant but had failed to produce during the course of assessment proceedings, however no reason was given by the appellant for not providing the details. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant only provided a list of the name and address of the donors, the list provided by the appellant is only a printout, which was not certified or signed by the appellant Trust. In absence of this, the authenticity of same remained non-genuine. In this regard, reliance is placed on the following judicial pronouncements - 1. CBDT notification No.30/2009 dated 31.03.2009 (Rule 17AA) the trust must maintain a record of the name, address and PAN or such other identification of the donor and mode of receipt. 2. Supreme court in case of CIT (exemption) vs Subash Educational Society (2020) 12 taxmann 168 held that merely mentioning the name and address of the donor is not sufficient. The trust must maintain complete particulars excluding PAN or other identification and mode of receipt. Failure to do so senders the donation "anonymous" and taxable u/s 115BBC. 3. CIT (exemptions) vs National Institute of Aeronautical Engineering Educational Society (2019) 105 taxmann 329 (Uttarakhand HC) held that "where the assessee failed to provide compete particulars of donars, including PAN and mode of payment, the Revenue was justified to treat the donation was anonymous and taxing them u/s 115BBC. 4. Sree Sree Ramkrishna Samity vs CIT (2015) 54 taxman 255 (Calcutta HC) - “The onus is on the assessee to prove the identity and genuineness of the donors. Merely providing name and address, without further substantiation, is insufficient.

Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld.AR’s limited submission was that assessee’s trust had only submitted partial information with regard to donation received. It was submitted that the details of the donors for all the donations received during the relevant assessment year were recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee and assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to furnish the relevant details.

The Ld.DR submitted that adequate opportunities were provided from the offices of the AO and the FAA and there is no violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, it was prayed the appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials on record. During the appellate proceedings, assessee had only provided the list of names and address of the donors. The list provided by the assessee of the donors is only print out which is not certified or signed by the assessee trust. The authenticity of the same was disbelieved by the FAA. The Ld.AR claims that assessee had got all the details of the donors for the donations received during the relevant assessment year. As per the CBDT notification No.30/2009 dated 31.03.2009 (Rule 17AA), the Trust must maintain the record of the name, address and PAN or such other identification of the donor and the mode of receipt. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee trust to furnish the requisite details. The assessee shall provide complete particulars of the donors including PAN and the mode of payment of donations. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

अपीलाथȸ/Appellant

Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुÈत /CIT, Chennai 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध/DR 5. गाड[ फाईल/GF.