CANCER AID SOCIETY,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 09/01/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1072047625(1) of ADDL/Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

(A.1) The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case an addition of Rs.7,45,000/- was made by the Assessing Officer taking adverse view of cash deposit amounting to Rs.7,45,000/- made by the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee contended that the cash deposit made by the assessee in bank was out of collections made by the students Assessment Year:2017-18 2 during the cancer awareness programme in various schools on various dates from 11/11/2016 till 29/12/2016. The Assessing Officer rejected the explanation furnished by the assessee on the ground that the assessee did not provide break up of cash donations received in old demonetized currency notes and in new currency notes. The relevant portion of the order of the Assessing Officer is reproduced as under:

“………..In its reply dated 05.11.2019, the assessee stated that in the account no. 0303002100503805 maintained with the Punjab National Bank, Chowk Branch, it had an opening balance of Rs.37,000/- as on 11.11.2016 and later the assessee had received cash as 'collections made by the students during our Cancer Awareness Program from the following schools' on various dates from 11.11.2016 till date 29.12.2016 which was deposited in its bank accounts. However, the assessee failed to prove that the said cash donations were taken in running currency notes (in the period 11.11.2016 to 29.12.2016) or new currency notes and not old demonetized currency notes. The assessee also failed to provide any certificate from banks confirming that the said cash deposits were done in running currency notes or new currency notes and not in old demonetized currency notes. Thus, it is very clear from the facts mentioned above that the assessee failed to prove that the said amount of Rs.7,45,000/- was actually taken as donations in running currency notes or new currency notes and not in old demonetized currency notes. The onus of proving that the said cash donations were not in old demonetized but in running currency notes or new currency notes lay on the assessee but the assessee has failed to discharge the onus which makes the fact very clear that the said cash deposits by the assessee in its bank accounts were either received or were already in possession of the assessee in old demonetized currency notes during the demonetization period. Since the assessee has failed to prove that the donations were in running currency notes or new currency notes and not in old demonetized currency notes, it is clear that the assessee received the said donations in old demonetized notes which itself is an act bad in law on the part of the assessee as it transacted in demonetized currency……….”

Assessment Year:2017-18 3 (A.2) Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal in the office of the learned CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 09/01/2025, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved again the assessee has filed the present appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. During the appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, a paper book containing the following particulars was filed from the assessee’s side:

Assessment Year:2017-18 4

(i) Copy of certificate issued by Punjab National Bank regarding details of amount deposited during demonetization period.

(B) At the time of hearing, the ld Authorized Representative for the assessee relied on the submissions made during the assessment proceedings and the contents of the aforesaid paper book. Learned D.R. relied on the assessment order. He also drew our attention to the relevant part of the order of the learned CIT(A), which is reproduced as under:

Assessment Year:2017-18 5

“6.8…………Even at the appellate stage, the appellant had not produced any documentary evidences explaining the source and nature of cash deposits made during the demonetization period. The certificate from bank attached by the appellant only shows the denomination of currency notes and not that whether the notes were SBNs or not. There are no other evidences put forth by the appellant………..”

(C) Both sides have been heard. Materials on record have been perused. It is not in dispute that the assessee ran a cancer awareness programme for collection of donations at various educational institutions during which cash collections were made. The amount of cash deposit in dispute (Rs.7,45,000/-) is neither excessive nor unreasonable having regard to the campaign run by the assessee in educational institutions. Further, the assessee is a charitable organization in the filed of healthcare. No material has been brought on record to suggest that the charitable nature of the assessee is diminished in any manner.

(D) In view of the foregoing, the aforesaid amount of Rs.7,45,000/- deposited by the assessee in bank is treated as explained and the Assessing Officer is directed to allow the same.

(E) In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 12/06/2025)