Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI PRAMOD M. JAGTAP
] ] BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/s.Vallabhbhai Dhanjibhai & Co. The ACIT T, 7/8, Darshan Complex V Circle-1 Nr.Madhav Complex s Bhavnagar Nilambaug, Bhavnagar – 364 003 PAN:AACFV 2572 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Biren Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Rakesh Jha, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 19/10/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement : 19/10/2022 आदेश/O R D E R
PER PRAMOD M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT
This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-6, Ahmedabad [CIT(A)] dated 19th September, 2017 and the grounds raised
therein read as under:
1. The Honorable CIT(A)-6, Ahmedabad failed to appreciate the facts of the case and denied 50% deduction u/s.80G of the Act on the addition made on account of disallowance of donation expenses of Rs.454879* made by Assessing Officer.
2. The Honorable CIT(A)-6, Ahmedabad failed to appreciate the facts of the case and confirmed the addition partly [Depreciation allowed] of disallowance on account of Fixed assets RICO TOOLS of Rs.2126564** Vallabhbhai Dhanjibhai & Co., Bhavnagar vs. ACIT AY 2013-14 2 Transferred to Galaxy expenses [Rev.exp.], and Fixed assets of Rs.91541**ADB GALATEA LTD. Transferred to Galaxy expenses a/c [Rev.Exp.] aggregate amount of Rs.22,18,105/- made by Assessing Officer.
We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As regards issue raised in Ground No.1, the Ld.counsel for the assessee has submitted that a sum of Rs.42,92,601/- was debited by the assessee in the P&L A/c. on account of donations paid. He has submitted that in the computation of total income, the assessee, however, had added back the donation amount of Rs.36,38,100/- and claimed deduction u/s.80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) to the extent of 50% of the said amount. He has submitted that the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act, however, added back a further amount of Rs.4,54,879/- on account of donation without allowing deduction u/s.80G of the Act in respect of the said amount. He has contended that the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s.80G of the Act in respect of the said amount also, but no opportunity was given by the Assessing Officer to the assessee to support and substantiate its claim. He has contended that this issue may therefore be sent back to the Assessing Officer for giving the assessee an opportunity to support and substantiate its claim. Since the Ld.DR has not raised any objection for sending the matter back to the Assessing Officer for verifying the assessee’s claim, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s.80G of the Act in respect of donations of Rs.4,54,879/- after giving an opportunity to the assessee to support and substantiate its claim. Ground No.1 of assessee’s appeal is accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Vallabhbhai Dhanjibhai & Co., Bhavnagar vs. ACIT AY 2013-14
At the time of hearing before us, the ld.counsel for the assessee has not pressed Ground No.2 raised by the assessee in this appeal. The same is accordingly dismissed as not pressed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 19th October,2022 at Ahmedabad. ( MADHUMITA ROY ) VICE PRESIDENT