Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee donated Rs. 2,15,000 to The Gujarat Cancer Society, initially claiming a deduction under Section 80GGA. The Assessing Officer disallowed this under Section 143(1) due to the assessee having business income. The assessee subsequently made an alternate claim for deduction under Section 35(1)(ii), which was rejected by lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer to re-examine the assessee's alternate claim for deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) for the donation made to The Gujarat Cancer Society. The AO was directed to grant the deduction if the assessee is found eligible. The appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction of donation under Section 80GGA or alternatively under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 154, Section 80GGA, Section 143(1), Section 35(1)(ii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg
Year : 2021-22 Rashmikant Bhaichandbhai The ITO बनाम/ Shah Ward-5(3)92) v/s. 31, Jain Society Ahmedabad – 380 015 Pritamnagar, Akhada Ellisbridge Ahmedabad – 380 006 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AFGPS 3047 E (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Revenue by : Smt.Mamta Singh, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 08/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 09/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 27/02/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2021-2022.
The assessee, in this appeal, has taken the following grounds of appeal: Rashmikant Bhaichandbhai Shah vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2021-22 2
1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the claim of appellant for donation of Rs. 215000 made in application u/s 154 of the act.
2. That the various reason advance by leaned CIT(A) in rejecting the claim of appellant are contrary to the facts of the case and the evidence on records. That the learned CIT(A) has misconstrued the provisions of section 154 of the act.
3. That appellant respectfully submit that he is entitled for deduction of Rs.215000 u/s 35 of the act and the same should be granted to him.
The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any of the grounds of appeal before final hearing of the appeal.”
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee made donation of Rs.2,15,000/- to The Gujarat Cancer Society. The assessee claimed deduction u/s.80GGA of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the said deduction in an intimation passed u/s.143(1) of the Act, stating that since the assessee has a business income, the assessee cannot get the deduction u/s.80GGA of the Act, as per the conditions laid down in the aforesaid provisions. The assessee has made an alternate claim that the assessee alternatively be allowed u/s.35(1)(ii) of the Act, stating that the said The Gujarat Cancer Society is involved in scientific research and has been duly notified in this respect and, therefore, assessee is eligible to claim deduction of the amount paid to the said Society. The alternate claim of the assessee has been rejected by the lower authorities.
I have heard the rival submissions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties and gone through the record. It has been held time and again that the income-tax authorities should charge legitimate taxes from the citizens. The CBDT has also issued instructions to the effect that the Income Tax Officers/AOs should assist the assessees in claiming eligible deductions, etc. while assessing their income. The income-tax authorities should not punish Rashmikant Bhaichandbhai Shah vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2021-22 the assessees for their bonafide mistakes, rather should assist the assessees in claiming the eligible claims of exemption/deductions, etc. In view of this, the matter is restored to the file of AO with a direction to examine the claim of the assessee relating to deduction of the amount paid to the Gujarat Cancer Society u/s.35(1)(ii) of the Act and if the assessee is found eligible, in this respect, then to grant the deduction accordingly.
With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.