M C DALAL & CO,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, NCC-5, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3516/CHNY/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 August 2019AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that a similar issue for a prior assessment year was remitted back to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, for the current year, the matter was also remitted back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction for a donation made to M/s Herbicure Healthcare Bio Herbal Research Foundation under Section 35(1)(ii). The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, which was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals).

What were the issues?

Whether the donation made to M/s Herbicure Healthcare Bio Herbal Research Foundation is eligible for deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 35(1)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Hearing: 24.07.2019Pronounced: 01.08.2019

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -5, Chennai, dated 28.09.2018 and pertains to assessment year 2014-15.

2.

Shri D. Anand, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that the donation made by the assessee to M/s Herbicure Healthcare Bio Herbal Research Foundation was claimed as deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). However, according to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee which was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals). Placing reliance on the order of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2013-14, the Ld.counsel submitted that when the very same issue came before this Tribunal, this Tribunal remitted back the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer.

3.

On the contrary, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the donation made by the assessee to M/s Herbicure Healthcare Bio Herbal Research Foundation is actually not donation. It is only an accommodation entry. Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the donation made to M/s Herbicure Healthcare Bio Herbal Research Foundation, Kolkata is not eligible for deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee claims deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act in respect of the donation said to be made to M/s Herbicure Healthcare Bio Herbal Research Foundation. The Assessing Officer by placing reliance on the material collected by the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata, disallowed the claim of the assessee which was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) for the assessment year 2013-14.

This Tribunal remitted back the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration on the identical situation. Therefore, during the year under consideration also, the matter needs to be re- examined by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue raised by the assessee is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall furnish the copies of investigation report said to be received from the Investigation Wing of the Department at Kolkata and thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the court on 1st August, 2019 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 35(1)(ii)

All 329 judgments and leading authorities on Section 35(1)(ii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →