Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a trust registered under sections 12A/12AA, filed a nil return for AY 2018-19. The Assessing Officer selected the case for scrutiny and added a voluntary contribution of Rs. 48,00,000 to the assessee's total income, treating it as 'income from other sources' under section 12. The CIT(A) upheld this addition.
Held
The Tribunal held that the addition of Rs. 48,00,000 was unsustainable as the assessee had already shown this amount as income in its audited books and had not claimed it as a corpus donation. Making such an addition would constitute a double addition. Therefore, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition.
Key Issues
Whether a voluntary contribution, already accounted for as income in the audited books and not claimed as a corpus donation, can be added again by the Assessing Officer as 'income from other sources'.
Sections Cited
250, 12A, 12AA, 143(3), 12
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, RANCHI
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay
Date of concluding the hearing : June 19, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : June 24, 2025 ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 06.12.2024 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-trust which is registered under 12A/12AA of the Act on 05.02.2003 as per order of the CIT, Ranchi. The assessee filed its return for the assessment year 2018- 19 by declaring total income as Nil. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under e-assessment scheme for the reasons of voluntary contribution other than corpus of Rs.48,00,000/- received while the Assessing Officer passed an order u/s 143(3) of the Act by determining total income of the assessee at Rs.48,00,000/- by treating the said amount as income from other sources u/s 12 of the Act.
Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) upheld the order passed by the Assessing Officer by dismissing the ground taken by the assessee.
Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee approached before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, the primary contention of the ld. AR is that the alleged addition made by the Assessing Officer was bad in law and the ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the assessee itself treated the contribution received as income and against which 85% has been utilized for the objectives of the trust by applying provisions of the law without causing loss to the revenue, therefore, the alleged addition made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the ld. CIT(A), is not correct. He also stated that the alleged addition of Rs.48,00,000/- is not warranted as the same duly formed part of the income in the audited books of account of the assessee and it is never claimed to be a corpus donation. In this context, the ld. AR submitted a copy of the computation sheet of ‘consolidated income & expenditure account for the year ended 31.03.2018’ to prove the fact that donation of Rs.48,00,000/- is shown as income in its Income & Expenditure A/c, which is as under:
On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the decisions of the authorities below. However, he could not controvert the fact as submitted by the ld. AR before the Bench.
We, after hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, find that in the present case, the alleged addition of Rs.48,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer solely on the ground that no specific direction of utilization of the contribution was found and as such, it does not form part of corpus donation, which is not correct. We notice from the documents submitted by the assessee which is clearly reflected that the voluntary contribution of Rs.48,00,000/- was shown as income of the assessee, therefore, if this addition is made then it will be terms as a double addition in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, the addition made by the Assessing Officer cannot be sustained and we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs.48,00,000/- as it is forming the part of the income of the assessee is reflected in audited books of account and the assessee has never claimed the same to be a corpus donation.
In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Kolkata, the 24th June, 2025.