GIRIRAJIJI RAGHUNANDAN SHIKSHA PRASAR AND VIKAS SAMITI ,INDORE vs. ITO ( EXEMPTION), BHOPAL
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRIB.M. BIYANI
आदेश/O R D E R
Per Vijay Pal Rao, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22nd May, 2023, of Ld. CIT(A) of NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment year 2009-10.
There is a delay of 49 days in presenting this appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, which is supported by an affidavit.
We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee as well as Ld. Departmental Representative on condonation of delay and carefully perused the reasons for delay in filing the appeal in para 4 of the affidavit as under :- Page 1 of 5
Shri Giriraji Raghunandan Shiksha Prasar and Vikas Samiti, Bhopal ITA No.342/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2009-10 (4) Further, it is being highlighted that the email id of our society as per “My Profile” tab is vipgroupbhopal@gmail.com and as per Income- tax return filed for assessment year 2022-23 was piyush 1012003@yahoo.co.in and as per form 35 filed by our society in respect of assessment year 2009-10 was capiyush73@gmail.com., which is the email id of regular counsel of our society. However, the said e-mail id of the regular counsel was not the main email id of the regular counsel was not the main email id of the regular counsel and was not used on day-to-day basis. Due to which, email correspondences communicating the passing of CIT(A) Order was missed by our society and the regular counsel of our society.” 4. Thus, the assessee has submitted that there were four e-mail IDs
available with the Department and specific e-mail id was given in Form
No.35, but the Ld. CIT(A) issued notices as well as sent the impugned order
to the e-mail ID, which is rarely used by the counsel of the assessee and was
also not provided in the Form No. 35. Therefore, there was a
miscommunication regarding the impugned order, which was sent by the e-
mail id not in the use in day to day basis. Having considered the
submissions of the Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee and no,
serious objection was raised by the Ld. Departmental Representative for
condonation of delay, we are satisfied with the reasons explained by the
assessee for delay of 49 days in filing the present appeal. Accordingly, the
delay of 49 days in filing the appeal is condoned.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
(i) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing order u/s 250 of the Act in the case of the appellant for assessment year 2009-10 without considering the submissions filed by the appellant physically before the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Bhopal.
(ii) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in initiating reassessment proceedings u/s 147
Page 2 of 5
Shri Giriraji Raghunandan Shiksha Prasar and Vikas Samiti, Bhopal ITA No.342/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2009-10 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even when no income chargeable to tax had escaped from assessment.
(iii) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in initiating reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in absence of any tangible material and live link of concealment of income and merely on the basis of borrowed opinion without independent application of mind.
(iv) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in initiating reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961,merely for verification of source of cash deposits in the bank account.
(v) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of the AO in treating the amount of donation received by the appellant of Rs. 56,82,500/- as anonymous donations u/s 115BBC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, without properly appreciating the facts of the case.
At the time of hearing, the Ld. Authorized Representative of the
assessee of the assessee has submitted that the appeal was filed by the
assessee on 28th January, 2007, in physical mode and thereafter it was
migrated to Faceless System vide order dated 25.09.2020. The assessee also
filed the written submissions and details physically, but at the time of
passing the impugned order, the Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the
submissions filed by the assessee and confirmed the addition u/s 115BBC
of the Act made by the AO on account of donations received by the assessee
society. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee has submitted
that the assessee filed the relevant details regarding the name and
addresses of the donors placed at page no. 27 to 57 of the paper book, but
the Ld. CIT(A) has not considered the said evidences on the ground that the
assessee has not responded to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Since
Page 3 of 5
Shri Giriraji Raghunandan Shiksha Prasar and Vikas Samiti, Bhopal ITA No.342/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2009-10 the details produced by the assessee are required to be verified, therefore,
he has pleaded that the matter may be remanded to the record of the AO for
fresh adjudication.
On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative has fairly
submitted that since the details of the donations were not available before
the AO and the same were not considered by the Ld. CIT(A) while passing
the impugned order, therefore, the matter requires verification at the level of
the AO.
We have considered the rival submissions as well as materials placed
on record. The AO while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3) read with
section 147 on 29th December, 2016, has made additions of Rs. 56,82,500/-
u/s 115 BBC of the anonymous donations for want of details and
explanations. The assessee challenged the said addition made by the AO
and also filed additional evidences in support of the corpus donations of Rs.
56,82,500/- before CIT(A). Since there was no response to the notices issued
by the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has declined to admit the
additional evidences and confirmed the addition made by the AO. We further
note that the AO has asked the assessee on 20th December, 2016, to explain
why the corpus donation should not be disallowed and added to the income
of the assessee u/s 115BBC and the impugned order was passed by the AO
on 29th December, 2016. Thus, it is clear that only at the fag end of the
limitation period for passing the order, the AO has asked the assessee to
furnish the details which were subsequently produced before the Ld. CIT(A).
Page 4 of 5
Shri Giriraji Raghunandan Shiksha Prasar and Vikas Samiti, Bhopal ITA No.342/Ind/2023 Assessment year 2009-10 Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, when the details
furnished by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A), were not examined and considered by the Ld. CIT(A) while passing the assessment order, we set-
aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A), and matter is remanded to the record of the AO for fresh adjudication after considering the details filed by the assessee in respect of donations received during the year under
consideration. Needless to say that the assessee be given an appropriate opportunity of hearing before passing the said order. 9. Resultantly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13.02.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (B.M. BIYANI) (VIJAY PAL RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated :13.02.2024 CPU/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,Indore Bench, Indore
Page 5 of 5
