Sri Balaji Educational & Charitable Public Trust, CHENNAI V. CIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1644/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68851 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N SANKARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S K TYAGI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 6; 12; 10; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE DR.O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1644/MDS/2013 SRI BALAJI EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST, 3 RD FLOOR, JAI DURGA COMPLEX, NEW NO.60, 1 ST AVENUE, ASHOK NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 083. [PAN: AACTS1386D] VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III, CHENNAI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K. TYAGI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N. SANKARAN, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 24.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.11.2013 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL III, CHENNA I DATED 25.07.2013 REJECTING CLAIM OF APPROVAL UNDER SECTIO N 80G(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S AN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE PUBLIC TRUST. IT HAS BEEN REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLAI MING EXEMPTION OF I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 2 ITS INCOME, WHEN APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. T HE ASSESSEE TRUST IS RUNNING THE FOLLOWING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, IN PURSUANCE TO ITS OBJECTS: I. BHARATHIYAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY, KARAIKAL. II. MAHATHMA GANDHI MEDICAL COLLEGE, PONDICHERRY. III. INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF DENTAL SCIENCE, PON DICHERRY. IV. KASTURBA GANDHI NURSING COLLEGE, PONDICHERRY. V. SRI VENKATESWARA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, PONDICHE RRY. VI. RAJIV GANDHI COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECH. AN D OTHERS. 3. THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS REGISTERED AS A PUBLIC C HARITABLE TRUST VIDE REGISTRATION NO. 1649 OF 1996 IN THE OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR, PONDICHERRY. THE TRUST WAS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT VIDE ORDER C.NO.6162E(142)/97-98 DAT ED 13.02.1998. THE TRUST WAS APPROVED UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT BY THE LD. CIT, PONDICHERRY VIDE ORDER C.NO. 9165-E(236)/CIT/PDY/20 04-05 DATED 14.12.2004 FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.04.2001 TO 31.03. 2006. THEREAFTER, THE AFORESAID APPROVAL WAS RENEWED VIDE ORDER C.NO. 9165-E(236)/CIT/ PDY/2006-07 DATED 22.11.2006 FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01 .04.2006 TO 31.03.2008. 4. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE TRUST FILED AN APPLICA TION IN FORM NO. 10G DATED 03.04.2008 SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2008. THE APPLICATION FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 3 FOR SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) WAS REJEC TED BY THE LD. CIT CENTRAL III, CHENNAI VIDE ORDER DATED 24.09.2008. A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT DATED 24.09.2008, THE ASSESSEE HAD PREF ERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT AND THE ITAT IN I.T.A. NO. 2127/MDS /2008 VIDE ORDER DATED 11.09.2009, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST FOR APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) WAS DISMISSED. AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE ITAT, THE ASSESSEE HAD PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND THE HONBLE HIGH COURT BY ITS JUDGME NT IN TAX CASE (APPEAL NO. 131 OF 2010 DATED 03.06.2013 HAS HELD A S UNDER: 8. CONSIDERING THE FACTS THAT THE ORDER OF REJECT ION RESTED ON THE SEIZED MATERIALS AND NON-FURNISHING OF THE COPIES O F THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE RELATING TO THE SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 O F THE ACT ON 13.08.2007, IN FAIRNESS TO THE CONTENTION OF THE AS SESSEE WITH REGARD TO NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE , THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CE NTRAL III, CHENNAI FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION IN ACCORDANCE WIT H LAW. 5. WHEN THE MATTER WAS PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD FILED SECOND APP LICATION DATED 09.01.2013 FOR APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) BEFORE THE LD. CIT CENTRAL III, CHENNAI. THE LD. CIT, AFTER CALLING FO R CLARIFICATION ON CERTAIN ISSUES, HAS REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSE E FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER 15.07.2013. AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT DATED 15.07.2013 I N RESPECT OF SECOND I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 4 APPLICATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON 09.01.2013, THE PRESENT APPEAL IS PREFERRED BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT HAS TRAVERSED MUCH BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE ENQUIRY UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT, WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS ENJOYING THE BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, THE LD. C IT HAS NO POWER TO QUESTION THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST; THE ISSUE OF CAPITATION FEE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESS EE HAS NO RELEVANCE TO THE INCOME TAX, 1961; THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT HAS ALSO MISCONC EIVED AND GROSSLY ERRONEOUS, AS ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT STOOD FULLY SATISFIED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST. 7 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESS EE WAS COLLECTING CAPITATION FEE FROM THE STUDENTS AND CLAIMING EXEMP TION UNDER SECTION 12A AND ALSO CLAIMING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) , WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. HE HAS SUBMITTED TH AT IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAD ADMITTED THAT IT H AD BEEN COLLECTING THE CAPITATION FEES. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DURI NG THE COURSE OF I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 5 SEARCH, THE SEARCH TEAM FOUND CASH ABOUT RS.44 LAKH S IN THE BED ROOM OF THE CHAIRMAN. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS COLLECT ING CAPITATION FEE AND KEEPING IT IN HIS HOUSE WHICH NOT PERMISSIBLE I N THE EYES OF LAW. THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH DETAILS OF THE D ONORS BEFORE THE LD. CIT. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD. ORIGINALLY, THE ASSESSEE TRUST FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G DATED 03.04.2008 SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G (5) OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2008. THE LD. CIT, VIDE ORDE R DATED 24.09.2008 REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NO. 2127/MDS/2008 VIDE ORDER DATED 11.09.2009 CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT. THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBL E HIGH COURT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SECOND APPLICATION BEFORE THE LD . CIT FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT. 9. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT. UNDER SECTION 80G(5), THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE TO BE SATISFIED: I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 6 (5) THIS SECTION APPLIES TO DONATIONS TO ANY INSTIT UTION OR FUND REFERRED TO IN SUB CLAUSE (IV) OF CLAUSE (A) OF SUB-SECTION (2), ONLY IF IT IS ESTABLISHED IN INDIA FOR A CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND IF IT FULFILS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, NAMELY : (I) WHERE THE INSTITUTION OR FUND DERIVES ANY INCOM E, SUCH INCOME WOULD NOT BE LIABLE TO INCLUSION IN ITS TOTAL INCOME UNDER TH E PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OR CLAUSE (23AA)] OR CLAUSE (23C)] OF SECTIO N 10 : PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN INSTITUTION OR FUND DERIVES ANY INCOME, BEING PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS, THE CONDITION THAT SUCH INCO ME WOULD NOT BE LIABLE TO INCLUSION IN ITS TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO SUCH INCOME, IF (A) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND MAINTAINS SEPARATE BOOK S OF ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF SUCH BUSINESS; (B) THE DONATIONS MADE TO THE INSTITUTION OR FUND A RE NOT USED BY IT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUCH BU SINESS; AND (C) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND ISSUES TO A PERSON MAKI NG THE DONATION A CERTIFICATE TO THE EFFECT THAT IT MAINTAINS SEPARAT E BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF SUCH BUSINESS AND THAT THE DONATIONS REC EIVED BY IT WILL NOT BE USED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, FOR THE PURPOSES O F SUCH BUSINESS; (II) THE INSTRUMENT UNDER WHICH THE INSTITUTION OR FUND IS CONSTITUTED DOES NOT, OR THE RULES GOVERNING THE INSTITUTION OR FUND DO N OT, CONTAIN ANY PROVISION FOR THE TRANSFER OR APPLICATION AT ANY TIME OF THE WHOL E OR ANY PART OF THE INCOME OR ASSETS OF THE INSTITUTION OR FUND FOR ANY PURPOS E OTHER THAN A CHARITABLE PURPOSE; (III) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND IS NOT EXPRESSED TO B E FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OR CASTE; (IV) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND MAINTAINS REGULAR ACCO UNTS OF ITS RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURE; (V) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND IS EITHER CONSTITUTED A S A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST OR IS REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 18 60 (21 OF 1860), OR UNDER ANY LAW CORRESPONDING TO THAT ACT IN FORCE IN ANY P ART OF INDIA OR UNDER SECTION 25 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 (1 OF 1956), OR IS A UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY LAW, OR IS ANY OTHER EDUCATIONAL INS TITUTION RECOGNISED BY THE GOVERNMENT OR BY A UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY LAW, O R AFFILIATED TO ANY UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY LAW, OR IS AN INSTITUTION FINANCED WHOLLY OR IN PART BY THE GOVERNMENT OR A LOCAL AUTHORITY; [AND] XXXXXXXXXXXXXX I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 7 10. IT APPEARS THAT WHILE READING OF THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 80G(5), ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS TO M AINTAIN RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURE. 11. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE LD. CIT PASSED A DETA ILED ORDER, ONE OF THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT FOR REJECTION OF 8 0G(5) IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN RECEIVING CAPITATION FEES AND THE REFORE NOT ELIGIBLE. SO FAR AS THIS ASPECT IS CONCERNED, THE TRIBUNAL HA S EXAMINED THE ENTIRE FACT AND HELD IN ITS ORDER [I.T.A. NOS. 1476 TO 1482/MDS/2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 TO 2008-09] THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ACCEPTED CAPIT ATION FEE AGAINST THE ALLOTMENT OF SEATS. THEREFORE, THE OBJECTION RA ISED BY THE LD. CIT IN THIS ASPECT IS REJECTED. 12. THE ANOTHER ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE TO GR ANT 80G(5) IS CONCERNED, DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH ` .44 LAKHS WAS FOUND AND SEIZED FROM THE RESIDENCE OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE AS SESSEE TRUST. SO FAR AS THIS ASPECT IS CONCERNED, THE TRIBUNAL HAS O BSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING A PETROL PUMP AND THE TURNOVER OF THE PETROL PUMP WAS MORE THAN ` .30 CRORES. THE TRIBUNAL HAS OBSERVED THAT THE SUM OF I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 8 ` .44 LAKHS HAS BEEN EXPLAINED AS INCOME OF THE CHAIR MAN OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST AND THE SAID AMOUNT HAS BEEN OFFERED FOR TAXATION IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE CHAIRMAN IN THE REGUL AR COURSE. 13. IN SO FAR AS FULFILLING THE CONDITIONS AS LAID DOWN UNDER SECTION 80G(5) IS CONCERNED, THE LD. CIT BY LETTER DATED 27 .06.2013 [PAPER BOOK PAGE NOS. 6 TO 8] SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE ASSES SEE THAT AS PER CLAUSE (IV) OF SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT, CERTAIN R ECEIPTS HAVE NOT BEEN REFLECTED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND CALLED FOR EXPLA NATION FROM THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THAT, THE ASSESSEE HAD SUB MITTED ITS REPLY DATED 09.07.2013 BY STATING THAT THE ENQUIRY BY THE LD. CIT UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT CANNOT EXTEND TO THE ACTUAL COMPUTATION OF INCOME UNDER THE ASSESSMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN FRAM ED OR LIKELY TO BE FRAMED. THE ENQUIRY RELATES TO WHETHER THE TRUST IS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12A, WHETHER IT IS A TRUST WHOLLY FOR CHARI TABLE PURPOSES OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES AND WHETHER THE INCOME RECEIVED BY IT IS ENTITLED TO BE CONSIDERED UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. SUCH ENQ UIRY DOES NOT GO BEYOND THAT WHETHER THE INCOME RECEIVED BY THE TRUS T FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE TAXABL E INCOME IN THE PAST YEAR OR NOT. FOR THE ABOVE PREPOSITION, THE ASSESSEE HAD RELIED ON TWO DECISIONS VIZ., N.N. DESAI CHARITABLE TRUST VS. CIT [2000] 246 I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 9 ITR 452 (GUJ.) AND SONEPAT HINDU EDUCATIONAL AND CH ARITABLE SOCIETY V. CIT [2005] 278 ITR 262 (P&H). THE LD. CIT, AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE IN PAGE NO.6 OF HER ORD ER GAVE A FINDING THAT WITH REGARD TO VOLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOTICED THAT MANY VOUCHERS DI D NOT HAVE REQUISITE DETAILS OF DONORS AND IT IS A CLEAR VIOLA TION OF SUB-SECTION (I), (II) AND (IV) TO SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT. 14. THE CASE LAW RELIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF SONEPAT HINDU EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE SOCIETY V. CIT (SU PRA), WHILE DEALING WITH THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 80G(5), THE SCOP E OF ENQUIRY BY THE LD. CIT EXTENDS TO ELIGIBILITY OF APPLICATION TO EX EMPTION UNDER VARIOUS PROVISIONS REFERRED TO IN THE SUB-SECTION, BUT NOT TO ACTUAL COMPUTATION OF INCOME UNDER THE ACT. THE REGISTRATION OF AN INS TITUTION UNDER SECTION 12A BY ITSELF IS SUFFICIENT PROOF THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS CREATED OR ESTABLISHED FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. 15. FURTHER, THE CASE LAW RELIED ON BY THE ASSESSE E IN THE CASE OF N.N. DESAI CHARITABLE TRUST VS. CIT (SUPRA), THE HO NBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAS OBSERVED THAT THE AUTHORITIES EXAMINING THE QUESTION WHETHER THE FUNDS OR INSTITUTION IS ELIGIBLE TO BE CERTIFIED FOR THE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 10 PURPOSES OF SECTION 80G IS NOT TO ACT AS AN ASSESSI NG OFFICER. ONCE THE APPLICANT TRUST WAS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12A AN D WAS GRANTED APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) AND ALSO RENEWED THER EAFTER, THE LD. CIT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING FOR RENEWAL OF APPROV AL ON THE GROUND THAT THE INCOME OF THE APPLICANT TRUST WAS LIKELY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE TAXABLE INCOME FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREME NT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. 16. THESE TWO ABOVE JUDGEMENTS OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT AS WELL AS HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, HAV E NO APPLICATION TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. IN THIS CASE, THE LD. CIT HAS SHOW- CAUSED THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO FULFILMENT OF CO NDITIONS AS REQUIRED UNDER SUB-SECTION (IV) OF SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT . THE ASSESSEE, WITHOUT ANSWERING TO THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE L D. CIT, IT HAS REPLIED THAT THE INVESTIGATION/ENQUIRY BY THE LD. CIT IS BE YOND THE SCOPE OF SECTION 80G(5). THE CASE LAW RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT HAS NO RELEVANCE TO THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE LD . CIT. A PLAIN READING OF SECTION 80G(5)(IV) SHOWS THAT THE INSTIT UTION HAS TO MAINTAIN REGULAR BOOKS OF ITS RECEIPTS. WHEN THE ASSESSEE CL AIMS AN APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) , IT IS BOUNDEN DUTY ON THE PA RT OF THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE RELEVANT DETAILS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER/CIT WITH REGARD I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1644 1644 1644 1644/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/13 1313 13 11 TO DONATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE DETAILS S UCH AS NAME OF THE DONOR, AMOUNT RECEIVED, ADDRESS, PAN NUMBER ETC. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH ALL THE DE TAILS OF VOLUNTARY DONATION RECEIVED SUCH AS NAME OF THE PARTIES/DONOR S, ADDRESS, PAN NUMBER, ETC. TO THE LD. CIT FOR VERIFICATION AND DI RECT THE LD. CIT TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HI GH COURT IN TAX CASE (APPEAL) NO. 131 OF 2010 DATED 03.06.2013 IF N OT COMPLIED AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER ALLOW ING SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 17. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS P ARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 27 TH OF NOVEMBER, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 27.11.2013 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE/A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.