Gramin Abhivruddhi Vidya Vardhak Samsthe, Gulbarga V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 (Exemption), Gulbarga

ITA 1804/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5989 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Transfer Pricing) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S R KARUPPUSAMY
• Assessee Lawyers: H N KHINCHA
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE T RIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH SMC-C, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNANT MEMBER ITA NOS.1804 TO 1807 (BANG) 2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2010 11 TO 2013 2014) M/S. GRAMIN ABHIVRUDDHI VIDYA VARDHAK SAMSTHE, A PPELLANT MAIN ROAD, MAIN CIRCLE, ALMEL, KARNATAKA. PAN. AABAG7355G VS THE ITO, WARD 1 (EXEMPTION), GULBARGA. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI H. N. KHINCHA, C. A. REVENUE BY : SHRI S. R. KARUPPUSAMY, ADDL. CIT (DR ) DATE OF HEARING : 02-08-2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03-08-2018 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M.: THESE FOUR APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND T HESE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST FOUR SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT (A) GULBARGA ALL DATE D 30.03.2018 FOR A. YS. 2010 11 TO 2013 - 14. THESE APPEALS WERE H EARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER FOR T HE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. SEVERAL IDENTICAL GROUNDS ARE RAISED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN THESE FOUR APPEALS BUT ONLY ONE COMMON GRIEVANCE ON MERIT IS THERE. THIS G RIEVANCE IN ALL THESE FOUR IS THIS THAT THE CIT (A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN SUSTAINI NG THE ORDER OF AO REGARDING HOLDING THAT THE DONATIONS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ANONYMOUS DONATIONS AND HENCE LIABLE TO TAX U/S 115BBC. THE AMOUNT OF S UCH DONATIONS IS RS. 28,69,796/- IN A. Y. 2010 11, RS. 11.90 LACS IN A . Y. 2011 12, RS. 25,39,575/- IN A. Y. 2012 13 AND RS. 34,99,298/- IN A. Y. 2013 14. ITA NOS. 1804 TO 1807(BANG)2018 2 3. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE RE LEVANT PART OF THE REMAND REPORT HAS BEEN NOTED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A) IN HIS ORDER ON PAGE 3 OF THE ORDERS FOR EACH YEAR AND AS PER THE SAME, THE AO IS SUED NOTICES TO THE DONORS ON 14.02.2018 AND THE SAME WERE DULY SERVED ON THEM BUT BY THE TIME ALLOWED BY THE AO I.E. UP TO 22.02.2018, THE SAID DONORS HA VE NEITHER APPEARED BEFORE THE AO NOR FURNISHED ANY DETAIL. HE SUBMITTED THAT THESE FACTS GO TO SHOW THAT THE TIME ALLOWED BY THE AO WAS VERY SHORT AND SERVI CE OF NOTICE OF THE AO ON THESE DONORS ESTABLISHES THAT THE DONORS ARE NOT AN ONYMOUS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE CIT (A) FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE DONORS AND IF IT IS DONE, THE ASSESSEE WILL PRODUCE THE DONORS BEFORE THE CIT (A) OR THE AO AS MAY BE REQUIRED. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE O RDER OF CIT (A). 4. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT T HERE IS ONE MORE ISSUE IN THESE APPEALS I.E. REGARDING VALIDITY OF REASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS. HE SUBMITTED THAT ON THIS ISSUE, THERE IS NO FINDING O F CIT (A) AND THEREFORE, THIS ISSUE MAY ALSO BE RESTORED BACK TO CIT (A). 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS. I FIND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSI ONS OF THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ON BOTH ISSUES, THE MATTER SHOULD BE REMANDED TO CIT (A) FOR FRESH DECISION BECAUSE, THE ISSUE REGARDING VALIDIT Y OF REASSESSMENT WAS NOT DECIDED BY CIT (A). ON THE SECOND ISSUE ALSO, THE O RDER OF CIT (A) IS VERY CRYPTIC AND HE HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE ON THE BASIS O F REMAND REPORT OF THE AO BY IGNORING THIS ASPECT THAT THE TIME ALLOWED BY TH E AO TO THE DONORS IN REMAND PROCEEDINGS WAS NOT ADEQUATE AND HOW, THE DONATIONS CAN BE SAID TO BE ANONYMOUS WHEN THE NAMES AND ADDRESS OF THE DONORS ARE PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE AO HAD BEEN SERVED ON THEM. HENCE, I SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT (A) ON BOTH ISSUES IN AL L FOUR YEARS AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO CIT (A) FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVID ING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO BOTH SIDES AND ALSO TO THE DONORS. IF REQUIRED, HE MAY OBTAIN FRESH REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO AND THE ASSESSEE SHOULD PRODUCE THE DONORS BEFORE THE AO OR CIT (A) AS MAY BE REQUIRED. ITA NOS. 1804 TO 1807(BANG)2018 3 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL FOUR APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE D ATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- ( A .K. GARODIA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE D A T E D : 03.08.2018 /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.