Kongu Nadu Educational Trust, Salem V. ITO, Salem

ITA 389/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8878 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 26-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 17-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: A S SRIRAMAN
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 234B; 133(6)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI . , . , ' # [ BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ] ./ I.T.A.NO.389/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 M/S KONGU NADU EDUCATIONAL TRUST UTHUKINARU MAMANGAM SALEM 636 302 VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD I(4) SALEM [PAN AABTK 0316 L] ( & / APPELLANT) ( '(& /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.S. SRIRAMAN, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 26 - 04 - 2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01 - 07 - 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), SALEM, DATED 31.12.2013, IN ITA NO.214/2009-10 PASSED UNDER SECT ION 143(3) R.W.S. 250(6) OF THE ACT. ITA NO.389/MDS/14 :- 2 -: 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN ITS APPE AL, HOWEVER, THE CRUXES OF THE ISSUES ARE AS FOLLOWS:- I) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS REFUSED TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE UNDER SECTION 46A OF THE ACT PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE BEING DETAILS OF THE DONORS AND THEREBY CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. II) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A TRUST ENGAGED IN EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 2.11.2007 ADMITTING NIL INCOME. DURING THE COURSE O F ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER OBTAINED THE LIST OF 119 DONORS WHO HAD DONATED RS.25,40,500/- IN AGGREG ATE. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER ISSUED LETTERS UNDER SECTION 133(6) OF THE ACT TO ALL THE DONORS CALLING FOR INF ORMATION REGARDING THE DONATION MADE TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST. OUT OF THE 119 DONORS ONLY 12 PERSONS CONFIRMED THAT THEY HAD DONATED CER TAIN SUMS TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST. SINCE THE GENUINENESS OF THE O THER DONORS WERE NOT ESTABLISHED, BY A DETAILED ORDER, THE LEAR NED ASSESSING OFFICER ADDED `23,63,000/- TO THE INCOME OF THE ASS ESSEE INVOKING ITA NO.389/MDS/14 :- 3 -: THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115BBC OF THE ACT FOR REC EIVING ANONYMOUS DONATIONS. 4. ON APPEAL THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS) WITHOUT ADMITTING THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASS ESSING OFFICER WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUE OF ANONYMOUS DONA TION AND LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT. 5. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE TO GIVE THE DETAILS OF THE DONORS IN ORDER TO ESTABLISH THEIR GENUINENESS. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE EN TIRE LIST OF DONORS WAS PLACED BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BUT HE REFUSED TO ADMIT THE SAME UNDE R RULE 46A OF THE ACT. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THAT THE MATTE R MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 6. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENT LY OPPOSED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZE D ITA NO.389/MDS/14 :- 4 -: REPRESENTATIVE AND REQUESTED FOR CONFIRMING THE ORD ERS OF THE REVENUE. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE DO NO T FIND MUCH STRENGTH IN THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED A UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE. FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSES SING OFFICER AND LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IT IS APPARENT THAT THE REVENUE HAS PROVIDED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNIT Y TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ESTABLISHING THE GENUINENESS OF THE DO NORS. IN SPITE OF THE SAME, THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE REVENUE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE TRU ST IS ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF EDUCATION, IN THE INTERE ST OF JUSTICE, WE HEREBY PROVIDE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD AND ACCORDINGLY REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. WE ALSO HEREBY DIRECT THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADMIT ALL THE EVID ENCES PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE MATTER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW & MERIT. WE ALSO CAUTION THE ASSESSEE TO PROMPTLY CO- OPERATE WITH THE REVENUE IN THEIR PROCEEDINGS, FAILING WHICH THE REVENUE SHALL PROCEED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ITA NO.389/MDS/14 :- 5 -: 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 ST JULY, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - ( . ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) $ & / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) & / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ / CHENNAI , / DATED: 1 ST JULY, 2016 SOMU ./ 0/ / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. 1 () / CIT(A) 5. / 4 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. 1 / CIT 6. / GF