Peoples Forum, Bhubaneswar V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Hyderabad

ITA 44/CTK/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7076 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2021
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Peoples Forum, HIG Vihar, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee ag u/s.263 of the Act by the CIT(E), Hyderabad at Vizag ITBA/COM/F/17/2020 17. 2. Shri S.K,.Agarwal, ld AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld CIT DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee submission that there was a survey in the premises of the assessee on IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.44/CTK/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Peoples Forum, HIG-97, Dharma Vihar, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar. Vs. CIT(Exemptions), Hyderabad No.AAATP 2214 R (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri S.K.Agarwal Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT ( Date of Hearing : 15/6 Date of Pronouncement : 15/ O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed u/s.263 of the Act by the CIT(E), Hyderabad at Vizag ITBA/COM/F/17/2020-2021/1031953118(1) for the assessment year Shri S.K,.Agarwal, ld AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld CIT DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee is a trust. It was the submission that there was a survey in the premises of the assessee on Page1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Exemptions), Hyderabad Respondent) S.K.Agarwal , AR CIT (DR) 6/ 2022 /6/2022 ainst the order passed u/s.263 of the Act by the CIT(E), Hyderabad at Vizag in for the assessment year 2016- Shri S.K,.Agarwal, ld AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld CIT DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. is a trust. It was the submission that there was a survey in the premises of the assessee on ITA No.44/CTK/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page3 | 4 notice did not contain any query in regard to anonymous donations received by the assessee much less the donation. It was the submission that as the verification had not been done by the Assessing Officer, the ld CIT (E) was right in law in directing the AO to make verification of the donations, which was in the nature of anonymous donation. It was the submission that the order of the ld CIT (E) is liable to be upheld. 5. We have heard the rival submissions. We have also had the privilege of the consequential order passed u/s.143(3) r.w. s 263 read with section 144b of the Income tax Act on 30.3.2022. Surprisingly, the ld CIT ( E) in his order u/s.263 of the Act had directed the AO to examine the donors and make proper enquiry and redo the assessment but the AO instead of doing the verification has practically rejected the assessee’s contention and has made addition representing 30% of the donations received treating the same as anonymous donations. 6. We are not going into the merits of the consequential order passed u/s.143(3) r.w. 263 r.w.s 144B of the I.T.Act. However, a perusal of the original assessment order clearly shows that no examination of the issues has been done. This being so, the ld CIT (E) is very much in his powers to direct the AO to examine the same. No error in the order of the ld CIT (E) has been pointed out by the ld AR of the assessee. This being so, the order of ld CIT(E) passed u/s.263 stands upheld.