Addl. CIT, Ghaziabad V. M/s Sai Chhaya Educational Welfare Society, Noida

ITA 96/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 74200 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 24-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S N BHATIA
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJEEV GUPTA
• Section: 68; 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: G NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI A. D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 96/DEL/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2005-06) ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-2, GHAZIABAD VS M/S SAI CHHAYA EDUCATIONAL WELFARE SOCIETY, C/O RAMAGYA SCHOOL, SECTOR- 50, NOIDA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AABAS2034G ASSESSEE BY: SHRI SANJEEV GUPTA REVENUE BY: SHRI S. N. BHATIA DATE OF HEARING 24.2.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 25.2.2014 ORDER PER R. S. SYAL, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE ARISES OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 21.10.2010 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2005- 06. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL THROUGH VAR IOUS GROUNDS IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O U/S 68 OF THE ACT. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY RUNNING A SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL. IT WAS G RANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12A ON 19.9.2003 AND EXEMPTION CER TIFICATE U/S 80G WAS GRANTED ON 3.3.2005. THE ASSESSEE FILED RET URN DECLARING ITA NO. 96/DEL/2011 SAI CHHAYA EDUCATIONAL W ELFARE SOCIETY 2 NIL INCOME FOR THE CURRENT YEAR. ON THE PERUSAL OF DETAILS, IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED ABNORMALLY H IGH DONATIONS TOWARDS CORPUS FROM MOST OF THE DONORS RESIDING IN LAXMI NAGAR AND ITS ADJOINING AREAS. SUCH DONATIONS TOWARDS COR PUS FUND TOTALED AS RS. 1,63,89,935/-, A DETAIL OF WHICH HAS BEEN E XTRACTED ON PAGES 2 & 3 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ON BEING CALLED UPON TO JUSTIFY THE GENUINENESS OF SUCH DONORS AND THEIR CAPACITY, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THEIR COMPLETE DETAILS, SUCH AS, PAN, ADD RESS AND CONFIRMATION. ON THE PERUSAL OF THESE DETAILS, SUCH AS, BANK PASS BOOK OF CERTAIN CORPORATE DONORS, THE ASSESSING OFF ICER NOTICED THAT SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED IN RESPECTI VE BANK ACCOUNTS BEFORE ISSUING CHEQUES FOR DONATION TO THE ASSESSEE. IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF SUCH DONATIONS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICES DIRECTLY TO DONORS. SOME OF THE LETTERS SENT THROUGH SPEED POST WERE RETURNED UNSERVED BY THE PO STAL DEPARTMENT WITH THE REMARKS THAT THE CONCERNS DID N OT EXISTS AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DRAWN A CH ART OF SUCH PERSONS WITH NAME OF DONOR AND AMOUNT OF DONATIONS ETC. ON PAGE 5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER: - NAME OF THE DONOR DONATION AMOUNT J. V TRADING PVT. LTD. RS. 1000000/- SAINIPAL MARKETING PVT. LTD. RS. 1000000/- MILLENNIUM EDUVISION PVT. LTD. RS. 1000000/- ZIGMA TELECOM PVT. LTD. RS. 1500000/- SILVERTONE INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. RS. 1000000/- ITA NO. 96/DEL/2011 SAI CHHAYA EDUCATIONAL W ELFARE SOCIETY 3 WALIA DIGITAL COLOR LAB & STUDIO (P) LTD. RS. 2000000/- BECONS SALES PVT. LTD. RS. 1000000/- SANDEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA RS. 500000/- SUMAN GUPTA RS. 60000/- ARVIND KUMAR YADAV RS. 500000/- MANOJ GUPTA RS. 60000/- DEEPAK RAWAT RS. 500000/- SUSHIL KUMAR GUPTA RS. 50000/- VINEETA GUPTA RS. 65000/- TOTAL RS. 1,02,35,000/- 4. ADDITION U/S 68 WAS MADE FOR A SUM OF RS. 1.02 C RORE. SUCH ADDITION GOT DELETED IN THE FIRST APPEAL AFTER RECE IVING REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE REVENUE IS A GGRIEVED AGAINST SUCH DELETION OF ADDITION. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED COMPLETE DETAILS OF SUCH DONORS, SUCH AS, THEIR CON FIRMATIONS, PANS, COPIES OF ANNUAL ACCOUNTS WHEREVER AVAILABLE IN SUPPORT OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE DONATIONS. THE ASSESSING OFF ICER MADE ADDITION BY HOLDING THAT SUCH DONORS WAS NOT AVAILA BLE AT THE GIVEN ADDRESSES. THE LD. CIT(A) REMANDED THE MATTER TO TH E A.O, WHO FURNISHED REMAND REPORT DATED 22.6.2009 WHICH HAS B EEN REPRODUCED ON PAGE 14 & 15 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. I T CAN BE SEEN FROM THE REMAND REPORT THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THESE DONORS SUCH AS BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT AND ITA NO. 96/DEL/2011 SAI CHHAYA EDUCATIONAL W ELFARE SOCIETY 4 LOSS ACCOUNT AND BANK STATEMENT. WHEN THE A.O REQUE STED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THESE DONORS, THE ASSESSEE STAT ED THAT THEY ARE VERY ESTABLISHED AND RESPECTABLE PERSONS AND HENCE CANNOT BE PRODUCED. IT WAS ALSO REQUESTED THAT THESE PERSONS ARE VERY MUCH AVAILABLE ON THEIR ADDRESS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSE E WHO MAY BE SUMMONED, IF REQUIRED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID N OT CONSIDER IT EXPEDIENT TO ISSUE ANY SUMMONS TO SUCH PERSONS IN T HE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. PROCEEDING FURTHER, IT CAN BE OBSERVED FROM PARA 7.4 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT THE A.O HAD SENT INTIMAT ION TO HIS COUNTERPART A.OS ASSESSING THESE DONORS. NO ADVER SE REPORT CAME FROM SUCH ASSESSING OFFICERS. THUS, IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGED THE BURDEN CAST UPON IT TO PROV E IDENTITY, CAPACITY AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. WE, T HEREFORE, UPHOLD THE IMPUGNED ORDER ORDERING THE DELETION OF ADDITION. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.02.2014. SD/- SD/- (A. D. JAIN) (R. S. SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 25/02/2014 *SUBODH* ITA NO. 96/DEL/2011 SAI CHHAYA EDUCATIONAL W ELFARE SOCIETY 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 24.02.2014 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 24.02.2014 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER. JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER. *