THE ITO WARD 1 & TPS , THODUPUZHA V. M/S HIGH RANGE RURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY , PALAKKAD

ITA 379/COCH/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Income Tax Officer, Ward 1 & TPS Thodupuzha as the appellant and High Range Rural Development Society as the respondent. The dispute arose from the assessment year 2018-2019, where the AO added an amount of Rs.2,31,03,413 to the income of the assessee under section 115BBC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, citing it as anonymous donation. The CIT(A) later deleted this addition after accepting additional documentary evidence from the assessee, which was not previously presented to the AO. The Revenue challenged this decision, leading to the current appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 360894 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Everest Education Society v. ACIT (2024) 164 taxmann.com 744 (Bom.)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PADMANATHAN K.V.
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.379/Coch/2023 : Asst.Year 2018-2019 The Income Tax Officer Ward 1 & TPS Thodupuzha. v. High Range Rural Development Society XIV, 273, Near Post Office Chandra Nagar Palakkad – 678 007. PAN : AAAJH0168A. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR Respondent by : Sri.Padmanathan K.V., Advocate Date of Hearing : 21.05.2025. Date of Pronouncement : 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : The present appeal of the Revenue is arising from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre / learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 20.03.2023, having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1050973623(1) and relates to the assessment year 2018- 2019. 2. Brief facts of the case as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is a society registered u/s.12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, filed its return of income for the impugned year declaring Nil income. Thereafter the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. ITA No.379/Coch/2023. High Range Rural Development Society. 2 During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee has deposited an amount of Rs.2,31,03,413 in its bank account. The AO asked for the source of this amount from the assessee. In response to which the assessee explained that this is the amount representing anonymous donation towards corpus. However, dissatisfied with the explanation of the assessee, the AO added the amount to the income of the assessee applying the provisions of sec.115BBC. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A) and pointed out that the assessee has received donations from various donors. The ld.CIT(A) referring certain documentary evidences filed by the assessee for the first time before the ld.CIT(A), accepted the claim of the assessee and deleted the addition made by the AO. 4. Feeling aggrieved with the order of the ld.CIT(A), the Revenue has come up in appeal before us. At the outset, the learned DR pointed out that the Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A), admitting additional evidence for the first time before him without confronting to the AO. The learned DR drawn the attention of the bench towards ground No.2.2 in which the Revenue is contending that the ld.CIT(A) has violated the provisions of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules. 5. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee relied upon the order of the CIT(A). ITA No.379/Coch/2023. High Range Rural Development Society. 3 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Perusal of the findings recorded by the ld.CIT(A) would show that the ld.CIT(A) has accepted certain documentary evidences without confronting to the AO. Therefore, in our view the matter requires fresh consideration at the end of the AO for examining the veracity of these documents filed by the assessee before the ld.CIT(A). The learned DR also placed on record the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Everest Education Society v. ACIT reported in (2024) 164 taxmann.com 744 (Bom.), wherein under similar circumstances the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has affirmed the addition of anonymous donation received from 7145 donors. Therefore, we direct the AO to examine the present case de novo in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, cited supra. Needless to say, the AO shall afford meaningful opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing any order. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 22nd day of May, 2025. Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) Sd/- (Prakash Chand Yadav) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin; Dated : 22nd May, 2025. Devadas G* ITA No.379/Coch/2023. High Range Rural Development Society. 4 Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Cochin. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin "