ZABSANG CHOEKHORLING MONASTERY,JOGINDER NAGAR MANDI H.P V. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD SOLAN, SOLAN

ITA 356/CHANDI/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Zabsang Choekhorling Monastery, the appellant, contesting an assessment order for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The primary issue arose from the AO's decision to tax an amount of Rs.65,85,197, which was allegedly paid to Mr. Nagwang Gelek for construction work but was found unverified due to non-compliance in providing necessary documentation. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, leading to the appeal before the ITAT. The ITAT found that while some donations were directly received by the payee and the construction work was reflected in the monastery's books, the absence of specific details and confirmations from the payee were significant shortcomings that needed to be addressed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 834035 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: . RANJIT KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIKSHIT CHAUHAN LD
• Keywords: Set aside; TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, CHANDIGARH HYBRID HEARING BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.356/CHANDI/2025 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Zabsang Choekhorling Monastery VPO Chauntra Tehsil, Joginder Nagar, Distt. Mandi (HP) – 175032 बनाम/ Vs. ITO Exemption Ward Solan (HP) - 175032 ̾थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AAAAZ-0663-P (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) : (ŮȑथŎ / Respondent) अपीलाथŎकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Sh. Parikshit Chauhan (Advocate) – Ld. AR ŮȑथŎकीओरसे/Respondent by : Sh. Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) - Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 03.02.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 04.02.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2018- 19 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC [CIT(A)] dated 16-05-2024 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s 143(3) of the Act on 05-03-2021. Having heard rival submissions, the appeal is disposed-off as under. Printed from counselvise.com 2 2. During assessment proceedings, upon perusal of Form 26AS, it transpired that the assessee made payment of Rs.65,85,197/- to Mr. Nagwang Gelek on various dates. The TDS was deducted by the assessee against these payments. However, the assessee failed to file any confirmation, specific details of work as carried out etc. The perusal of bank statement revealed that no such payment was made by the assessee to the payee. The assessee remained substantially non-compliant and therefore, the amount of Rs.65,85,197/- was held to be unverified and brought to tax by Ld. AO. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the assessment for the same very reasons against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. AR stated that the donations were directly received by the payee. The said expenditure was incurred towards construction of building and accordingly, capitalized in the books of accounts. The payee carried out the work of construction of the monastery building using the corpus donations which was received from the donors directly in the bank account of the payee. The entries were duly reflected in the books of the assessee. The Ld. AR also furnished the PAN details of the payee. 4. It, prima-facie, appear that certain donations have been received directly by the payee and the payee has carried out construction of the building for the assessee. The said transactions are duly reflected in the books of the assessee. However, the only shortcoming is that the assessee has failed to specify the exact work carried out by the contractor and also failed to furnish the confirmation from the payee. To enable the assessee to meet with the same and in view of the fact that the assessee largely remained non-compliant before lower authorities, we set aside the impugned order and restore this issue back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh Printed from counselvise.com 3 consideration with a direction to the assessee to meet with these shortcomings. No other ground has been urged in the appeal. 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 04th February, 2026. -Sd- -Sd- (RAJPAL YADAV) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 04-02-2026 आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3. आयकरआयुƅ/CIT 4. िवभागीयŮितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊफाईल/GF ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT CHANDIGARH Printed from counselvise.com "