9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against addition of donation received by assessee trust from four parties for assessment year 2002-03.
Details of the Judgment: 1. Assessing Officer's Opinion: The Assessing Officer considered the companies as bogus front companies of Usha Group, treated the donation as income of the assessee due to lack of identity papers, tax returns, and account books of the donors. 2. Submission before CIT (Appeals): The assessee submitted that donations were received by account payee cheques, provided details to the Assessing Officer, filed confirmation certificates, income-tax particulars of donors, and donors were produced under section 131 with account books. Affidavits filed before CIT (Appeals) were not admitted as additional evidence. 3. CIT (Appeals) Decision: CIT (Appeals) confirmed the addition, stating that receiving donations by cheque does not establish their genuineness. Representatives of donor companies failed to provide adequate evidence or identification papers. Affidavits filed during appellate proceedings were considered additional evidence and not admitted. 4. Tribunal's Decision: The Tribunal found the revenue's approach flawed, emphasizing that if donations were proven to be received, the matter should be examined in that context. The Tribunal criticized the rejection of affidavits as fresh evidence and remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination after considering the material produced by the assessee. 5. Conclusion: The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, setting aside the decisions of both CIT (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer, and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination. *Order pronounced in open court on 10th July 2009.*
|
