2020 (4) TMI 722 - HC - Income Tax

Allowance under explanation to section 35(1)(ii) - whether the donee sent back the donation to the donor ? - Tribunal justified in remitting the matter back to the file of the assessing officer or not? - HELD THAT - Having given a finding that the appellant is entitled to exemption, the Tribunal went further and based on sworn statement of founder director of M/s.Herbicure Healthcare Bio-herbal Research Foundation that the organization returned the donation to the assessee, thought it fit to remand the matter to ascertain the means of the assessee and the actual amount paid by the assessee and decide the issue afresh after affording sufficient opportunities to the assessee. This Court does not find anything wrong with that. The approach of the Tribunal is very balanced. Initially, it found that the disallowance made by the lower authorities is unsustainable and allowance should be given, however, based on the statement made by the donee, the Tribunal rightly remanded the matter to the assessing officer.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of donation claimed under section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act.
2. Disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Income-tax Act.
3. Remand of the matter back to the assessing officer by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.

Issue 1: Disallowance of donation claimed under section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act:
The appellant, a partnership firm engaged in share trading, made a donation to M/s.Herbicure Healthcare Bio-herbal Research Foundation, Calcutta, approved for contributions under section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim based on the founder director's statement that the donation was returned after deducting a commission. Despite the appellant's clarification, the donation was treated as bogus. The Tribunal found the donation genuine and remitted the matter back to the assessing officer for further verification. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the remand was justified to ascertain the actual repayment by the donee.

Issue 2: Disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Income-tax Act:
The appellant claimed exemption under section 10(38) for dividend income received from shares and Mutual funds. The Assessing Officer disallowed an amount under section 14A treating it as expenses incurred for earning exempt income. The Commissioner restricted the disallowance to the amount of exempt income, taxing the entire exempt income. The Tribunal remitted this issue back to the assessing officer for reconsideration. The High Court found the Tribunal's approach balanced, allowing the assessing officer to re-examine the matter after providing the appellant with a fair opportunity.

Issue 3: Remand of the matter back to the assessing officer by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal:
The Tribunal remanded the donation and expenses issues back to the assessing officer despite finding the donation genuine and the disallowance unsustainable. The High Court supported this decision, emphasizing the need for the assessing officer to verify the actual repayment of the donation and reconsider the expenses disallowance. The Court found the Tribunal's approach fair and in line with the principles of natural justice. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the Tribunal's remand order for further assessment.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues involved and the rationale behind the decisions made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and the High Court.