2014 (1) TMI 132 - HC - Income Tax

Unexplained cash credit in form of corpus donation - Held that - The AO carried out enquiries to satisfy himself about the identities and creditworthiness of the donors and the genuineness of the transactions - The letters were sent to a number of donors, out of which 11 letters came back to him unserved - From 12 persons, incomplete replies were received without copies of the donation receipts which was called for - All the 12 letters were sent by one person - The AO found that the donors had meager incomes, not enough to enable them to make the donations of amounts claimed by the appellant - No PAN etc. were there in respect of most of the donors - One donor assessed to tax denied to have made any donation - During remand proceedings, four donation receipt books were produced which were newly bound and freshly written - The assessee has failed to establish the genuineness of the transactions and the creditworthiness of the donors - Decided against assessee.

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of ITAT to confirm addition under Section 69A after holding no addition under Section 68.
2. Justification of ITAT in confirming additions ignoring specific donations raised by appellant.
3. Adequacy of opportunity provided to appellant during assessment.
4. Confirmation of addition under Section 69A despite submission of evidence by appellant.
5. Liability of appellant to pay interest under Sections 234A and 234B.

Analysis:
1. The appeal questioned the jurisdiction of the ITAT to confirm an addition under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act after holding no addition under Section 68. The AO added Rs.13,62,575 under Section 68 for AY 2005-06. The CIT (A) confirmed this addition based on the lack of proof regarding donations to the society. The ITAT, after considering submissions, found that the donations should be included under Section 69A as they were shown in the books of accounts, leading to the confirmation of the addition.

2. The appellant argued that the ITAT was not justified in confirming the additions of Rs.13,62,575 and Rs.1,71,225, disregarding specific donations raised by the society. The CIT (A) upheld the AO's findings, emphasizing the lack of satisfactory explanation for the bank deposits. The AO's inquiries revealed doubts about the genuineness of transactions and the creditworthiness of donors, leading to the confirmation of the addition.

3. The appellant raised concerns about the adequacy of opportunity during assessment, stating that no evidence of opening cash balance was filed before the AO until a certain date. The CIT (A) considered the facts presented and found that the appellant failed to account satisfactorily for the deposits in the bank account, resulting in the confirmation of the addition as unexplained money.

4. Despite the submission of evidence by the appellant, including the identities of donors and affidavits proving transaction genuineness, the ITAT confirmed the addition under Section 69A. The ITAT's decision was based on the inclusion of donations in the books of accounts, disregarding the appellant's arguments regarding the cancellation of a demand draft made from the donation amount.

5. The issue of the appellant's liability to pay interest under Sections 234A and 234B was also raised. The ITAT correctly held that interest under both sections is charged on assessed tax, and the calculation should be redone accordingly. The Court found no legal questions arising from the ITAT's findings, concluding that the appeal was based on factual determinations and dismissing it.

← Previous Next →