9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akhs Only) u/s 68 of the IT Act, disregarding the claim that this amount represented corpus donation received by the Appellant which was exempt u/s 11(d) of the IT Act. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 95,00,000/- (Rupees Ninety Five Lakhs Only) without appreciating that the AO did not carry out enquiries as directed by the ITAT, Delhi Bench in its order dated 15.07.2011 in ITA No. 2295(Del) of 2010 and did not bring on record any fresh evidence against the Appellant. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 95,00,000/- (Rupees Ninety Five Lakhs Only) u/s 68 without appreciating that the Appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for the period ending 31.3.2005. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed at Rs. 97,20,170/- by making addition of corpus donation of Rs. 95 lacs received from M/s Locus for Educational & Academic Research Network (LEARN) of Imphal, treating as unexplained cash credit u/s. 68. Against the assessment order, Assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), and the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the alleged corpus donation of Rs. 95 lacs by LEARN. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Department preferred an appeal before the ITAT and the Tribunal vide its order dated 15.7.2011 set aside the issue for verification of corpus donations. In compliance to the directions of the ITAT, a letter dated 5.2.2013 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed information. It is further submitted that the account of LEARN has no connection with the activities of the assessee society, therefore, investigations into the account of LEARN has no co-relation to the donation received by the assessee society through a legitimate banking transaction and which was duly declared as such by the assessee society. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly upheld the action of the AO in declaring the corpus donation as undisclosed income, despite the fact that corpus donation was received through account payee cheque/drafts and moreover these modus of donation have been confirmed by the office bearers of LEARN and assessee is not required to prove the source of source of donation received as corpus d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erved by the ITAT and earlier denied by the two letters written by Chairman, LEARN during original assessment, enumerating therein the fact that the assessee had no capacity to pay donation and now reflected in DCIT, Circle Imphal, letter dated 21.3.2013 received in fax, that the said NGO, LEARN only received donations from other parties during the assessment year 2005-06. We further note that AO has taken all necessary steps to enquire the veracity and genuineness of corpus donation by LEARN on the basis of directions issued by ITAT but no new facts or evidence have been gathered during the enquiry. It is further observed that all sufficient steps have been taken by the AO in accordance with the ITAT directions to investigate and unearth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
