9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1256X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al - HELD THAT:- A.O. did not required assessee in assessment proceedings to produce receipt of contribution made by Association in C.M. Relief Fund for which deduction u/s 80G was claimed in return filed. The said receipt is filed at page no. 22 of annexure 3 uploaded on ITBA portal on 07-11-2022. The said receipt is again enclosed herewith. It is therefore prayed that deduction u/s 80G may kindly be allowed. Addition made based on 26AS - As based on the arguments of both the parties that the contentions raised before us found acceptable. The deduction of donation is required to be given as the ld. AO has not asked and the ld. CIT(A) has not given any adverse finding we direct the assessee to file the proof of donation made to the file of the ld. AO. The ld. AO is directed to verify the receipt of the donation and allow the claim of the assessee in accordance with the law. As regards the addition based on the receipt reported in the year under consideration the ld. AO is directed to verify that whether the same is recorded in the receipt shown by the assessee in the subsequent year and after verification the receipt which has been shown in the accounts of the subsequent year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o claimed. The ld. AO also observed that income to the extent of Rs. 19,02,500/- is shown in 26AS but the same is not shown in the accounts of the assessee. Based on that observation the income of the assessee determined at Rs. 25,30,612/-. While computing the income the deduction of donation of Rs. 5 lac given to Chief Minister fund was also not granted. 4. Aggrieved from the said order of the ld. AO the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. The ld. NFAC deleted the lumpsum 20 % addition of Rs. 6,28,112/- out of the expenses so claimed and in respect of the other two issue the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below: 5. Ground No. 2: 5.1 I have considered the submission of the appellant and perused the relevant assessment records. This ground related to addition of Rs.19,02,500/- on account of alleges income house property. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings, on verification of Form 26AS, observed that the appellant had received rental income of Rs.19,02,500/- but such income was not offered to tax. Hence, the AO has made the addition of Rs.19,02,500/- under the head income from house property. During the appellat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted their detailed submission on the issue and the same is reproduced here in below; The above appeal has been filed by assessee against the appeal order dated 10-11-2022 passed by Ld. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi in appeal No. CIT(A)-2, Jaipur/11175/2019-20. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT (A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in law in confirming addition of Rs. 1902500/- made to the income of the appellant by the ld assessing officer on the basis of alleged income appearing in Form No. 26AS on the ground that financial for next year F.Y. 2017-18 (wherein such receipts are shown/declared by the appellant) were not found at ITBA portal ever though these documents/papers were duly uploaded by the appellant on 07-11-2022 vide Annexure 3. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT (A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in law in upholding action of the AO is not allowing deduction of Rs. 500000/- u/s 80G of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of donation given to CM Relief Fund allegedly on the ground that proof of such donation was not found at the ITBA portal even though app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on alleged ground that financials for next year F.Y. 2017-18 (wherein such receipts are shown/declared by the appellant) were not found at ITBA portal even though these documents/papers were duly uploaded by the appellant on 07-11-2022 vide Annexure 3. The Ld CIT(A) further also upheld action of the AO of not allowing deduction of Rs. 500000/- u/s 80G of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of donation given to CM Relief Fund allegedly on the ground that proof of such donation was not found at the ITBA portal even though appellant filed proof thereof during the appellant proceeding vide page no. 22 of Annexure 3 on 7- 11-2022. The present appeal is against the said addition upheld by Ld. CIT(A). Groundwise submissions Ground No. (1) The ground No. (2) of appeal is that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT (A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in law in confirming addition of Rs. 1902500/- made to the income of the appellant by the ld assessing officer on the basis of alleged income appearing in Form No. 26AS on the ground that financial for next year F.Y. 2017-18 (wherein such receipts are shown/declared by the appellant) were not found at ITBA portal eve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to which it belongs as per accounting principles. The appellant filed the documentary evidence/proof of said receipts duly shown in the F.Y. 2017-18 highlighting the relevant entries vide annexure 3 of the reply dated 07-11-2022. However the Ld. CIT(A) without providing any opportunity passed the order by simply mentioned that above said details were not found on ITBA portal though assessee AOP mentioned in its letter. It is, thus evident that said income of stall rent of Rs. 19,02,500/- was income of financial year 2017-18 (A.Y. 2018-19) and has been duly shown in return filed for A.Y. 2018-19 and, therefore its addition wrongly confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) in A.Y. 2017-18 is a double addition which is wrong and bad in law and the same deserves to be deleted. Ground No. (2) The ground No. (2) of appeal is that the ld. CIT (A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in law in upholding action of the AO is not allowing deduction of Rs. 500000/- u/s 80G of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of donation given to CM Relief Fund allegedly on the ground that proof of such donation was not found at the ITBA portal even though appellant filed proof thereof during the appellant proceeding vide pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year and in respect of the donation in the assessment proceeding the ld. AO has not raised any question and has not specifically asked for the proof. Thus, based on the arguments of both the parties that the contentions raised before us found acceptable. The deduction of donation is required to be given as the ld. AO has not asked and the ld. CIT(A) has not given any adverse finding we direct the assessee to file the proof of donation made to the file of the ld. AO. The ld. AO is directed to verify the receipt of the donation and allow the claim of the assessee in accordance with the law. As regards the addition based on the receipt reported in the year under consideration the ld. AO is directed to verify that whether the same is recorded in the receipt shown by the assessee in the subsequent year and after verification the receipt which has been shown in the accounts of the subsequent year then the ld. AO is directed to deleted the amount which has already been offered in the subsequent year. At same time assessee is directed to file the required documents within 30 days from the receipt of this order and the ld. AO is also directed to verify these aspects and passe the consequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
