9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Officer (hereinafter referred to as ld. 'AO') found that in course of survey operation u/s 133A of the Act conducted on 27.01.2015 in the premises of SHG&PH and Examination and Analysis impounded books of accounts and other important documents along with post survey enquiries establish that SHG&PH was indulge in providing bogus donation entries u/s 35 of the Act through various brokers in lieu of the commission. In course of survey statement of several persons related to School of Human Genetics and Population Health (in short SHG&PH) were recorded, notice u/s 131 of the Act was issued to various brokers and their statements were also recorded on oath. The assessee was requested to show cause vide letter dated 13.01.2016 as to why the above noted donation of Rs. 1.25 Crore will not be treated as bogus and the deduction claimed in relation to that amount not be disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee for the AY 2013-14. The assessee has submitted written submission and, in his submission, he claimed that the donation was bona fide and the deduction was claimed on the basis of approval and notification of the Govt. of India. But the Ld. AO did not f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is, therefore, restricted to the deduction claimed at Rs. 2,18,75,000/-. After a careful consideration of the relevant assessment records and the submission of the appellant, the disallowance of Rs. 2,18,75,000/- on account of expenditure made u/s 35(l)(i) and (ii) of the IT. Act, 1961 is, hereby, confirmed. The Assessing Officer is directed accordingly." Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order, the present appeal has been preferred. 1.2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee challenges the impugned order by citing a decision passed in the case of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax 5,Kolkata Vs. J P Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. in ITAT/153/2023 IA NO: GA/2/2023 has submitted that issue in the present case and the issue before the Hon'ble High Court in the above cited decision are the same and his case is entirely covered with the cited decision as above. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that Ld. CIT(A) in its order has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in view of the notification that Section 35(i)(iii) of the Act shall not come to rescue the appellant as it relates only to approvals which have been withdrawn subsequent to the payments made to the ins ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... registered u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, The assessee found that the Board of SHGPG was constituted by eminent persons in the field of life sciences. The assessee also had gone through the projects as carried on by the SHGPG as exhibited in the website and the assessee was approached by SHGPG to make donation so as to continue the research activities. 2.2. The assessee was also informed by SHGPG that since the year ending is approaching, the donation have to be made within 31/03/2013 to get the deduction u/s 35(l)(ii) of the Income Tax Act. On request of the assessee, M/s SHGPG had submitted the documents regarding its registration u/s 12AA of the Income tax Act and gazette notification issued by the Central Government dated 28/01/2010 approving SHGPG for the purpose of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Income tax act, 1961. Based on the above, the assessee donated a sum of Rs. 1,25,00,000 through RTGS to the bank account of the donee. 2.3. By submitting all the documentary evidences during assessment, the assessee had shown that it had examined the credentials of M/s SHGPG. The assessee also explained about its objective for association with the Institu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med under Section 35(1 )(ii) of the Act by the assessee company for donation to the M/s. Herbicure Healthcare Bio-Herbal Research Foundation is perverse considering that there were ample evidence on the contrary and placed on record where it is clearly evident that such transactions were carried out by the assessee firm were I the nature of bogus donations made with the sole intention to evade taxes ? B. Whether the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed substantial error in law in giving relief to the assessee by allowing the claim of bogus donations under Section 35(1 )(ii) by stating that the CBDT had recognized such bogus entry providing concerns namely M/s. Herbicure Healthcare Bio-Herbal Research Foundation under section 35(1 )(ii) whereas on the contrary such approval and recognition had been withdrawn by the CBDT vide Gazettee Notification S.O. 2882(E) dated 6th September, 2016 and O.M. vide F. No. 203/09/2015/ITA.II dated 21st September, 2016 considering the nature of unscrupulous activities carried on by these donee concerns ? We have heard Mr. Om Narayan Rai, learned standing counsel along with Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate for the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
