INCOME TAX OFFICER Vs. SATYA KABIR SAHABANI GADI SHRI SATYA KABIR SAHABANI GADI V ITO
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
B. L. CHHIBBER, A. M. : -
(1.) THIS appeal by the Revenue and the cross-objection filed by the assessee arise out of the order of the CIT(A), II Rajkot. The only effective ground raised in the appeal filed by the Revenue reads as under : "The CIT(A) erred in law and on facts of the case in directing to delete the amount of Rs. 3,37,223 and Rs. 8,62,677 and also directing to allow a sum of Rs. 42,922 as expenses as claimed by the assessee."
(2.) The assessee is a Public Charitable Trust. During the year under appeal the trust received donation amounting to Rs. 3,37,223 towards "BLdg. Fund A/c". It also received donations aggregating to Rs. 8,62,677 towards "Kayami Fund Account". Before the ITO the assessee-trust contended that these donations were received with a specific direction that these shall form corpus of the respective funds. It was further submitted that both the "Bldg. Fund A/c." and "Kayami Fund A/c." constituted corpus of the trust. The ITO was not satisfied with the explanation furnished and treated the above two amounts of Rs. 3,37,223 and Rs. 8,62,677 being donations towards "Bldg. Fund A/c." and "Kayami Fund A/c." respectively, as income of the assessee trust.
On appeal, the CIT(A) want through the receipts issued by the assessee-trust and noted that in every receipt the purpose of the donation was mentioned and the donations were received for "Bldg. Fund A/c." and "Kayami Fund A/c". He, therefore, held that the donations had been made by the donors with the specific directions that these were for the corpus of the trust. Relying upon the decision of Delhi Bench "A" of Tribunal in the case of Dharama Pratishthanam vs. ITO (1985) 11 ITD 40 (Del) he directed the Assessing Officer to delete the additions of Rs. 3,37,223 and Rs. 8,62,677.
(3.) SHRI A. K. Hajela, the learned Departmental Representative, submitted that the donations of Rs. 3,37,223 and Rs. 8,62,677 towards "Bldg. Fund A/c." and "Kayami Fund A/c." respectively were voluntary contributions and constituted the income of the assessee-trust under S. 2(24)(iia) of the Act. He further submitted that there were no specific directions from the donors that the contributions were towards the corpus of the trust and, hence, reliance placed by the CIT(A) on the decision of Delhi Bench "A" of Tribunal (supra) is misplaced.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.