- (1.) This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), against the order dated June 21, 2011 (annexure A-3), passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench "B", Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") passed in I.T.A. No. 1150/Chd/2009 for the assessment year 2005-06 claiming the following substantial questions of law: "A. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has misdirected itself in being influenced by irrelevant factors and applying erroneous criteria while deciding the issue of genuineness of the impugned donations thereby ignoring sufficient evidences to prove the factum of receipt of donations by the UK Sangat for application of the funds for the benefit of Gurudwara Sahib by treating the explanation and affidavit of Sewadar of Gurudwara Baba Balwinder Singh as not sufficient evidence and thereby making addition under section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the hands of the appellant who having simply collected the said amount in the absence of Baba Ji from India which findings of the Tribunal being perverse? B. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in reversing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and upholding the order of the Assessing Officer, under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case where no evidence is on record to prove income but payment to the aforesaid third party is an admitted fact? C. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the findings of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal are perverse and against the evidences on record thus unsustainable in law so that so the impugned addition of Rs. 11,26,000 on account of donations by Sangat and interest of Rs. 39,411 is bad in law and needs deletion?" The facts necessary for adjudication as narrated in the present appeal may be noticed. The assessee who is engaged in glass business filed his return for the assessment year 2005-06 on March 9, 2006, declaring the income at Rs. 97,500. The said return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and was asked to explain cash deposits of Rs. 16,92,300. The appellant explained that out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. 11,26,000 was collected on behalf of Baba Balwinder Singh by way of donation from the Sangat of UK. The assessee also filed an affidavit dated June 21, 2007 (annexure A-4) of Balwinder Singh. The appellant was asked to produce Balwinder Singh on November 2, 2007, to verify the authenticity and the genuineness of the affidavit but he could not be produced. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer, vide order dated December 27, 2007, made an addition of Rs. 11,26,000 along with interest of Rs. 39,410. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) who, vide order dated September 10, 2009 (annexure A-2), deleted the aforesaid additions made by the Assessing Officer. Against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the Revenue filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, vide order dated June 21, 2011 (annexure A-3), while allowing the appeal of the Revenue, sustained the order of the Assessing Officer. Hence, the present appeal by the assessee.
(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
(3.) The issue that arises for consideration in this case is whether the addition of Rs. 11,26,000 on account of donations collected by way of Sangat of U.K. and interest of Rs. 39,410 as made by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the Tribunal was justified. It was urged on behalf of learned counsel for the assessee-appellant that Baba Ji could not be produced earlier for cross-examination as he was out of India but could be produced now and the inference drawn on that basis was unjustified.;