Tribunal upholds CIT(A)'s decision, dismisses Revenue's appeal. Key issues: income treatment, charitable expenses, remand report. (A)

Dy. DIT (E) Investigation Circle-II, New Delhi Versus Parayas Juvenile Aid Centres

Dy. DIT (E) Investigation Circle-II, New Delhi Versus Parayas Juvenile Aid Centres - TMI Issues:
1. Treatment of unutilized grants in total receipts.
2. Deletion of addition made by the Assessing Officer regarding expenditure without proper documentation.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, the Revenue, challenged the order of the CIT(A) regarding the treatment of unutilized grants in total receipts. The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in allowing the reduction of unutilized grants directly from the total receipts. The Revenue argued that the reduction of &8377; 1,69,45,310/- from the total receipts of &8377; 6,70,82,812/- was not acceptable. However, the tribunal noted that the source of funding for the society's projects included government grants, state government grants, FCRA funds, and donations. The accounts were subject to statutory audit and audit by government agencies. The tribunal found that the Assessing Officer wrongly considered the unutilized grant as income and disallowed expenses incurred for charitable purposes. The tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the CIT(A) properly considered all relevant facts and there was no need to interfere with the findings.

2. The second issue revolved around the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer regarding 25% of the expenditure of &8377; 5,22,61,219/- due to lack of proper documentation. The Revenue argued that despite providing several opportunities, the assessee failed to provide books of account and other details of expenses. However, the tribunal observed that the Assessing Officer wrongly denied deductions under Section 11(1) to the society based on ad-hoc disallowance of expenses. The tribunal found that the CIT(A) had appropriately called for a remand report from the Assessing Officer and considered all relevant facts. Since the Assessing Officer did not raise any adverse comments in the remand report, the tribunal concluded that the CIT(A)'s decision was justified. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue.

In conclusion, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision in both issues, emphasizing the proper consideration of facts and the unjust treatment by the Assessing Officer. The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the order was pronounced on June 29, 2021.