Tribunal grants assessee relief, rejects revenue's appeals based on lack of evidence and procedural errors.

The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing appeals for various assessment years where additions and disallowances were deleted due to lack of incriminating material, violation of natural justice, and procedural irregularities. The tribunal confirmed exemptions under relevant sections and deductions for capital expenditure, dismissing the revenue's appeals for those years.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Addition of Rs. 15,00,000 as unexplained expenditure for A.Y. 2004-05.
2. Addition for alleged bogus purchases from M/s Prateek Enterprises and M/s Saluja Enterprises for A.Ys. 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09.
3. Addition of Rs. 17,00,000 for alleged unexplained payment to Shri S.D. Tomar for A.Y. 2009-10.
4. Addition of Rs. 36,08,666 for alleged benefit given to M/s Siddharth Kapoor Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (SKIPL) for A.Y. 2009-10.
5. Denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for various years.
6. Denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) for A.Y. 2009-10 and subsequent years.
7. Addition of notional interest on the amount advanced to Homebound Travel Pvt. Ltd. (HTPL) for A.Ys. 2009-10 and 2010-11.
8. Disallowance of depreciation expenses at Rs. 7,71,146 for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11.
9. Allowance of deduction for capital expenditure as application of income for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition of Rs. 15,00,000 as unexplained expenditure for A.Y. 2004-05:
The tribunal found that the alleged transaction was through the banking channel and accounted for in the books. The addition was based on a paper seized from a third party and not from the assessee's premises. Since the assessment for A.Y. 2004-05 was non-abated and no incriminating material was found during the search, the addition was beyond the scope of Section 153A. The tribunal deleted the addition.

2. Addition for alleged bogus purchases from M/s Prateek Enterprises and M/s Saluja Enterprises for A.Ys. 2006-07, 2007-08, and 2008-09:
The tribunal noted that the assessee had provided detailed documentation, including ledger accounts, bank statements, purchase bills, and certificates from contractors and architects. The tribunal found that the purchases were genuine and used in the construction of the building. The addition was based on third-party information without providing an opportunity for cross-examination, violating principles of natural justice. The tribunal deleted the additions for all three years.

3. Addition of Rs. 17,00,000 for alleged unexplained payment to Shri S.D. Tomar for A.Y. 2009-10:
The tribunal found that the payment was made to a contractor for construction work, duly recorded in the books, and tax was deducted at source. The tribunal held that the payment was for the society's objects and deleted the addition.

4. Addition of Rs. 36,08,666 for alleged benefit given to M/s Siddharth Kapoor Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (SKIPL) for A.Y. 2009-10:
The tribunal found that the payment was a loan to Ayushmati Educational Society (AESS) for land development, which was used for sports activities for students. The transaction was not an investment or deposit and thus not hit by Section 13(3). The tribunal deleted the addition.

5. Denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for various years:
The tribunal noted that the denial of exemption was based on certain additions and disallowances, which were deleted. The tribunal held that only the income violating Section 13 should be taxed at the maximum marginal rate, not the entire income. The tribunal confirmed the benefit of exemption u/s 11 for the remaining income.

6. Denial of exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi) for A.Y. 2009-10 and subsequent years:
The tribunal found that the denial was without following the procedure prescribed in the proviso to Section 143(3). The tribunal noted that the assessee was granted approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) and the activities were solely for educational purposes. The tribunal held that the assessee could claim exemption under both Sections 10(23C)(vi) and 11 simultaneously before the amendment by Finance Act 2020. The tribunal allowed the exemption u/s 10(23C)(vi).

7. Addition of notional interest on the amount advanced to Homebound Travel Pvt. Ltd. (HTPL) for A.Ys. 2009-10 and 2010-11:
The tribunal found that interest was charged on the amount advanced to HTPL and recorded in the books. The tribunal deleted the notional interest addition.

8. Disallowance of depreciation expenses at Rs. 7,71,146 for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11:
The tribunal found no incriminating material for the alleged bogus assets. The disallowance was based on non-abated assessments, and no addition could be made without incriminating material. The tribunal deleted the disallowance.

9. Allowance of deduction for capital expenditure as application of income for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11:
The tribunal noted that the assessee was eligible for exemption u/s 11, and the capital expenditure was for the society's objects. The tribunal confirmed the allowance of deduction for capital expenditure.

Conclusion:
The tribunal allowed the assessee's appeals for A.Ys. 2004-05, 2006-07 to 2009-10, and 2009-10 to 2010-11, and dismissed the revenue's appeals for A.Ys. 2008-09 to 2010-11 and 2009-10 to 2010-11.

---