Tribunal remands case to Assessing Officer, finding income addition unjustified. Appeal allowed.

The Tribunal remanded the case to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication, finding that the addition to the assessee's income was not justified without verifying the facts. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, with the order pronounced in Allahabad, U.P., on 02.08.2022.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Legitimacy of the cash deposits in the assessee's bank account.
2. The applicability of section 10(23C)(iiiad) exemption to the assessee.
3. The requirement for the assessee to provide the identity and details of the donors.
4. The justification for the addition of Rs. 45,55,746/- to the assessee's income under section 69A.
5. The verification of the assessee's claim regarding the transfer of donations to the Dalai Lama Charitable Trust.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Legitimacy of the Cash Deposits in the Assessee's Bank Account:
The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under section 148 to the assessee, a University enjoying exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad), to assess the income on account of a cash deposit of Rs. 45,55,746/- in the bank account. The assessee claimed that the amount was a donation given to the Dalai Lama Charitable Trust by devotees and was transferred via demand draft. However, the AO did not accept this explanation due to a lack of supporting documents and added the amount to the assessee's income.

2. Applicability of Section 10(23C)(iiiad) Exemption to the Assessee:
The assessee argued that it enjoys exemption under section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Income Tax Act. Despite this, the AO proceeded with the assessment, treating the cash deposits as unexplained money under section 69A, thereby questioning the applicability of the exemption.

3. Requirement for the Assessee to Provide the Identity and Details of the Donors:
The AO and the CIT(A) both emphasized the necessity for the assessee to provide the identity and details of the donors. The assessee failed to furnish these details, leading to the addition of the entire amount in the hands of the assessee. The CIT(A) sustained the addition, citing the lack of particulars to show the nature and source of the deposits.

4. Justification for the Addition of Rs. 45,55,746/- to the Assessee's Income Under Section 69A:
The AO made the addition of Rs. 45,55,746/- to the assessee's income, including amounts from the sale of books and advances received for University work. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, stating that the appellant could not submit the list of persons who made contributions, nor any particulars to show the nature and source of these deposits.

5. Verification of the Assessee's Claim Regarding the Transfer of Donations to the Dalai Lama Charitable Trust:
The Tribunal noted that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) took steps to verify the correctness of the assessee's claim. The assessee provided details of the deposits and transfers, including confirmations from the Dalai Lama Charitable Trust and supporting documents. The Tribunal found that the amount deposited in the bank account was immediately transferred to the Dalai Lama Trust and was declared as income by the Trust. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO to re-adjudicate after verifying the details and evidence provided by the assessee.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the addition made by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) was not justified without verifying the facts. It remanded the matter to the AO to re-adjudicate, considering the details and evidence provided by the assessee. The appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes. The order was pronounced on 02.08.2022 at Allahabad, U.P.

---