Deduction Denied on Donation to Research Trust After Expiry of Approval Under Section 35(1)(ii) Benefit Claim

ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 35(1)(ii) on donation made by the assessee to a research trust whose approval under that provision had expired on 31.03.2006. The Tribunal held that, post-expiry, the trust was not a recognised institution for purposes of s.35(1)(ii) and thus could not validly receive donations qualifying for weighted deduction. It found that the assessee, being financially literate and aware of the CBDT approval period, could not plead ignorance. Consequently, the disallowance by AO and confirmation by CIT(A) were sustained.

---

---

1. ISSUES PRESENTED AND CONSIDERED

1.1 Whether the delay of 282 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal deserved to be condoned.

1.2 Whether deduction under section 35(1)(ii) was allowable on donation made to a research institution whose approval under that provision had expired prior to the year of donation.

1.3 Whether the assessee's plea of good faith and reliance on documents/certificates received from the donee trust could validate the claim for deduction when CBDT approval under section 35(1)(ii) was not in force.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Condonation of delay in filing appeal

Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal examined the assessee's explanation that, by oversight, the clerk did not hand over the signed appeal papers to the authorised representative, which led to the delay of 282 days in filing the appeal. On consideration of the "requisite details", the Tribunal found the explanation to be "genuine and reasonable".

Conclusions: The delay of 282 days in filing the appeal was condoned.

Issue 2 & 3: Allowability of deduction under section 35(1)(ii) for donation to a trust whose approval had expired; effect of assessee's bona fides

Legal framework (as discussed): The Tribunal proceeded on the basis that deduction under section 35(1)(ii) is available only when the donee institution is approved/recognised for the relevant period by the competent authority (CBDT/DSIR), and that after expiry of such approval the institution is "not eligible to raise donations for undertaking Scientific Research" for purposes of weighted deduction.

Interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal recorded that the Arvindo Institute of Applied Scientific Research Trust had earlier been approved under section 35(1)(ii), but such approval expired on 31.03.2006. For the assessment year 2017-18, the approval was not in force. This fact, along with the earlier approval period, had been clearly brought out and reproduced in the assessment order. The Tribunal noted the specific finding that the recognition letter relied upon was not issued by the competent authority (BSIR/DSIR), indicating that the institute was not duly recognised for the relevant period. On these facts, the Tribunal held that the entity, having lost recognition after 31.03.2006, could not legally raise donations eligible for deduction under section 35(1)(ii).

The Tribunal rejected the assessee's contention that it acted in good faith on the basis of certificates and documents issued by the trust. It emphasised that the assessee, being a science graduate "conversant with financial updates" and aware of its business environment, could not claim ignorance of the necessity of valid CBDT approval and of the fact that approval had only been granted up to 2006. The Tribunal accepted the authorities' characterisation that the donation was made solely with a view to obtain weighted deduction at 175%, and upheld the inference that the claim under section 35(1)(ii) was not sustainable. The argument that the assessee had done all that was within its domain and that the disallowance was for "no fault" of the assessee was implicitly rejected in view of the clear position on the expiry of recognition and the assessee's expected awareness thereof.

Conclusions: The donation made to the Arvindo Institute of Applied Scientific Research Trust for the assessment year in question was not eligible for deduction under section 35(1)(ii), as the trust's approval had expired on 31.03.2006 and was not in force during the relevant period. The assessee's plea of good faith and reliance on certificates/documents from the trust could not override the statutory requirement of valid approval by the competent authority. The disallowance of Rs. 54,25,000/- under section 35(1)(ii) as made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the appellate authority was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.

---