2017 (7) TMI 502

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rned Income Tax, Appellate Tribunal erred in law in allowing the deduction under section 80GGB in respect of donation made by the assessee to the political parties." The facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are that the assessee made donation to political parties. In the return filed by the assessee this was not claimed as a deduction. The assessment was accordingly made. The assessee on preferring an appeal, the CIT(A) found and said that which is reproduced below: "..........Examination of the breakup of expenses in schedule-3 of the Audited Accounts as well as in Annexure-III with regard to miscellaneous expenses reveal that the appellant made total contribution as donation during the year at Rs. 2,25,72,928/- which includes ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ccept the claim of assessee, though the same has not been made in the original return nor has been claimed in the revised return. In the circumstances, respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gotze (India) Ltd. (refer to supra), the Assessing Officer is directed to grant the assessee's claim of deduction u/s 80GGB of the donations made by the assessee to political parties in respect of Rs. 45 lakhs given to Congress party and Rs. 80 lakhs given to BJP." Ms. Das De relied on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in (1991) 187 ITR 688 (SC) to the portion in that judgment as extracted below: "The next question which arises for considerati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....w of the later judgment of the said court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs.CIT reported in (2006) 284 ITR 326 (SC) the question was covered against Revenue. Mr. Murarka, in addition to Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra), relied on another judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. reported in (1986) 160 ITR 920 (SC) in which, inter alia, the following was said. "In the second place, there is a duty cast on the Income tax Officer to apply the relevant provisions of the Indian Income tax Act for the purpose of determining the true figure of the assessee's taxable income and the consequential tax liability. Merely because the assessee fails to claim the benefit of a set-off, it cannot relieve the Income....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sistant Commissioner. Though Ms. Das De submitted, such direction meant that the deduction was not allowed, we see the direction as being one to consider the merits of the deduction and not the deductibility itself. The facts in Gurjargravures Private Ltd.(supra) were that the assessee therein had not claimed exemption under section 84 before the I.T.O and the assessment was completed accordingly. The assessee then appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and one of the grounds of appeal was that the I.T.O had erred in not giving the assessee any benefit under section 84 of the Act. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissed the appeal on the ground that the question of error on the part of the I.T.O did not arise as no claim f....