TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (3) TMI 1245
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... PER RAJPAL YADAV: JUDICIAL MEMBER The assessee is in appeal before us against the order of the learned CIT(A) dated 27.7.2009 passed for assessment year 2002-03. The grievance of the assessee is that learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3,50,000. 2. The learned counsel for the assessee while impugning the orders of the Revenue Authorities Below contended that the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Surender Pal Singh. It was contended by the assessee that a sum of ₹ 3,50,000 was received from Shri Surender Pal Singh vide cheque No.608924 dated 16.10.2001. Apart from this, assessee was unable to give the other details in respect of Surender Pal Singh. However, it was contended by the assessee that donation was received voluntarily. It was taken into consideration as the income of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e contended that thee is no question of double taxation. The assessee failed to explain the source of donation whether it is voluntary or otherwise. The benefit of sections 11 and 12 was not given to the assessee on this amount and it has been, therefore, taxed. The possibility of introduction of assess's own unexplained money cannot be ruled out. 3. We have duly considered the rival contentions....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee in the case of Keshav Social & Charitable Foundation. In that case, the assessee was a charitable trust that had received donation of ₹ 18,24,200. The assessee was asked to furnish the details of the donations i.e. names and address of the donors and the mode of receipt of the donations. The assessee was unable to furnish the details satisfac....