TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 1451
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fact that the appellant has submitted all relevant documentary evidences to substantiate the genuineness of the impugned donation. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer, without considering that the appellant was neither provided any opportunity of cross examination of persons on whose statements reliance was placed nor provided any copy of such statements or any material or evidences on which reliance was placed, which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The appellant craves to add, alter, classify, reclassify, delete or modify any of the above grounds of appeal and requests to consider each of the above grounds without prejudice to one another. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of trading in chemicals. The assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2012-13 on 29.09.2012 disclosing a total income of Rs. 21,94,300/- and the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 11.02.2015 with a total income of Rs. 21,94,300/-.Subseque....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the Ld. AR that the donation is genuine and duly supported with the facts and the material information to substantiate the eligibility of claim of deduction u/s 35(1)(iii) of the Act. The Ld.AR submissions are realistic and duly supported by the evidences. We find the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of M/s Sopariwala Exports Pvt Ltd vs. DCIT in ITA No. 2039/Mum/2018 dated 17-06-2021 has dealt on the identical facts and granted the relief and observed at page 3 Para 9 to 15 of the order as under: 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. At the outset learned Counsel of the assessee submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by several decisions of the ITAT on identical facts. He referred to the following decisions : * Motilal Dahyabhai Jhaveri & sons Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 3453/Mum/2018 dt. 24.4.2019) * Borsad Tobacco Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (ITA No. 2040/Mum/2018 dt. 17.6.2019) * Kitchen Essentials Vs. ACIT (ITA No. 6672&6673/Mum/2013 dt. 15.1.2019) 10. Per contra, learned Departmental Represe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ol of Human Genetics and Population Health' (hereinafter referred to as 'SHG'). The Assessee Firm in A.Y. 2014-15, made donation of Rs,2,00,00,000/ to Matrivani and Rs,4,00,00,000/ to SHG and claimed weighted deduction Assessing Officer. We note that not providing the opportunity of crossexamination is against the principle of natural justice and for that we rely of-the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Dharam Pal Prern Chand Ltd. [2007] 295 ITR 105, 108 (del). We note that on identical facts, the similar proposition was upheld by the Coordinate Bench of Kolkata in the case of Rajda Polymers, ITA No.333/Kol/2017,for Assessment Year 2013-14 wherein it was held as follows: "10. ....Thus we note from the entire facts and circumstances, that the AO got swayed away with the statement recorded on oath of Mr. Swapan Ranjan Dasgupta during survey conducted at the premises of M/s. Herb/cure. We have reproduced Question no. 22 and 23 and answers given by Shri Swapan Ranjan Dasgupta, wherein he admits to provide accommodation entries in lieu of cash. This information we should say can be the tool to start an investigation when the assessee made the cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction 12A of the Act and Section 21 of the General Clauses Act held that the order of the CIT passed under Section 12A is quasi judicial in nature. Second, there was no express provision in the Act vesting the CIT with power of cancellation of registration fill 01.10.2004; and lastly. Section 21 of the General Clauses Act has no application to the order passed by the CIT under Section 12A because the order is quasi judicial in nature and it is for all these reasons the CIT had no jurisdiction to cancel the registration certificate once granted by him under Section 12A till the power was expressly conferred on the CIT by Section I2AAC3) of the Act w.e.f. 01.10.2004. We hold that the ratio decidendi of the aforesaid judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court would squarely be applicable to the facts of the instant case. In fact the assessee's case herein falls on a much better footing than the facts before the Hon'ble Apex Court. In the case before Hon'ble Apex Court, the power of cancellation of registration us 12A of the Act was conferred by the Act on the Id CIT w.e.f. 1.10.2004 and the Hon'ble Apex Court held that prior to that date , no cancellation of registration ....