TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 194
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n in making disallowance of Rs. 2,86,530/- being the penalty compensatory in nature under the FCRA and hence, not justified. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well in law, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the AO's action in making the addition of Rs. 18,96,725/- on account of the voluntary contributions of the donors made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust, treating it as the income, without considering in the right, lawful and proper perspectives, the claim of the appellant trust for such specific donations eligible for exemption u/s 11(1)(d) of the Act and hence, not justified. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well in law, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the AO's action in making addition of Rs. 16,73,830/- treating the deposits of amount in cash in the regular bank account of the appellant trust's educational branch namely Amalsad Mandal Prathmik Vibhag and hence, both the lower authorities have grievously erred in treating the accounted income of the trust as unexplained cash credit, arbitrarily ignoring the detailed audited statements of educational bra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 7350/Mum/2011 order dated 25/03/2013. 4. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that the ld. CIT(A) relied upon the latest decision of Mumbai Tribunal in Nandlal Tolani Charitable Vs ITO(E) (supra) wherein the general provisions vis a vis, the special provision for trust prescribed under Sections 11, 12 and 13 were examined and the ratio of said decision is directly applicable on the facts of the present case. In ADIT (E)(2) Vs Sri Sathya Sai Trust (supra), the Bench has not considered the provision of Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Act. 5. I have considered the submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of the lower authorities carefully. I find that the Assessing Officer disallowed standard deduction by taking a view that income of assessee is subject to application of Sections 11, 12 and 13 of the Act which has overriding effect to the general provisions of Income Tax Act. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer by approving the view of Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A) also followed the decision of Delhi Tribunal in Improvement Trust, Fatehabad Vs ITO(Exemptions) wherein the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in Nandlal Tolan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r submission that the expenses incurred for payment of penalty is allowable expenses which are not penal in nature. The ld CIT(A) upheld the order of assessing officer by taking view that penalty was levied by Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) for infringement of law, thus, the same is not allowable. Further aggrieved the assessee has filed present appeal before Tribunal. 7. The ld AR for the assessee submits that penalty levied by MHA was not in the nature of fine, rather it was levied for accepting donation in breach of violation of FCRA. The penalty levied by MHA is compensatory in nature and allowable expenditure. Such penalty was paid as the assessee was not having permission of Ministry of Home Affairs to receive such funds. To support his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Chandigarh Benches of Tribunal in Master Capital Services Ltd. Vs DCIT (2008) 23 SOT 60 (Chd). 8. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR for the revenue supported the order of Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT-DR submits that the penalty was paid for infringement of law. 9. In short rejoinder, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that the penalty was not paid for any of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... contribution, the assessee admitted that they have received amount in FY 2013-14. The ld CIT(A) further noted that as per the submissions of the assessee the impugned amount was received in earlier years in FY 1997-98 and 198-99 but as the letter sent by the assessee to FCRA indicate that such amount was received in FY 2013- 14. Thus, ld CIT(A) on recording such discrepancies confirmed the action of assessing officer. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeal before tribunal. 12. The ld AR for the assessee submits that in fact such funds were not received in the financial year 2013-14, rather it was received in FY 1997-98 and 198-99. The details of donors with the amount of donation is filed as per page 81 of paper book. As no funds were received in the current financial year, so no additions cane be made against the assessee in the assessment year under consideration. So far as observation of ld CIT(A) is concerned that the assessee admitted that they have received amount in FY 2013-14, is incorrect and may be due to inadvertent mistake. 13. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR for the revenue supported the finding of ld CIT(A). 14. I have considered the rival submissions o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AR for the assessee submits that the assessing officer made addition without appreciating the facts and only on the basis of AIR information. The assessing officer treated branch of assessee namely Amalsad Mandal Prathmik Vibhag as separate and independent entity without appreciation the real fact and only on the basis of AIR information. The whole of the amount was received on account of tuition fee and deposited throughout of the year. The bank account is duly disclosed to the department. The ld CIT(A) confirmed the action of assessing officer by relying and referring the part of profit and loss account of assessee-trust. The schedule -H, which is considered by the ld CIT(A) is not related to the school. The assessee has placed on record the audit report of Amalsad Mandal Prathmik Vibhag and the copy of bank statement. The credit in the bank consist of tuition fee of Rs. 15,76,960/-, term fee of Rs. 93,900/- admission fee of Rs. 1,100/- and Rs 1870/- on account of recovery, aggregating of Rs. 16,73,830/-. Thus, entire credit in the bank is explained. The books of accounts are duly audited. There is no unexplained credit in such bank account. 17. On the other hand, the ld DR for....