TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 66
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2024 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19 in the proceeding under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 declaring total income of Rs. 1,08,70,110/- The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny to verify the deduction on account of donation for scientific research. The assessee had claimed deduction of Rs. 75,00,000/- under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act in respect of donation of Rs. 50,00,000/- made to Shri Arvindo Institute of Applied Scientific Research Trust (hereinafter referred as "Institute") for research in the field of solar and renewable energy ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e-cases. In the circular CBDT has specified the monetary limit for filing an appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal as Rs. 60,00,000.00 of Tax Effect. In the instant matter, the tax effect determined by the Ld. ITO is of Rs. 20,66,348.00/-, which is not exceeding the prescribed limit specified by CBDT vide circular 09/2024 dated 17th September, 2024. The respondent prays to your lordships, to dismiss the appeal filed by the appellant before your lordships. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter and/or to amend all or any of grounds of cross objection before the final hearing of appeal." 6. Shri Abhijit, Ld. Sr. DR, submitted that the Assessing Officer had rightly disallowed the deducti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....025 (Ahmedabad Tribunal) vi) Kapadia Marketing Inc. vs. ITO, ITA No.95/Ahd/2023 dated 17.01.2025 (Ahmedabad Tribunal) 7. Per contra, Shri Ashish Kanabar, Ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that the assessee had obtained all the relevant certificate/documents and made donation to this Institute after due verification to the best of its satisfaction. Considering the documents provided by the Institute, the assessee had no reason to disbelieve the same and no other material was available with it to conclude that the donation made to the Institute was not genuine. The Ld. AR further submitted that the CBDT had communicated to the field authorities that approval granted to the Institute under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act had expired i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ute's registration under Section 12AA of the Act was cancelled and that the activities of the Institute were not genuine. Merely because the assessee had made donation to the Institute on the basis of fraudulent documents, it does not make such donation eligible for deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The undisputed fact is that the Institute was not approved for the purpose of receiving donations under Section 35(1)(ii) after 31.03.2006 and all donations subsequently received by the Institute were on the basis of forged documents furnished by it. The CBDT, vide letter dated 14.12.2018, had issued an advisory to the field formation to examine the irregular claim of weighted deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) in respect of the donat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wing the consistent view of the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in various cases as referred above, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer had rightly disallowed the claim for weighted deduction under Section 35(1)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the disallowance as made by the Assessing Officer is upheld and the order of the Ld. CIT(A), allowing relief to the assessee, is quashed. 9. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed. C.O. No.44/Ahd/2025 10. The only ground raised by the assessee in the cross objection is about the monetary limit for filing the appeal. According to the assessee, tax effect involved in the present appeal was less than Rs. 60,00,000/- and, therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....section 35(1)(ii) of the Act which expired on 31.03.2006. Thereafter, this entity, being not recognized for purpose of section 35(1)(ii) of the Act, is not eligible to raise donations for undertaking scientific research however, the Trust has raised substantial donations over the last six years on the basis of a forged certificate while the donors have irregularly claimed weighted deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) of the Act on donations made to the Trust. 4. In view of above, I am directed to state that the pending scrutiny assessment cases of donors who have claimed irregular weighted deduction u/s 35(1)(ii) should be handled in light of above facts. In case of donors whose cases are presently not under scrutiny, the Board desires that a l....