TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 1726
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 12.06.2023 arising out of the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act by DCIT, Circle-22, Kolkata dated 31.03.2016. 2. Though Registry has reported that this appeal of the assessee is time barred by 62 days however, considering the date of receipt of the impugned order, we find that there is no delay in filing this appeal. We, therefore, proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 3. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1.1 For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the disallowance of the appellant's genuine and bona fide claim for deduction of Rs. 2,62,50,000 under section 35(1)(ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and his purported findings in that behalf are wholly arbitrary, er....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rbicure") and has claimed deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the Act at Rs. 2,62,50,000/- being 175% of the donation amount. Ld. AO referring to survey proceeding u/s 133A and also discussing about the report of Investigation Wing came to the conclusion that the alleged donation is bogus and assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s. 35(1)(ii) of the Act. The assessee challenged the said action of the AO before the Ld. CIT(A) placing reliance on various decisions but failed to succeed. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Counsel for the assessee apart from referring to the detail paper book containing 209 pages and also referring to various judgments attached to the case law paper book stated that the assessee's case stan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion and accepted that it has received bogus donation in lieu of commission and was returned cash in exchange of cheques. However, the said decision of Tarasaf International (P) Ltd. (supra) cannot be applied on the facts of the instant case because we are dealing with other scientific research organisation i.e. "Herbicure Health Care Bio Research Foundation" and the Departmental Representative has not brought on record any fact demonstrating that whether "Herbicure" has gone before the Settlement Commission and has admitted to have been providing accommodation entry in the form of bogus donation. The facts of the case in hand are different from the facts of the case of Tarasaf International (P) Ltd. (supra). Thus, the ratio laid down in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 35(1)(ii) by stating that the CBDT had recognized such bogus entry providing concerns namely M/s. Herbicure Healthcare BioHerbal Research Foundation under section 35(1)(ii) whereas on the contrary such approval and recognition had been withdrawn by the CBDT vide Gazettee Notification S.O. 2882(E) dated 6th September, 2016 and O.M. vide F. No. 203/09/2015/ITA.II dated 21st September, 2016 considering the nature of unscrupulous activities carried on by these donee concerns? We have heard Mr. Om Narayan Rai, learned standing counsel along with Mr. Soumen Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate for the appellant/revenue. The short issue which falls for consideration in this appeal is whether the Tribunal was right in allowing the ded....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istake of the department. The department has power of withdrawal but in such cases withdrawal can be only with prospective effect. Further it was held that if the donation to the approved society is genuine, in that case withdrawal with retrospective effect does not affect the right of the assessee for deduction of the amount which has accrued to the assessee on the basis of the payment to an approved society under Section 35CCA of the Act. In the light of the above, the order passed by the learned Tribunal does not call for any interference. In the result, the appeal is dismissed and the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue. The stay application being GA/2/2023 is also dismissed." 9. R....