TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 31
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in restricting the disallowance of bogus donation u/s 80GGC to Rs. 6,00,000/- as against Rs. 8,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer, without appreciating that the entire claim of Rs. 8,00,000/- was ineligible and part of the modus operandi of RUPPs as established during search proceedings. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Noida has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE, without appreciating that the assessee had failed to establish the source and nexus of the time deposit with disclosed income and the burden of proof rested on the assessee. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed that the donation made by the assessee is only of Rs. 6 lacs and not Rs. 8 lacs as alleged by the AO. The appellant also filed copy of the bank account statement wherein, donation of Rs. 6 lacs on 19.11.2019 is clearly reflected. As far as, the issue of claim of bogus deductions by making donations to RUPPs is concerned, the complete modus operandi has been discussed by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order. The AO has clearly pointed out the fact that the donations made via banking channel are routed through the accounts of RUPPs and layered through shell entities from wherein the cash is returned back to the donor. The said findings of the AO are based on the search action carried out on the RUPPs wherein, the donation made by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... do not find any infirmity in the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, Revenue's appeal on this issue is dismissed. 6. Appeal on ground No.2 is against the deletion of addition of Rs. 1 crore made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has brought out a complete factual position on this issue in the appellate order, which is as under:- "5.3 In these grounds of appeal, the AR has contested the addition of Rs. 1 crore made by the AO with respect to a time deposit made in her bank account. The AR submitted copy of the bank account statement wherein, vide entry dated 17.11.2018 a time deposit of Rs. 1 crore has been made. There are regular credits in the ban....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of Rs. 5,33,62,191/- The Assessee has filed a return of income of Rs. 5,46,84,197/-. In our considered view if the Assessee has income of more than Rs. 5.46 crores in the year under consideration, then there is nothing unusual of making a term deposit of Rs. 1 Crore out of income of Rs. 5.46 Crores for the year under consideration. The Revenue has brought nothing on record to rebut the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue, therefore, we find no reason to interfere in the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A). The Revenue's appeal on this issue is dismissed. 10. Appeal on ground No.3 is against the deletion of addition of Rs. 13,01,200/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unsubstantiated claim of gratuity, leave encashment....