TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (4) TMI 2082
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessable in the hands of assessee in his individual capacity is to be deleted subject to assessment in the hands of AOP of these persons. Such direction of Ld. CIT(A) is perverse, illegal & bad in law, hence the same be expunged. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in rejecting the additional evidences filed by the assessee in support of existence of unregistered AOP in the name of Shyam Salona Dhwaj Yatra Samiti' by making various incorrect and irrelevant observations. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that the expenditure incurred out of donation received by 'Shyam Salona Dhwaj Yatra Samiti' is not allowable as deduction in computing the total income by making various incorrect and irrelevant observations ignoring the concept of mutuality and basic principle of taxation. 4. That the learned Assessing Officer has erred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in wrongly computing the total receipts at Rupees 32,48,726.00, out of the seized material AS-2, whereas, the receipts are only Rupees 7,79,461.00 and expenses of Rupees 7,70,025.00 out of the same, thus there is an income of Rupee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r 2016-17 and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)-IV, Jaipur, has erred in not giving any finding thereon." 2.1 At the outset of hearing of the appeals of the assessee, the Bench noted that there are delay of 208 days and 139 days in filing the appeal (supra) by the assessee for which the assessee has filed two applications dated 13-10-2024 for condonation of delay narrating therein the same viewpoint/ reasoning which are as under:- "The Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, G-4, Raj Mahal Residency Area, C' Scheme, Jaipur. Application for condonation of delay in Filing of appeal in the case of KEDAR PARSAD VIJAY, 236, Scheme Number 1 Alwar Rajasthan PAN: AATPV5993J A.Y. 2014-2015 and 2016-17. Respected Sir, It is humbly submitted that the appeal of the above assessee for the Assessment Year 2014-15 was decided by learned. Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)VI, Jaipur vide its order dated 22.01.2024 and while deciding the appeal, Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax-(Appeals)-VI, Jaipur, has given the following direction to the Assessing Officer on page number 60 in 1 and 2 para of the appellate order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t may be noted that the assessee was under the bona fide belief that Ld. CIT(A) has allowed relief to him but only when the appeal effect order for AY 2016-17 was communicated to him on 28.08.2024 he came to know that AO has taken different stand in AY 2016-17 as compared to that taken in AY 2014-15. This has resulted in delay in filing the appeal and therefore, in the interest of natural justice, equity and fair play, it is prayed that the appeal of assessee be admitted by condoning the delay in filing the appeal." To this effect, the assessee has filed an affidavit deposing the above facts as to the delays made in filing the above mentioned appeals. 2.2. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR objected to assessee's applications for condonation of such inordinate delays and prayed that Court may decide the issue as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2.3 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted that the reasons as advanced by assessee for condonation of delay in respect of the above mentioned appeals have sufficient reasons to condone the delay which has merit. Thus, we concur with the submission of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd page 41 of annexure AS-3. 3.2 Before the CIT(A) assessee filed additional evidences by way of pictures taken during the course of conducting the Dhwaj Yatra, affidavit of 6 persons working as members of the samiti that document seized from the assessee belongs to the samiti as also the mistake in the amount added by the AO which is reproduced at page 46-49 of the appellate order. However the Ld. CIT(Appeal) after detailed discussion at page 52-59 of the appellate order rejected the additional evidences by observing that the registered society came into existence much later and therefore the samiti/AOP which is in existence during the year is completely distinct and separate and thus held that income as per seized material, deposits in the bank account etc. of the unregistered society is assessable in the hands of the 3 individuals in the status of AOP (Shri Kedar Prasad Vijay- Appellant, Shri Tulsi Ram Mittal and Shri Dilip Kumar) and not in the hands of the appellant in his individual capacity. Direction is given for making the assessment in the hands of AOP and thus addition made in the hands of the assessee is deleted subject to assessment in the hands of the AOP. For read....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t is also noteworthy to mention that the ld.CIT(A) has passed the similar type of order in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 2016-17 giving therein following narration. "7.6 I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions of the appellant as against the observations / findings of the AO in the assessment order, the remand report and the rejoinder submitted by the appellant. The contentions / submissions of the appellant are being discussed and decided as under:- I have decided the similar issue in the case of the appellant for the assessment year 2014-15 in the ground of appeal number 2 where the additional evidence has been rejected being irrelevant and ground of appeal have been statistically treated as allowed with direction for making the assessment in the hands of the AOP. Material facts of the present appeal being pari material with the facts of the appeal in assessment year 2014-15 in the ground of appeal number 2 will apply mutatis mutandis to the present appeal for the assessment year 2016-17 and it is held accordingly. In view of the above, the income as per the seized material, deposits in the bank accounts etc. o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the deposit in the bank account etc. of the unregistered society is assessable in the status of AOP, his direction that addition in the hands of the individual is to be deleted subject to assessment in the hands of the AOP is illegal, bad in law and the same be expunged. 3. In respect of the second issue the assessee on the basis of the seized material and the bank statement of 'Shyam Salona Dhwaj Yatra Samiti' has explained that the total receipt and expenses as per the seized annexure vis-à-vis the deposit/ withdrawal in the bank account is as under:- AY Annexure Receipt Expenses Surplus Bank Deposit Bank Withdrawal 2014-15 AS-2 & Pg 41 of AS-3 7,79,461/- 7,77,025/- 2,436/- 4,37,000/- 3,86,000/- 2016-17 AS-1 & AS-3 5,60,100/- 8,49,075/- (2,88,975/-) 2,92,600/- 6,35,100/- The AO while making the addition has added both the receipt and expenses. Further amount carried forward from one paper to another paper has been added independently. Amount noted on the individual paper and the summarized total of these pages noted on a separate paper are both added. This has resulted into incorrect addition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../11 25,937/- - - It is an expenditure which is part of page 14 & page 15 13. AS-3/13 & back of Pg 11 56,403/- - 56,403/- - 14. AS-3/14 58,627/- - - It is an expenditure which is part of page 15 15. AS-3/15 80,292/- - 80,292/- - 16. AS-3/16 6,18,585/- - 6,18,585/- On the back of this paper, there is an account receipt of Rs. 6,18,200/- and expenditure of Rs. 6,18,585/- 17. AS-3/17 1,85,340/- - - It is covered by page 16 above 18. AS-3/18 1,34,350/- - - It is covered by page 16 above 19. AS-3/19 1,66,495/- - - It is covered by page 16 above 20. AS-3/20 1,32,400/- - - It is covered by page 16 above 21. AS-3/42 4,70,100/- 4,70,100/- - - 22. AS-3/43 565/- - 565/- - 23. AS-3/44 235/- - 235/- - Total 22,95,239/- 5,60,100/- 8,49,075/- Thus the quantum of addition made by AO is otherwise incorrect. 4. It is further submitted that for the Dhwaj Yatra, group of persons have contributed the fund and that amount is utilized for incurring t....