Donations cannot be regarded as anonymous under 115BBC because the givers’ details are published
Fact and issue of the case
That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in affirming the action of the assessing officer in treating voluntary donations to the extent of Rs. 11,60, 77,000as ‘anonymous donation’ under section 115-BBC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”).
That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the appellant had maintained complete records of the identity of the donor’s in compliance with provisions of section 11 5-BBC of the Act.
That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in disregarding the confirmation(s) furnished by the appellant during the course of assessment/appellate proceedings.
That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that there was no requirement under the provisions of section 115-BBC of the Act to prove the ‘genuineness’ of voluntary contributions received by the appellant-trust.
That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that mere non-receipt of response to notice issued under section 133(6) of the Act would not ipso-facto mean that the voluntary contributions received were non-genuine.
That the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in not following the binding decision of the CIT(A) in the appellant’s own case for the earlier assessment year 2011-12, in gross violation of principles of judicial discipline.
That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming levy of interest under sections 234B of the Act.”
The ld counsel of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has erred in affirming the action of the Assessing Officer in treating the voluntary donations to the extent of RS. 11,60,77,000/- asanonymous donation u/s 115BBC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act). He further submitted that the ld first appellate authority has grossly erred on facts and in law in not appreciating that the appellant had maintained complete records of the identity of the donor’s in compliance with provision of section 115BBC of the Act and disregarding the confirmation furnished by the appellant during the course of assessment as well as appellate proceedings. The ld counsel vehemently pointed out that the ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that there was no requirement under provision of section 115BBC of the Act to prove the genuineness of voluntary contributions received by the appellant trust and merely non receipt of response to notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act would not ipso‑ facto mean that the voluntary contributions received were non-genuine. The ld counsel again drew our attention towards orders of authorities below and submitted that the ld CIT(A) is not following the binding decision of the ld CIT(A) in assessee’s own case for the earlier assessment year 2008-09, which was upheld by the Tribunal order 21.10.2022, which is gross violation of the principles of judicial discipline therefore, impugned orders of authorities below may kindly be set aside in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s 115BBC of the Act. He vehemently, pointed out that since the identical issue under similar circumstances has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee dismissing the appeal of Revenue, therefore, the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the order of the Tribunal (supra) is assessee’s own case.
The ld counsel further placing vehement reliance on the order of ITAT Delhi Bench dated 21.10.2022 in the cross appeal in assessee’s own case of AY 2008-09 rendered in ITA No. 4775/Del/2015 (departmental appeal) and submitted that identical issue was decided in favour of the assessee by ld CIT(A) and the appeal of the revenue has been dismissed by the Tribunal by passing the said order and upholding the conclusion drawn by the ld CIT(A) in favour of the assessee, on the identical issue under similar facts and circumstances. The ld counsel of the assessee thus submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the coordinate bench of Tribunal for AY 2008-09 dated 21.10.2022 (supra).
Observation of the court
On careful and thoughtful consideration of above noted rival submissions, basis taken by the AO for making addition and observations of the ld CIT(A) while upholding the action of the AO are considered and evaluated in the light of findings and conclusion recorded by the ld. CIT(A) and coordinate bench of ITAT Delhi in assessee’s own case for AY 2008-09 then we find that the first appellate authority has granted relief to the assessee on the identical issue having similar facts and circumstances with present AY 2012-13. From the order of the coordinate bench of the Tribunal for AY 2008-09 (supra), wherein the appeal of Revenue has been dismissed approving conclusion of ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition, we note that the Tribunal upheld the order of ld CIT(A) by observing that the provisions of Section 115BBC of the Act would not be applicable to the facts of the case. The Tribunal further noted that details of the names, addresses, their PAN card nos., cheque nos., dates and amounts of donation of the donors has not been proved to be wrong. He, therefore, held that for these reasons also the donation received by the assessee-trust cannot be considered to be anonymous donation by virtue of sub-section (3) of Section 115BBC of the I.T. Act, 1961. Before us, no fallacy in the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) has been pointed out by the Revenue. With these observations the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of Revenue for A.Y. 2008-09 on identical issue, upholding the conclusion of Ld. CIT(A) i.e., deletion of addition made by the A.O. on the allegation of anonymous donation. The ld. CIT(DR) could not show us any contrary factual position or order or judgment which may lead us to take a contrary or different view as taken by the Tribunal for AY 2008-09. Accordingly, since the issue before us is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Tribunal for AY 2008-09. Accordingly, respectfully following the same sole grievance of assessee, raised in the grounds noted above, is allowed and hence, the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19/10/2023.
Read the full order from here
Gian-Sagar-Educational-and-Charitable-Trust-Vs-DCIT-ITAT-Delhi2
