JCIT Vs Shree Ganesh Construction (ITAT Ahmedabad)
It is observed that even though the original receipt for payment of donation of Rs.50,000/- made to Chief Minister Kanya Kelvani Nidhi was not produced by the assessee as the same was lost or misplaced, sufficient evidence was produced by the assessee to support and substantiate its claim of having paid the said donation. As noted by the Ld.CIT(A) in his impugned order, the said evidence was sufficient to verify the claim of the assessee regarding payment of donation of Rs.50,000/- to Chief Minister Kanya Kelvani Nidhi. Even the donation receipt issued by the Executive Engineer Panchayat Department Dahod evidencing payment of donation was produced by the assessee. Keeping in view these details and documents furnished by the assessee to support and substantiate its claim of donation of Rs.50,000/-paid to Chief Minister Kanya Kelvani Nidhi, the Ld.CIT(A), in our opinion, has rightly deleted the disallowance of assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.80G of the Act made by the Assessing Officer. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.80G of the Act
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-10, Ahmedabad [CIT(A)] dated 10th December-2015.
2. In ground No.1, the Revenue has challenged the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs.2,88,85,846/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s.68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) on account of unsecured loans by treating the same as unexplained cash credit.
3. The assessee, in the present case, is a partnership-firm which is engaged in the business of road construction. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 05/08/2010 declaring total income of Rs.51,58,810/-. The said return was selected for scrutiny through CASS and a notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee on 30/08/2011.
3.1. As noted by the Assessing Officer, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee had received loans/deposits aggregating to Rs.2,88,85,846/- from 28 parties during the year under consideration which were also refunded back. In this regard, he required the assessee to produce the confirmations of the concerned creditors/depositors along with proof showing the availability of funds to give the loans/deposits to the assessee. As noted by the Assessing Officer, the assessee, however, failed to comply with the said requirement, the Assessing Officer therefore treated the loans/deposits aggregating to Rs.2,88,85,846/- as unexplained cash credits and addition to that extent made by him to the total income of the assessee u/s.68 of the Act in the assessment completed u/s.143(3) of the Act vide an order dated 28/03/2013.
3.2. The addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s.68 of the Act was challenged by the assessee in appeal filed before the Ld.CIT(A). During the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A), additional evidence in the form of copies of respective ledger accounts, bank statements and TDS details was filed with a request that there being no proper and sufficient opportunity afforded by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings to submit the same, the additional evidences may be admitted. Keeping in view the facts of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) admitted the additional evidences and the same were forwarded by him to the Assessing Officer for his verification and comments. In the remand report dated 12/10/2015 submitted to the Ld.CIT(A), the Assessing Officer offered his comments on this issue as under:
“In this regard it is submitted that the assessee has submitted all the squared up accounts, provided the copies of respective accounts as per ledger and copy of bank statement from where cheques were issued, TDS deducted wherever applicable in respect of 28 persons from whom the assessee firm has accepted deposits and returned back.
4. Further the assessee was asked to submit the following details vide office letter dated 28/08/2014 of ITO, Ward 9(1) Ahmedabad:-
a) Details of all bank accounts i.e. name, Branch & A/c No.
b) Details of all bank accounts of each partner i.e. Name, Branch & A/c No.
c) Copy of return filed by Shri Dhirubhai Patel, Partner of the firm.
d) If Shri Dhirubhai Patel is not filed any return &f income till date, furnish latest residential address alongwith proof thereof.
e) It is seen that the following depositors have not filed their return of income and produce the above depositors alongwith copy of their balance sheet, bank book and bank statement.
