Raman and Weil (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2025) 215 ITD 514 (Mum) (Trib.)

S. 35AC: Expenditure on eligible projects or schemes-Donations-Had valid approval at the time of payment-Information from Investigation wing-No evidence that donation was bogus or returned cash-Subsequent withdrawal of approval or cancellation of registration under section 12AA(3) could not justify disallowance of deduction under section 35AC of the Act. [S.12AA(3), 35AC(6), 131, 132, 143(3),147, 148]

Assessee-company claimed deduction under section 35AC for donations made to NCT, a charitable trust. Assessing Officer reopened the assessment based on Investigation Wing information, alleging that the donation was not genuine. Assessing Officer on perusal of search findings noted that trust was in receipt of a donation from various parties through the banking channel, and the donation was returned to the parties as payment of expenses. He also noted that there was a subsequent withdrawal of section 35AC recognition of trust and cancellation of registration under section 12AA(3). On this basis, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of deduction under section 35AC. CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal, the Tribunal held that the donee-trust enjoyed approval under section 35AC from the financial year 2010-11 onwards till withdrawal of the same by a notification issued by the department dated 30-11-2016. Furthermore, donation by assessee was made in the financial years 2011-12 and 2012-13 and at the relevant time, the trust was having the requisite valid approval. Thus, disallowance of claim of deduction under section 35AC in the hands of assessee could not have been made without establishing that it had made a bogus donation and money was received back in cash. Accordingly, the addition on account of the disallowance of the deduction claimed under section 35AC was deleted. (AY. 2012-13, 2013-14)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*