| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 1714 (Mad-HC) : (2020) 427 ITR 0224 : (2020) 271 TAXMAN 0166 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 35(1)(ii)
Where deduction claimed by assessee under section 35(1)(ii) was disallowed by AO based on statement of director of receiving organization that it had returned donation to assessee after deducting commission, Tribunal rightly remanded matter to AO ascertain means of assessee and actual amount paid and decide issue afresh.
|
Business deduction under section 35(1)(ii) - Donation to approved organisations - Allegation that donation amount got returned to assessee after charging certain commission on donated amount -
Assessee claimed weighted deduction under section 35(1)(ii) in relation to amount donated to an approved organization. AO disallowed the same alleging that founder director of organization had made a sworn statement during a survey under section 133A that donation made to organization was returned back to assessee after deducting 5 per cent commission. Held: Having given a finding that assessee was entitled to deduction under section 35(1)(ii), Tribunal went further and remanded matter to AO to ascertain means of assessee and actual amount paid and decide issue afresh. Approach of Tribunal was very balanced and it had rightly remanded matter to AO. There was no infirmity in order passed by Tribunal.
REFERRED : CIT v. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd. (2017) 248 Taxman 55 (Mad.) : 2017 TaxPub(DT) 1144 (Mad-HC)
FAVOUR : Against the assessee.
A.Y. :
IN THE MADRAS HIGH COURT
N. KIRUBAKARAN & P. VELMURUGAN, JJ.
Krupa Trading Co. v. ITO
T.C.A. No. 55 of 2018, C.M.P. No. 474 of 2018
13 December, 2019
Appellant by: T.C.A. Sangeetha
Respondent by: T. Ravikumar Sr. Counsel
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|