Facts of the Case
The assessee, Acharya Dharamchandradeo Medical College (or
related institutional entity), was subjected to scrutiny assessment proceedings
by the Income Tax Department. During the course of assessment, the Assessing
Officer made additions to the declared income, allegedly on account of certain
receipts, transactions, or discrepancies treated as unexplained or improperly
accounted.
The assessee challenged the assessment order before the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), contending that the additions were
unjustified and not supported by proper verification of records. Being
dissatisfied with the outcome at the appellate stage, the assessee preferred a
further appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench.
Issues Involved
- Whether
the additions made by the Assessing Officer were justified in law and on
facts.
- Whether
the AO conducted adequate inquiry into the institution’s accounts and
receipts.
- Whether
the explanations and documentary evidence furnished by the assessee were
properly considered.
- Whether
the appellate order required interference by the Tribunal.
Petitioner’s (Assessee’s) Arguments
- The
additions were arbitrary and based on presumptions rather than concrete
evidence.
- Complete
books of account, records, and explanations had been furnished during
assessment.
- The
AO failed to carry out meaningful verification before drawing adverse
conclusions.
- The
institutional nature of activities and accounting treatment were not
properly appreciated.
- Therefore,
the additions were liable to be deleted.
Respondent’s (Revenue’s) Arguments
- The
Assessing Officer acted within statutory authority based on material
available on record.
- The
explanations furnished by the assessee were insufficient or not
satisfactorily substantiated.
- The
CIT(A) had already examined the matter, and the assessment order should be
upheld.
- The
additions were necessary to safeguard revenue interests.
Court Order / Findings (ITAT)
- Additions
must be supported by cogent material and proper inquiry.
- Suspicion
or conjecture cannot substitute proof in taxation matters.
- When
the assessee furnishes plausible explanations supported by documents, the
burden shifts to the Revenue to disprove them.
- Failure
of the Assessing Officer to rebut such evidence renders the additions
unsustainable.
Important Clarification by the Tribunal
- Assessment
of educational or medical institutions must consider the nature of
activities and accounting practices.
- Revenue
authorities must base conclusions on verified facts and evidence.
- Appellate authorities must ensure fairness and legality in sustaining additions.
Link to download the order https://itat.gov.in/public/files/upload/1658402519-ita%20no.%2021%20alld%202021%20Acharya%20Dharamchandradeo%20Medical.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment