<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>tax deduction dispute Archives - Square Feat India</title>
	<atom:link href="https://squarefeatindia.com/tag/tax-deduction-dispute/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://squarefeatindia.com/tag/tax-deduction-dispute/</link>
	<description>Real Estate News Website</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2026 06:07:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.4</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>ITAT Mumbai Clears Real Estate Developer of Fraud Allegations, Allows ₹1.79 Crore Tax Deduction</title>
		<link>https://squarefeatindia.com/itat-mumbai-clears-real-estate-developer-of-fraud-allegations-allows-%e2%82%b91-79-crore-tax-deduction/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[SquareFeatIndia]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2026 08:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Realty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aakash Value Realty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[corporate taxation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fraud allegations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[income tax case]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITAT judgment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ITAT Mumbai]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[real estate developer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Section 35(1)(ii)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tax deduction dispute]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://squarefeatindia.com/?p=11688</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>The Mumbai ITAT has ruled that a real estate developer cannot be denied a tax deduction merely due to alleged fraud by a recipient trust’s employee, allowing Aakash Value Realty’s ₹1.79 crore claim under Section 35(1)(ii).</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://squarefeatindia.com/itat-mumbai-clears-real-estate-developer-of-fraud-allegations-allows-%e2%82%b91-79-crore-tax-deduction/">ITAT Mumbai Clears Real Estate Developer of Fraud Allegations, Allows ₹1.79 Crore Tax Deduction</a> appeared first on <a href="https://squarefeatindia.com">Square Feat India</a>.</p>
]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">In a significant ruling with implications for corporate taxpayers and the real estate sector, the <strong>Mumbai Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT)</strong> has granted major relief to <strong>Aakash Value Realty Pvt. Ltd.</strong>, holding that a real estate developer cannot be denied a legitimate tax deduction merely on the basis of alleged fraud at the level of a recipient institution, in the absence of any evidence of the developer’s involvement.</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The Tribunal allowed the developer’s appeal and <strong>deleted a disallowance of ₹1.79 crore</strong> made under <strong>Section 35(1)(ii) of the Income-tax Act</strong>, rejecting the tax department’s attempt to link the assessee to alleged financial irregularities involving a charitable research trust.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Background of the Case</h3>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The case pertains to <strong>Assessment Year 2016–17</strong>, where <strong>Aakash Value Realty Pvt. Ltd.</strong>, a Mumbai-based real estate company engaged in construction and property development, had claimed a <strong>weighted deduction of ₹1,79,37,500</strong> for donations made to <strong>Vivekananda Yoga Anusandhana Samsthana (VYASA)</strong>, a well-known scientific research institution approved under Section 35(1)(ii).</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The company had donated <strong>₹1 crore on March 31, 2016</strong>, and <strong>₹2.5 lakh on November 18, 2015</strong>, and claimed the statutory deduction available for donations made towards approved scientific research institutions.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Reassessment Triggered by Alleged Fraud</h3>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The Income Tax Department reopened the assessment under <strong>Section 147</strong>, citing information received from the office of the <strong>ACIT (Exemptions), Coimbatore</strong>, alleging that:</p>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>An <strong>employee of VYASA</strong> had opened an unauthorised <strong>Axis Bank account in Hyderabad</strong></li>



<li>Donations were allegedly received through this account</li>



<li>Funds were purportedly diverted for personal benefit, without the knowledge of the trust</li>



<li>Receipts issued through the said account were therefore not genuine</li>
</ul>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">On this basis, the Assessing Officer disallowed the entire deduction and initiated penalty proceedings, holding that the assessee failed to prove actual utilisation of funds for scientific research.</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The disallowance was subsequently upheld by the <strong>Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai</strong>, who relied on the principle that “fraud vitiates all.”</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">ITAT’s Findings</h3>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">A bench comprising <strong>Shri Amit Shukla (Judicial Member)</strong> and <strong>Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)</strong> rejected the department’s stand, observing that the <strong>entire case against the developer was based on suspicion and third-party allegations</strong>, with no evidence linking the assessee to any fraudulent activity.</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The Tribunal noted that:</p>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>The donations were made <strong>through regular banking channels</strong></li>



<li>The amounts were <strong>debited from the assessee’s bank account</strong></li>



<li>Valid <strong>donation receipts and approval notifications</strong> under Section 35(1)(ii) were furnished</li>



<li>The trust’s approval under the Act was <strong>valid at the time of donation</strong></li>
</ul>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Crucially, the Tribunal pointed out that <strong>no material was produced to show that the assessee’s donation was credited to the disputed bank account</strong>, or that any amount was returned to the assessee in cash or otherwise.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Donor Not Responsible for Donee’s Internal Misconduct</h3>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The ITAT clarified that <strong>Section 35(1)(ii) does not impose an obligation on the donor to prove end-use of funds</strong>, and that once payment to an approved institution is established, the statutory conditions stand fulfilled.</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">It held that:</p>



<blockquote class="wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow">
<p class="wp-block-paragraph">“A donor cannot be penalised for internal irregularities or misconduct at the level of the donee institution unless there is cogent evidence of complicity, knowledge, or benefit.”</p>
</blockquote>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The Tribunal also distinguished earlier rulings relied upon by the tax department, noting that those cases involved <strong>clear findings of organised fraud and round-tripping</strong>, which were entirely absent in the present matter.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Final Verdict</h3>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Holding that the disallowance was based on conjecture rather than evidence, the ITAT <strong>set aside the orders of the lower authorities</strong> and allowed the appeal in full.</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The order was pronounced on <strong>January 22, 2026</strong>, in <strong>ITA No. 2560/Mum/2025</strong>.</p>



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Why This Ruling Matters</h3>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The judgment provides crucial clarity for <strong>real estate developers and corporate taxpayers</strong>, reinforcing that:</p>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Legitimate tax deductions cannot be denied on the basis of unproven allegations</li>



<li>Fraud must be established with concrete evidence</li>



<li>Third-party misconduct cannot automatically taint bona fide transactions</li>
</ul>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">The ruling is expected to influence several pending cases involving donations to research institutions and alleged misuse of statutory incentives.</p>



<p class="wp-block-paragraph">Also Read: <a href="https://squarefeatindia.com/itat-mumbai-upholds-%e2%82%b947-crore-tax-addition-land-cost-must-be-counted-in-real-estate-revenue-calculations/">ITAT Mumbai Upholds ₹47 Crore Tax Addition: Land Cost Must Be Counted in Real Estate Revenue Calculations</a></p>
<p>The post <a href="https://squarefeatindia.com/itat-mumbai-clears-real-estate-developer-of-fraud-allegations-allows-%e2%82%b91-79-crore-tax-deduction/">ITAT Mumbai Clears Real Estate Developer of Fraud Allegations, Allows ₹1.79 Crore Tax Deduction</a> appeared first on <a href="https://squarefeatindia.com">Square Feat India</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
