ITA No.597 of 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITA No. 597 of 2006 Date of decision: 2.2.2011 Haryana State Coop. Supply and Marketing Federation Limited Panchkula -----Appellant Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Spl. Range I, Chandigarh ----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr.Rajesh Garg, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the revenue. Adarsh Kumar Goel,J. 1. As per office report, file was not available on account of fire in the Court premises. The file has been reconstructed on the basis of paper book furnished by learned counsel for the appellant. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) against order dated 14.6.2006 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh bench ‘B’ in ITA No.489/Chandi/2000, claiming following substantial questions of law:- “i) Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in not allowing rebate under section 80G of the Act on donation made by the appellant to Kurukshetra Development Board amounting to Rs.5 lac on the ground that the receipt was not filed either before the Assessing Officer or the CIT (Appeals) when it was not asked for by either of the authorities? ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the finding of the CIT(Appeals) regarding non filing of receipt was not challenged in appeal before the Tribunal when specific 1 ITA No.597 of 2006 ground in not allowing the rebate was taken as per Rule 8 of the income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules? iii) Whether the claim of rebate under section 80G of the Act could be declined especially in view of the fact that the claim had been allowed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 10.11.1997 passed under section 143(1) of the Act?” 3. Learned counsel for the parties state that identical issue in the case of the assessee arose in ITA No.268 of 2006 alongwith ITA No.157 of 2005 and vide order dated September 8, 2010, the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision on merits in accordance with law after holding that evidence led by the assessee relating to the donation may be looked into. 4. In view of above, we set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and remand the matter to it for a fresh decision on merits in accordance with law in the light of aforesaid judgment. The parties may appear before the Tribunal for further proceedings on March 28, 2011. 5. The appeal is disposed of. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge February 2, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) ‘gs’ Judge 2