D.K. Jain, J.
1. CM No. 48 of 2002 : Allowed subject to just exceptions :
I.T.A. No. 125 of 2002 : This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal'), dated October 19, 2001, in I.T.A. No. 7156/Delhi of 1994, pertaining to the assessment year 1991-92.
2. The main ground on which the assessed had been denied exemption under Section 11 of the Act was that the assessed-trust had allegedly made donations to an association which was involved in unlawful activities and had been declared to be so by the Central Government. While dealing with the said objection by the Department, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (for short 'the CIT(A)') and the Tribunal have noticed that the stand of the Assessing Officer is not correct inasmuch as the notification declaring the association concerned as unlawful has been quashed by the Tribunal. This fact has not been controverter in the appeal.
3. It is contended by Mr. R.D. Jolly, learned counsel for the Revenue, that the trust had also failed to produce the donors, as directed by the Assessing Officer and, thereforee, having failed to establish the identity of the donors, the Assessing Officer was justified in refusing exemption under Section 11 of the Act. On this aspect, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has noticed that the trust has been granted exemption under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act for the last several years, when similar donations were received by it and during the relevant previous year also it had carried out only charitable activities. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has recorded a categorical finding that the trust has furnished all details required by the Assessing Officer and having done so it was not for the trust to produce the donors before the Assessing Officer, as desired by him. The said finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has been confirmed by the Tribunal.
4. Having perused the orders of both the appellate authorities, we are unable to read any perversity therein warranting interference. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are pure findings of fact and no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arises there from.
5. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.