ASOKA TAKNIKI AND VYAVSAYIK TRANING INSTITUTE CHIPABROD,JAIPUR V. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 1414/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Ashoka Takniki And Vyavsayik Traning Institute Chipabrod, which appealed against the orders of the CIT(E), Jaipur, denying them registration under section 12AB and recognition under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) had rejected the applications on grounds including non-registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act and engaging in business activities under the guise of charity. The Tribunal found that the issues cited by the CIT(E) for rejection were curable and thus restored the matters to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision, emphasizing that the Tribunal's decision should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 35372 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RUNI PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ANOOP BHATIA
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavsayik Traning Institute Chipabrod 82 A, Shyam Nagar, Near Tarang, Khatipura, Jhotawara, jaipur. cuke Vs. The CITE-Exemption, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:AABTA6950E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Shri Anoop Bhatia, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Smt. Runi Pal, CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 18/02/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 28/02/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. The present of two appeals filed by the assessee challenges the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur [herein after referred to as “CIT(E)”] both dated 30.09.2024 thereby rejecting the registration under section 12AB of the Act and recognition u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) respectively. 2 ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavasayik Traning Institute Chipabrod vs. CIT(E) 2.1 In ITA No. 1414/JPR/2024 the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in denying the approval to the assessee u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application of approval u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act 1961 on the technical grounds, such action being absolutely unjustified, unlawful as well as against the concept of natural justice hence the order passed by Ld CIT (E) deserves to be quashed. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in further rejecting the provisional approval previously granted to the assessee u/s 80G of the Act, such action being illogical and irrational hence deserves to be set aside. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that appellant trust was not able to substantiate the genuineness of activities which is absolutely incorrect. Appellant prays rejecting the application without considering or rebutting the documents and without considering material facts filed before the Ld CIT (E) being bad in law and in violations to the principles of natural justice deserves to be rolled back. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that appellant trust was doing business activity in the garb of charity being completely baseless, invalid and illogical hence deserves to be set aside. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that appellant trust was doing activity beyond the objective of the trust being completely incorrect and void, hence deserves to be quashed. 7. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend, modify, or alter any ground or grounds of appeal.” 2.2 In ITA No. 1415/JPR/2024 the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in denying the final approval to the assessee u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act 1961. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application of final approval u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act 1961 on the technical grounds, such action being absolutely unjustified, unlawful as well as against the concept of natural justice hence the order passed by Ld CIT (E) deserves to be quashed. 3 ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavasayik Traning Institute Chipabrod vs. CIT(E) 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in further rejecting the provisional approval previously granted to the assessee u/s 12AB of the Act, such action being illogical and irrational hence deserves to be set aside. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that appellant trust was not able to substantiate the genuineness of activities which is absolutely incorrect. Appellant prays rejecting the application without considering or rebutting the documents and without considering material facts filed before the Ld CIT (E) being bad in law and in violations to the principles of natural justice deserves to be rolled back. 5. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that appellant trust was doing business activity in the garb of charity being completely baseless, invalid and illogical hence deserves to be set aside. 6. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the application on the ground that appellant trust was doing activity beyond the objective of the trust being completely incorrect and void, hence deserves to be quashed. 7. The appellant reserves the right to add, amend, modify, or alter any ground or grounds of appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee filed an online application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 21.03.2024. The assessee was issued a letter/notice dated 17.06.2024 requesting it to furnish certain documents/explanations by 26.06.2024, but no compliance has been made by the assessee. The assessee-applicant submitted its point wise reply vide dated 22.08.2024 which was thoroughly examined on record & found some discrepancies. These discrepancies were conveyed to the applicant vide show cause letter dated 06.09.2024 wherein date of hearing was given 13.09.2024. In response, the applicant-assessee had failed to furnish its reply on the above show cause. After 4 ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavasayik Traning Institute Chipabrod vs. CIT(E) perusing of show cause notice and its reply ld. CIT(E) noted that the assessee is not registered under Rajasthan Public Trust act, 1959. The assessee doing business income in the grab of the charitable activity beyond its object as the income on account of contract receipt towards Indira Rasoi Yojna neither fall in donation contribution grants or concession and therefore, Ld. CIT(E) is doing business activity beyond the scope of charitable activity. Considering that findings of the ld. CIT(E) noted that the assessee is doing non genuine activity and therefore, the application for 12AB of the Act was rejected by the ld. CIT(E). 4. Whereas in the application u/s. 80G of the Act, was rejected only on the reason that since the assessee is not registered u/s 12AB cannot be given to the assessee. 5. Aggrieved from the above order of the ld. CIT(E) the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal challenging both the orders. The ld. AR of the assessee as regards non registration under RPT Act stated that the assessee trust giving the registration vide certificate dated 24.01.2025. As regards other observation on the business as well non genuineness of the activity. The ld. AR for the assessee submitted that of observation made by the ld. CIT(e) are curable in nature merely receipt are having contractual in nature. The assessee trust cannot be considered as engaged in the business activity and even if the same is considered that portion that part of the income can be considered as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex court 5 ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavasayik Traning Institute Chipabrod vs. CIT(E) in the case of Ahemdabad Urban Development Authority. Considering that aspect of the matter, ld. AR of the assessee prayed that the assessee may be given one more chance to defend the merit of the case. 6. Per contra, ld. DR replied upon the orders of the ld. CIT(E) and stated that the assessee was not registered under RPT Act as on the date of application and therefore, the order of the ld. CIT(E) be sustained. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused material available on record. The Bench noted that the only reason in rejection of the registration of the applicant-assessee trust was that the assessee was not registered under RPT Act and therefore, the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Act was rejected. The Bench noted that since the assessee has already applied for registration under RPT Act and thereby the reasons advance for rejecting the registration of the applicant-assessee trust are curable in nature. Considering that aspect of the matter, the Bench feels that the issue of registration u/s 12AB of the be decided a fresh, based on the registration under RPT Act to be produced by the assessee. Therefore, we restore the matter of the registration u/s 12AB of the Act to the file of the ld. CIT(E) be decided afresh. The Bench also noted that recognition u/s 80G of the Act was denied because the applicant-assessee trust was not registered u/s 12AB of the Act. Since we have restored the matter of 6 ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavasayik Traning Institute Chipabrod vs. CIT(E) registration u/s 12AB of the Act to the file of the ld. CIT(E) and therefore, we also deem it a fit case to restore the matter of recognition u/s 80G of the Act to the file of the ld. CIT(E). In light of the aspect of the case both the matters are restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(E). 8. Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the ld. CIT(E) independently in accordance with law. In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/02/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼MkWa-,l-lhrky{eh½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 28/02/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfr fyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Ashoka Takniki and Vyavsayik Traning Institute Chipabrod, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT(E), Jaipur. 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 7 ITA No. 1414 & 1415/JPR/2024 Ashoka Takniki And Vyavasayik Traning Institute Chipabrod vs. CIT(E) 6. xkMZQkbZy@ Guard File ITA No. 1414&1415/JPR/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asstt. Registrar "