MOTIBEN RATANCHAND JAIN CHARITABLE TRUST, MUMBAI V. DIT (E), MUMBAI

ITA 123/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4047 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N P SINGH
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (JM) I.T.A. NO. 123 /MUM/ 2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 ) MOTIBEN RATANCHAND JAIN CHARITABLE TRUST 301, PRATIK AVENUE PLOT NO. 34, NEHRU ROAD M.G. ROAD VILE PARLE (E) MUMBAI - 400 057. VS. DIT(EXEMPTION) 6 TH FLOOR PIRAMAL CHAMBERS PAREL MUMBAI - 400 012 ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) PAN NO. AADTM0405A ASSESSEE BY NONE DEPARTMENT BY SHRI N.P. SINGH DATE OF HEARING 11 .4 . 201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNC EMENT 11 .4 . 201 6 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A M : - THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL CHALLENGING THE ORDER DATED 27.11.2012 PASSED BY DIT(E), MUMBAI REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT. 2. NONE APPEAR ED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE EVEN THOUGH NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT TO IT BY REGISTERED POST ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION . H ENCE WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL, EX - PARTE, WITHOUT PRESENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HEARD LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT BEFORE DIT(E). THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED LD DIT TO FILE DETAILS REGARDING ACTIVITIES CARRYING ON BY IT. SINCE LEARNED DIT(E) FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CA RRYING ON ANY ACTIVITIES, HE TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO MOTIBEN RATANCHAND JAIN AHARITABLE TRUST 2 PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES AND ACCORDINGLY REJECTED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. BEFORE US ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SHOW THAT IT DID CARRY ON ANY A CTIVITIES IN FURTHERANCE OF ITS OBJECT. UNDER THESE SET OF FACTS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED DIT(E). 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 .4 .2016 . SD/ - SD/ - (AMIT SHUKLA ) (B.R.BASKARAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 11 / 4 /20 1 6 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI PS