M/s vimala shankar Foundation, Bangalore V. CIT, Bangalore

ITA 1261/BANG/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0279 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P K SRIHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: V SRINIVASAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRI BUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1261(BANG) 2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : NA) M/S VIMALA SHANKAR FOUNDATION, VIMALA SHANKAR, NO.12, 1 ST CROSS, ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BANGALORE-560 004 PAN NO.AABTV7820N APPELLANT VS THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION.) BANGALORE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI V. SRINIVASAN, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : DR.P.K.SRIHARI, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 11-07-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 5.07-2016 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K.GARODIA, JM: THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE, DATED 31-07-2015 PASSED B Y HIM U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER 1.THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(E) IN SO FAR AS IT IS A GAINST THE APPELLANT, IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION AND REFUSIN G TO GRANT APPROVAL U/S 80G(5) OF THE ACT IS OPPOSED TO LAW, E QUITY, WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE, PROBABILITIES FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE LD. CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING TO GRAN T APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 UNDER THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS CASE. ITA NO.1261(BANG)2015 2 3. THE LD. CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT FURNISHED THE REQUIRED PARTICULARS AND HAS NOT SUBMITTED SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION, WHICH REMARK IS NOT TRUE AND SUCH FINDING IS CONTRARY TO EVIDENCE AND IS VIT IATED AND THEREFORE, THE REFUSAL TO GRANT APPROVAL REQUIRES T O BE SET ASIDE. 4. THE LD. CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR HIM TO ASSERT THE GENUINENESS OF THE O BJECTIVES AND FUNCTIONS OF THE TRUST AND ON THAT ALLEGED COUN T REJECTING THE GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT, UN DER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANTS CASE AND SUCH FINDING IS CONTRARY TO EVIDENCE AND IS VITIATED AND THEREFORE , THE REFUSAL TO GRANT APPROVAL REQUIRE TO BE SET ASIDE. 5. FOR THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGE D AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL, YOUR APPELLANT H UMBLY PRAYS THAT THE APPROVAL MAY BE ALLOWED AND JUSTICE RENDERED. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE T HAT THE BASIS OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(E) IS THIS THAT NO REPLY WAS S UBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO A QUERY DATED 08-07-2015 ISSUED BY THE LD.CIT(E). IN THIS REGARD, HE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO LETTER DATED 15-07-2015 AVAI LABLE ON PAGES 22 TO 29 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS IS TH E REPLY TO THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(E) DATED 08-07-2015. 4. AT THIS JUNCTURE, A QUERY WAS RAISED BY THE BENC H REGARDING THE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08-07-2015 ISSUED BY THE CIT(E) AND IN REPLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SA ID QUERY LETTER DATED 08- 07-2015 IS NOT READILY AVAILABLE. ITA NO.1261(BANG)2015 3 5. THE LD. DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(E). 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND WE FIND THAT AS PER REPLY LETTER DATED 15-07-2015 AVAILABLE ON PAGES 22 -29 OF THE PAPER BOOK, IT IS STATED IN THE SAID LETTER THAT THIS IS IN REPLY TO LETTER DATED 08-07-2015 ISSUED BY LD. CIT (E, BUT IN THE ABSENCE OF QUERY L ETTER DATED 08-07-2015, IT CANNOT BE ASCERTAINED AS TO WHETHER THE REPLY DATED 15-07-2015 IS COMPLETE OR NOT TO THE QUERY LETTER DATED 08-07-2015. UNDE R THESE FACTS, WE FEEL IT PROPER TO RESTORE THE ENTIRE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) FOR A FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BE ING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT IONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) SD/- (A.K. GARODIA) JUDICAL MEMBER AC C OUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 15.07.2016 AM* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE ITA NO.1261(BANG)2015 4 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S. .. 4 DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE .. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO . 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 9. DATE ON WHICH ORDER DOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT . 10. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 11 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER. 12 THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE DISPATCH SEC TION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER 13 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER