BRAHMARSHI INSTITUTE, Pune V. CIT-I, Pune

ITA 1424/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 93725 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-05-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 05-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MODI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1424/PN/2013 BRAHMARSHI INSTITUTE, 13, SHRIRAM APARTMENT, HINGANE HOME COLONY, KARVENAGAR, PUNE 411052 PAN NO.AAECB8562F .. APPLICANT VS. CIT-1, PUNE .. RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI A.K. MODI DATE OF HEARING : 12-05-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13-05-2015 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30-03-2013 OF THE CIT-I, PUNE CHALLENGING TH E DENIAL OF REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. THIS CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 2 8-07- 2014. SINCE NONE APPEARED ON THAT DATE THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 30-10-2014. AGAIN SINCE NONE APPEARED ON 30-10-201 4, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO 19-02-21015. SINCE ON 19-02-2 015 NONE APPEARED, AGAIN THE NOTICE WAS ISSUED BY RPAD FIXING THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 12-05-2015 AND THE NOTICE WAS DULY SERV ED ON THE ASSESSEE AS PER ACKNOWLEDGMENT PLACED ON RECORD. HOWE VER, WHEN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED ON 12-05-201 5, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY PETITION SEEK ING ANY ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE WAS FILED. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL IS BEING 2 DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND AFT ER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 3. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE I.T. ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY REGISTERED U/S .25 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND IS REGISTERED VIDE NOTIFICATION DATE D 03-01-2012 ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, MAHARASHTRA , PUNE. 4. AFTER RECEIPT OF THE APPLICATION, THE LD.CIT CALLED FOR CERTAIN DETAILS WHICH WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE VARIOUS DETAILS FILED FROM TIME TO TIME BY THE ASSESSEE COMP ANY, THE LD.CIT NOTED THAT THE OBJECTS ARE MAINLY TO COND UCT TRAINING, TUITIONS AND COACHING CLASSES IN VARIOUS SUBJECTS. RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE PATNA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BIHAR INSTITUTE OF MINING AND MINING SURVEYING VS. CIT REPORTED IN 208 ITR 608 WHERE IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT CONDUCTING SUCH PROGRAMMES CANNOT BE REGARDED AS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES W ITHIN THE MEANING O SECTION 2(15) OF THE I.T. ACT, THE LD.CIT CAM E TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SUCH OBJECTS OF THE INSTITUTE CANNOT BE REGARDED AS CHARITABLE IN NATURE. THE LD.CIT FURTHER NOT ED THAT THE APPLICANT ALSO SEEKS TO CARRY OUT ITS ACTIVITIES NOT O NLY IN INDIA BUT ALSO ABROAD. HE REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF TRUSTEES OF H.E.H THE NIZAMS PILGRIMAGE MONEY TRUST VS. CIT REPORTED IN 243 ITR 676 (S C) WHERE IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE SITUS OF THE PUBLIC PURPO SE OR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS NATURE HAS TO BE IN INDIA. THE L D.CIT WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y THAT NO ACTIVITY CAN BE CARRIED OUT BY A TRUST OR INSTITUTION OUTSIDE INDIA, EXCEPT ON THE BASIS OF A GENERAL OR SPECIAL ORDER T O BE 3 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES. THE LD.CIT FURTHER NOTED THAT INITIALLY THE APPLICANT HAD STATED THAT THE AP PLICANT HAS NOT CARRIED OUT ANY ACTIVITY SINCE INCEPTION. SUBSEQU ENTLY, IT WAS CLAIMED THAT A FEW ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT IN THE MEANWHILE. HOWEVER, IN ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CARRYING OUT OF ANY SUCH ACTIVITY, THE LD.CIT CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NO FINDING CAN BE GIVEN AS OF NOW AS REGA RDS THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INSTITUTE. IN VIEW OF T HE ABOVE, THE LD.CIT REJECTED THE REQUEST FOR GRANT OF REG ISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE LD.CIT THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AN D ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE O RDER OF THE LD.CIT. HE HAS GIVEN COGENT REASONS FOR DENYING T HE GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE I.T. ACT. IN ABSENCE OF ANY MATERIAL TO TAKE A CONTRARY VIEW THAN THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LD.CIT, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN HIS ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, WE UP HOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT DENYING REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13-05-2015. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SATISH PUNE DATED: 13 TH MAY, 2015 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT-I, PUNE 4. THE D.R, B PUNE BENCH 5. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE