Jehovah Church, CHENNAI V. ITO, Nagercoil

ITA 1467/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0788 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Benefit of exemption; Condonation of delay
• Section: 80G; 12AA; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1467/MDS/2011 JEHOVAH CHURCH, KALLADIMAMOODU, CHERUPPAALUR, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT. [PAN:AAAJG1029R] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), NAGARCOIL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A PPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI GURU BASHYAM, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 13.02.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.02.2013 ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX I, MADURAI DATED 09.03.2 011 IN C.NO. 464/266/ 2005-06/CIT-I PASSED UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT 1961 [IN SHORT THE ACT]. 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE AR POINTED OUT BE FORE US THAT THE INSTANT APPEAL IS TIME BARRED BY 110 DAYS IN FILING. HE SUB MITS THAT A CONDONATION PETITION HAS BEEN FILED AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESS EE. BY REFERRING TO THE CONTENTS THEREIN, HE PRAYS FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY . THE REVENUE ALSO DOES NOT CONTROVERT THE PLEADINGS IN THE CONDONATION PET ITION. ACCORDINGLY, WE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1 11 1467 467467 467/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/11 1111 11 2 CONDONE THE DELAY OF 110 DAYS IN FILING AND OBSERVE THAT THE REASONS CONTAINED IN THE PETITION ABOVE SAID OFFER SUFFICIE NT EXPLANATION FOR NOT INSTITUTING THE APPEAL IN TIME. WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS. 3. REITERATING THE PLEADINGS IN THE GROUNDS RAISED , THE AR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THE CIT HAS ERRED IN REJECTING ITS APPL ICATION SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT AND PRAYS FOR ACC EPTANCE OF THE APPEAL. 4. OPPOSING THIS, THE REVENUE STRONGLY SUPPORTS TH E ORDER OF THE CIT UNDER CHALLENGE BEFORE US AND PRAYS FOR UPHOLDING T HE SAME. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH PARTIES AT LENGTH AND PERUSE D CIT ORDER REJECTING ASSESSEES APPLICATION SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTI ON 80G OF THE ACT. ADMITTED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS SOCIETY REGISTERED ON 30.12.1957 UNDER THE PROVISION OF TRAVANCORE COCH IN LITERACY, SCIENTIFIC AND CHARITABLE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1955. IT ENJOYS REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT SINCE 28.08.2006 AS PUBLI C RELIGIOUS CUM CHARITABLE SOCIETY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND SUBSEQU ENT ASSESSMENT YEARS. ON 03.12.2010, IT HAD FILED AN APPLICATION S EEKING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT. VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER B Y THE CIT, THE SAME STANDS REJECTED WITH A FINDING THAT ITS ACTIVITIES ARE NO CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS IN NATURE RENDERING IT INELIGIBLE FOR APP ROVAL IN QUESTION. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1 11 1467 467467 467/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/11 1111 11 3 6. AFTER GIVING OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO TH E ISSUE BEFORE US I.E. AS TO WHETHER THE CIT HAS RIGHTLY REJECTED ASSESSEES APPLICATION SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT, FIRST OF A LL WE REITERATE THAT THE SETTLED PROVISION IN SECTION 12AA PRESCRIBES REGIST RATION TO CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS. IN THE SCHEME OF THE AC T, BOTH KINDS OF INSTITUTIONS MAY AVAIL EXEMPTION BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, SECTION 80G (5) BARS SUCH A RELIEF TO RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION S AND IT ONLY APPLIES IN CASE OF A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION. ON PERUSAL OF THE PROV ISION ITSELF I.E. SECTION 80G(5) OF THE ACT MAKES, IT IS CLEAR THAT AN INSTIT UTION OR FUND WHICH INCURS EXPENDITURE DURING ANY PREVIOUS YEAR RELIGIOUS NATU RE FOR AN AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING 5% OF THE TOTAL INCOME BECOMES ELIGIBLE F OR THE BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 80G(5). THEREFORE, A RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION IS NOT INDEPENDENTLY ENTITLED FOR APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G ABOVE SAID. 7. FURTHER, AS IT IS CLEAR FROM THE FACTS OF THE C ASE, THE ASSESSEE IS A CHURCH; ADMITTEDLY RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION. IN OUR VI EW, IT MAY BE DOING LOT OF CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AS DESTINED BY HIM. THAT IT SELF DOES NOT CONFER IT THE STATUS OF A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION. IN A DIVERSE CO UNTRY LIKE INDIA, THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES SOMETIM ES BECOMES SLENDER THIN. HOWEVER, THE LAW GRANTS SPECIFIC AND DIFFERENT STAT US TO CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS BY TREATING THEM UNDER DIFFE RENT FOOTINGS EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12 AA OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, A I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.1 11 1467 467467 467/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/11 1111 11 4 RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION IS NOT ENTITLED FOR THE BENEF IT UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT. ON THIS ANALOGY, WE FIND THAT THE CIT HAS RIG HTLY REJECTED ASSESSEES APPLICATION SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G OF T HE ACT. 8. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THURSDAY, THE 21 ST OF FEBRUARY, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE - PRESIDENT (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 21.02.2013 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.