Panoli Industrial Infrastructure Project Ltd., Ankleshwar V. The CIT-II, Baroda

ITA 1656/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 60574 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 28-06-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BATHEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL H TALATI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12AA; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.1656 / AHD/2009 PANOLI INDUSTRIES INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LTD., L/913-10, GIDC, PANOLI, NEAR INDIAN BANK ANKLESHWAR VS. CIT-II, BARODA PAN/GIR NO. : AAECP3943J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI SUNIL H TALATI, AR, RESPONDENT BY: SHRI O P BATHEJA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING: 28.06.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06.07.2012 O R D E R PER SHRI A. K. GARODIA, AM:- THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORD ER OF CIT-III, BARODA DATED 31.03.2009 PASSED BY HIM U/S 12AA OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UN DER: THE ASSESSEE BEING AGGRIEVED BY REJECTION OF THE A PPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA BY C.IT.-ILL, BARODA PRESENT S THIS APPEAL AGAINST THE SAME ON THE FOLLOWING AMONGST OTHER GRO UNDS. 1. THE LEARNED C.IT.-ILL, BARODA ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE LEARNED C.I.T. ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE APPLICANT WAS NOT FOR THE BENEFIT OF 'PUBLIC' WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IT BE SO HELD THAT THE APPLICANT SATISFIES ALL THE CONDITION S FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12AAOF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE LEARNED C.I.T. ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATI NG THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE APPLICANT AND TO THE OBJECTS OF THE APP LICANT COMPANY. IT BE SO HELD NOW THAT THE ACTIVITIES AND OBJECTS O F THE COMPANY WERE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO REGISTRATION I.T.A.NO. 1656 /AHD/2009 2 U/S. 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ORDER OF C.I.T. REFUSING THE APPLICATION BE CANCELLED AND THE REGIS TRATION BE DIRECTED TO BE GRANTED AS APPLIED. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE C.I.T. OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT OBJECTS OF THE APPLICANT COMPANY ARE 'CHARITABLE PURPOSE' AND ENTITLED TO REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 4. YOUR APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER AND/OR TO AMEND ALL OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS BEFORE THE FINAL HEARING. 2. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THIS ISSUE IS NOW COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE TRIBUNAL DECISION REN DERED IN THE CASE OF NANDESARI WATER & UTILITIES LTD., BARDA VS CIT II, IN I.T.A.NO. 2506/AHD/2008 DATED 12.12.2008. HE SUBMITTED A COP Y OF THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION WHICH IS AVAILABLE ON PAGES 12-13 OF THE P APER BOOK. AT THIS JUNCTURE, IT WAS ASKED BY THE BENCH THAT SINCE ORDE R OF LD CIT IS OF A LATER DATE I.E. DATED 31.03.2009, WHETHER THIS TRIBUNAL D ECISION WAS CITED BEFORE CIT OR NOT. IN REPLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R. THAT THE SAME COULD NOT BE CITED BEFORE HIM AND HENCE, THE MATTER MAY B E RESTORED BACK TO HIS FILE FOR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF THIS TRIB UNAL DECISION. LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSE D THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORIT IES BELOW AND THE TRIBUNAL ORDER CITED BY THE LD. A.R. WE FIND THAT THE FACTS AND THE BASIS ON WHICH CIT REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESS EE FOR REGISTRATION IS THIS THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE CAT EGORY OF INSTITUTIONS MEANT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE IN TERMS OF SECTION 2( 15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IN THE CASE OF NANDESARI WATER & UTILIT IES LTD. (SUPRA), IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST IS TO HELP OTHER MEMBER INDUSTRIES I.E. PUBLIC AT LARGE. SINCE THE FACTS O F THIS CASE I.E. NANDESARI WATER & UTILITIES LTD. ARE NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE US, WE FEEL THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THIS MATER SHOULD GO BACK TO T HE FILE OF CIT FOR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION AFT ER COMPARING THE FACTUAL I.T.A.NO. 1656 /AHD/2009 3 POSITION OF THIS CASE AND THE PRESENT CASE. ACCORDI NGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FIL E FOR A FRESH DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE DISCUSSION AFTER PROVIDING ADEQU ATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE M ENTIONED HEREINABOVE. SD./- SD./- (KUL BHARAT) (A. K. GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE LD. CIT (APPEALS) 5. THE DR, AHMEDABAD BY ORDER 6. THE GUARD FILE AR,ITAT,AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION 28/6 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 1/7.OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P .S./P.S. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6/7 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. P.S./P.S.6/7 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 06/7/2012 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK .. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER. .