Navjeevan Mandal, Pune V. ITO, Ward 1(3), Pune, Pune

ITA 167/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 16724514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K SINGH
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 167 & 168/PN/2012 (ASSTT. YEAR : -) NAVAJEEVAN MANDAL ... APPELLANT ASHRAYSTHAN, NEAR BHIKSHEKARI SWEEKAR KENDRA, OPP. RTO GROUND PHULENAGAR, YERAWADA, PUNE 411 006 PAN : NOT AVAILABLE V. INCOME - TAX OFFICER RESPONDENT WARD 1 (3), PUNE APPELLANT BY : SHRI. M.K. KULKARNI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. S.K. SINGH DATE OF HEARING :02-4-12 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 -4-12 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM THE ABOVE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 5 TH DECEMBER 2011 OF THE CIT II, PUNE REJECTING THE GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S. 80 G OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, WHICH HAS THE EFFECT OF CANCELLATION OF 12AA REGISTRATION. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THE ASSESSEE FILE D THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10G FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S. 80G OF THE I NCOME TAX ACT. THE LD CIT NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE AN APPLICAT ION EARLIER FOR SUCH APPROVAL VIDE ITS APPLICATION DATED 20 TH FEBRUARY 2009. THE SAID APPLICATION WAS REJECTED VIDE ORDER DATED 19 TH AUGUST 2009 ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPLICATION WAS NOT ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT WHICH WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNA L VIDE ORDER DATED 28 TH FEBURARY 2011. ITA . NOS. 167 & 168/PN/2012 NAV JEEVAN MANDAL, A.Y. - PAGE OF 7 2 3. ON SCRUTINY OF THE APPLICATION AND FORM NO. 10G SUBMITTED ON 10 TH JUNE 2011 AND THE ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS, THE LD C IT NOTICED THAT AFTER REJECTION BY HIM OF ITS EARLIER APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL U/S. 80G ON THE GROUND OF ABSENCE OF CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATIO N U/S. 12A AND WHEN THE APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER OF REJECTION WAS PENDING BEFORE THE ITAT, THE ASSESSEE MADE AN APPLICATION IN THE OFFIC E OF CIT-I, PUNE SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA. HE NOTED THAT THE C IT I, PUNE HAD GRANTED SUCH REGISTRATION VIDE AN ORDER U/S. 12AA(1 )(B)(I) PASSED ON 22.10.2010. HE NOTED THAT THE PRESENT APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G WAS ACCOMPANIED BY A COPY OF THE SAID ORDER DATED 22.1 0.2010 BY THE CIT - I, PUNE. HE, THEREFORE, ISSUED A LETTER TO THE ASS ESSEE, THE DETAILS OF WHICH READS AS UNDER : 2.2 YOUR PRESENT APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G AND T HE ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS WERE SCRUTINIZED IN THE LIG HT OF THE FACTS THUS EMANATING FROM THE RECORDS. ONE OF THE DOCUM ENTS SUBMITTED BY YOU IS A COPY OF REGISTRATION ORDER U/ S. 12AA(1)(B)(I) AND 22/10/2010 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX-I, PUNE. PRIMA FACIE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE ORDER ISSU ED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, PUNE, YOUR PRESENT AP PLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G CANNOT BE ROUTINELY TREATED AS INCOMPL ETE OR INVALID ON THE GROUND OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION RELATING TO FURNISHING OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE AND LAID DOW N IN RULE 11AA OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. NEVERTHELESS, SEVERAL MOOT QUESTIONS DO ARISE. THE SAME ARE AS UNDER: (I) YOU HAD EARLIER SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO .10G IN THIS OFFICE PRIMARILY BECAUSE, AS PER YOU, THE JURI SDICTION OVER YOUR CASE VESTED IN THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-II CHARGE. IN FACT, IN THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G WHICH HAD BEEN EARLIER SUBMITTED BY YOU, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BEEN CL EARLY MENTIONED AS CIRCLE 2, PUNE. EVEN IN THE PRESENT APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G THERE HAS BEEN NO DEPARTURE FROM THE S AME. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN AS TO ON WHA T BASIS YOU MADE AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12A BEFOR E THE ITA . NOS. 167 & 168/PN/2012 NAV JEEVAN MANDAL, A.Y. - PAGE OF 7 3 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, PUNE WHOSE OFFICE, AS PER YOURSELF, DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER YOUR CASE . (II) IT HAS BEEN ALREADY NOTED THAT IN YOUR INITIAL APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G YOU HAD MADE REFERENCE TO REGISTRAT ION U/S. 12A GRANTED TO YOU VIDE ORDER NO. N-17/95-96 DATED 7/6/1995. DOES YOUR SUBSEQUENT APPLICATION MADE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, PUNE PROVE THAT NO SU CH ORDER DATED 7/6/1995 HAD BEEN ACTUALLY PASSED? (III) WHAT MADE YOU MAKE AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A (I.E. SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA) BEFORE THE CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-I, PUNE DURING THE PENDENCY OF YOUR APPE AL BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE AGAINST THI S OFFICE ORDER OF REJECTION DATED 19/8/2009? AS ALREADY MENTIONE D, THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL DISPOSED OF YOUR APPEAL ONLY ON 21 /2/2-011. 3. YOU ARE HEREBY REQUESTED TO SUBMIT YOUR EXPLANATION WITH REFERENCE TO THE ABOVE ISSUES / QUERIES. YOU MAY ALSO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY ADVERSE VIEW SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN OF YOUR ACTION IN OBTAINING A CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION U /S. 12A FROM A CHARGE NOT HAVING JURISDICTION OVER YOUR CASE AND A LSO DURING THE PENDENCY OF YOUR APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIB UNAL. YOUR EXPLANATION SHOULD REACH THIS OFFICE ON OR BEFORE 2 5/11/2011. YOU ARE ALSO THEREBY GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON THE AFOREMENTIONED DATED AT 4.00 P.M. 4. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE CIT (II) , PUNE, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST T HAT THE MISTAKE IN APPROACHING THE OFFICE OF CIT I, PUNE FOR OBTAININ G A CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OCCURRED AS HE WAS UNAWARE O F THE PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND WAS ALSO ANXIOUS T O SPEED UP THE 80 G APPROVAL. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE OFFICE OF THE CIT-I, PUNE GAVE NO INDICATION THAT THE APPLICANTS CASE IS NOT COM ING UNDER THEIR PURVIEW AND INSTEAD PROCESSED THE APPLICATION AND ISSUED TH E CERTIFICATE U/S. ITA . NOS. 167 & 168/PN/2012 NAV JEEVAN MANDAL, A.Y. - PAGE OF 7 4 12AA. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SUCH MISTAKE O F OMISSION AND COMMISSION WILL NOT OCCUR IN FUTURE. 5. HOWEVER, THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE T RUST COULD NOT SATISFY THE LD CIT II, PUNE. HE NOTED THAT THE EA RLIER APPLICATION U/S. 80G MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED BY HIM ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME HAD NOT BEEN ACCOMPANIED BY A CERTIFICATE OF R EGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. AT THAT TIME THE ASSESSEE HA D TAKEN A PLEA THAT IT HAD BEEN ALREADY ACCORDED REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA VI DE AN ORDER DATED 7 TH JUNE 1995. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY SUCH ORDER. THEREFORE, GOING BY THE CONDUCT OF THE ASSE SSEE SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA BEFORE CIT- I, PUNE SHOWS TH AT NO SUCH REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST U/S. 12A OF THE I .T. ACT. HE NOTED THAT KNOWING FULLY WELL THAT THE JURISDICTION OF THE AS SESSEE TRUST FALLS UNDER CIT II, PUNE, THE ASSESSEE TRUST MADE AN APPLICATI ON FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12A BEFORE CIT I, PUNE AND OBTAINED AN ORDER U/S. 12AA FROM AN OFFICE WHICH DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OF THE CASE . HE, THEREFORE, HELD THAT ORDER U/S. 12AA CANNOT BE TREATED AS A VALID O RDER SO AS TO BE RECOGNIZED BY HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF GRANTING APPRO VAL U/S. 80G OF THE I.T. ACT. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILE D TO BRING THE VARIOUS FACTS BEFORE THE CIT- I, PUNE IN APPLICATION IN FOR M NO. 10 G. HE, THEREFORE, HELD THAT THE APPLICATION IN THE FORM N O. 10G BY THE ASSESSEE MUST BE CONSIDERED AS CONTINUING TO SUFFER FROM THE SAME DEFICIENCY AS HAD BEEN REFERRED TO IN THE EARLIER REJECTION ORDER DATED 19 TH AUGUST 2009. HE ACCORDINGLY REJECTED REQUEST OF THE ASSES SEE FOR GRANTING THE APPROVAL U/S. 80G OF THE I.T. ACT. 6. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT- II, PUNE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE ABOVE APPEALS WITH THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- ITA . NOS. 167 & 168/PN/2012 NAV JEEVAN MANDAL, A.Y. - PAGE OF 7 5 GROUNDS IN APPEAL NO. ITA 167/PN/2012 1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD.C.I.T. II, PUNE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING TH AT THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE WAS INVALID SO GRANTED BY CIT- I,PUNE EVEN WITHOUT PASSING ANY INDEPENDENT CANCELL ATION ORDER AS PROVIDED IN S. 12-AA (3) OF THE ACT. THE LD C.I.T. II WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING SUCH ORDER HAVING EFFECT OF CA NCELLATION OF 12-AA REGISTRATION. THE ORDER OF CIT II BE QUASHED. 2) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. C.I.T. II, PUNE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN INVOKIN G THE PROVISIONS OF S. 263(1) OF THE ACT TO CANCEL IN ORDER OF REGISTRA TION PASSED BY SENIOR COMMISSIONER I, PUNE. THE LD. C.I.T. II HELD THE REGISTRATION U/S. 12-AA WAS INVALID ON TECHNICAL GR OUNDS AND INTERNAL WORKING OF THE DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSEE C ANNOT BE FAULED FOR THE SAME. GROUNDS IN APPEAL NO. ITA 168/PN/2012 1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW THE LD. C.I.T. II, PUNE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUS ING THE PRAYER FOR RENEWAL OF APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 10-G OF THE ACT , SIMPLY ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS. THE DIRECTIONS BE ISSUED IN A CCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF LAW TO GRANT APPROVAL U/S. 80-G OF TH E ACT. 2) ON THE FACT AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW THE REJECTING OF THE PRAYER FOR APPROVAL OF APPLICA TION U/S. 80-G OF THE ACT EVENTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE IS HOLDING REGISTRA TION NO. N- 17/95-96 DT, 07-06-1995 WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND THE S AME BE ALLOWED ACCORDINGLY. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 2 IN ITA NO. 167/PN/2012 DOES NOT EMANAT E FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT. THEREFORE, HE IS NOT PRESSING FOR THE SAME . THE LD. D.R. HAS NO ITA . NOS. 167 & 168/PN/2012 NAV JEEVAN MANDAL, A.Y. - PAGE OF 7 6 OBJECTION. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 2 IN ITA NO. 1 67/PN/2012 IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 6.1 SO FAR AS THE OTHER GROUNDS ARE CONCERNED, T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT A LIBERAL VIEW SHOULD B E TAKEN FOR GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A AND GRANTING APPROVAL U/S.80 G OF THE I.T. ACT. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, WHILE SUPPORTING THE O RDER OF THE CIT II, PUNE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MIS-REPRESEN TED THE FACTS BEFORE THE CIT I, PUNE FOR OBTAINING REGISTRATION U/S. 12 A OF THE I.T. ACT. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY B OTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE CIT II, PUNE AND THE PAPE R BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, AN APPLICATION SEEKIN G THE GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S. 80G WAS REJECTED BY THE CIT II, PUNE VIDE ORD ER DATED 19 TH AUGUST 2009 ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPLICATION IS NOT ACCO MPANIED BY CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE I.T. EVEN THOUGH TH E ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST ORDER OF CIT REF USING GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S. 80 G AND EVEN THOUGH THE SAME WAS DISMISSED B Y THE TRIBUNAL WE FIND THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE C IT-I, PUNE SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE I.T. ACT AND THEREAFTE R OBTAINED REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE I.T. ACT. KNOWING FULLY WELL THAT T HE JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST FALLS UNDER CIT II, PUNE, WE FIND THE ASSESSEE MADE THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12A T O CIT I, PUNE AND AFTER OBTAINING THE REGISTRATION U/S. 12A MADE AN APPLIC ATION BEFORE CIT II, PUNE SEEKING GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S. 80G OF THE I.T. ACT. UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN TH E ORDER OF CIT II, PUNE REFUSING GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S. 80 G OF THE I. T. ACT. WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE APPEALS. 8. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ITA . NOS. 167 & 168/PN/2012 NAV JEEVAN MANDAL, A.Y. - PAGE OF 7 7 THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26TH APRIL, 2012. SD/- SD/- ( I.C. SUDHIR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( R.K. PANDA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED THE 26TH APRIL, 2012 US COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT II, PUNE 4. THE D.R. B BENCH, PUNE . GUARD FILE /-TRUE COPY-/ BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE