Sri Ramanuja Sahasrabdi, Hyderabad V. DIT(Exemptions), Hyderabad

ITA 1709/HYD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 170922514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S RAMA RAO; RAVI SESHAGIRI RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: D SUDHAKAR RAO
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1709/HYD/2014 SRI RAMANUJA SAHASRABDI, R.R. DISTRICT. PAN AAKAS 2597 K DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY SHRI S. RAMA RAO & SHRI RAVI SESHAGIRI RAO ASSESSEE BY SHRI D. SUDHAKAR RAO DATE OF HEARING 02-12-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05-12-2014 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M.: THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21 /10/2014 OF DIT(E), HYDERABAD, REJECTING APPELLANTS APPLICATIO N FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE IT ACT. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, APPELLANT IS A SOCIETY RE GISTERED UNDER THE AP SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 2001 ON 16/12/13. AS APPELLANT IS CREATED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES AS DEFINED U/S 2(15 ) OF THE ACT, IT APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. REGI STRATION WAS ALSO GRANTED TO APPELLANT BY LD. DIT(E) VIDE ORDER DATED 28/08/2014. APPELLANT HAD ALSO FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10G ON 10/03/14 BEFORE LD. DIT(E) SEEKING APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) O F THE ACT. LD. DIT(E) NOTED THAT AT THE TIME OF GRANTING OF REGIST RATION, AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT INSTITUTION HAD STA TED THAT THE SOCIETY IS IN THE PROCESS OF ACQUIRING LAND FOR ESTABLISHIN G ITS ACTIVITIES. 2 ITA NO. 1709/HYD/2014 SRI RAMANUJA SAHASRABDI HOWEVER, AS NOTED BY LD. DIT(E) IN PARA 5 OF HIS OR DER, THOUGH, APPELLANT INSTITUTION HAD RECEIVED CORPUS FUND OF R S. 1,19,09,094 AND AMOUNT OF RS. 10,80,000 TOWARDS ADVANCES FOR ADVERT ISEMENT, BUT, NO LAND HAS BEEN REGISTERED IN THE NAME OF APPELLANT I NSTITUTION TILL DATE. THEREFORE, LD. DIT(E) REFUSED TO GRANT APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) AND ACCORDINGLY, REJECTED APPELLANTS APPLICATION IN TH E IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY HIM. 3. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT WHEN APPELLA NT HAS BEEN REGISTERED AS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT AND THERE IS NO DOUBT WITH REGARD TO CHARITABLE OBJECT OF APPELL ANT, DENIAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5) IS ILLEGAL. HE, SUBMITTED THAT ONCE TRUST IS REGISTERED U/S 12AA AND FULFILLS THE CONDITIONS ENU MERATED UNDER CLAUSE (I) TO (V) OF SECTION 80G(5), APPROVAL CANNO T BE DENIED TO APPELLANT. IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CONTENTION, HE RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: 1. BENGAL HOSIERY MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION VS. DI T(E), [2012]18 ITR (TRIB.) 205 (KOLKATA) 2. PROJECT MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE VS. DIT(E), 142 IT D 239 (HYD.) 3. DIT(E) VS. NEEL GAGAN CHARITABLE TRUST, [2013] 3 57 ITR 86 (DELHI) 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF LD. DIT(E). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIE S, PERUSED THE ORDER OF LD. DIT(E) AND OTHER MATERIALS ON RECORD A S WELL AS THE DECISIONS CITED. A PLAIN READING OF SECTION 80G(5) WOULD MAKE IT CLEAR THAT APPROVAL CAN BE GRANTED UNDER CLAUSE (VI) IF T HE CONDITIONS OF CLAUSE (I) TO (V) ARE FULFILLED. ON A PERUSAL OF TH E IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. DIT(E) IT IS EVIDENT, THE ONLY REASON ON WHICH HE DENIED APPROVAL IS LAND REQUIRED BY APPELLANT FOR ESTABLISHING ITS ACT IVITIES HAS NOT YET BEEN REGISTERED IN ITS NAME. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO ALLEGATION BY THE LD. DIT(E) THAT APPELLANT HAS NOT FULFILLED ANY OF THE CONDITIONS OF 3 ITA NO. 1709/HYD/2014 SRI RAMANUJA SAHASRABDI CLAUSE (I) TO (V) OF SECTION 80G(5). FURTHERMORE, T HERE IS NO DISPUTE THE FACT THAT APPELLANT IS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION WITH CHARITABLE OBJECTS, AS LD. DIT(E) HIMSELF HAS GRANTED REGISTRA TION TO APPELLANT U/S 12AA. THAT BEING THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW, LD. DIT(E) WAS NOT CORRECT IN REJECTING APPELLANTS APPLICATION FOR GR ANT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5). MOREOVER, IN COURSE OF HEARING, LD. AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE MEANTIME LAND HAS ALSO BEEN REGISTERED IN THE N AME OF THE SOCIETY. THEREFORE, THE OBJECTION OF LD. DIT(E), AS IT APPEARS, HAS ALSO BEEN TAKEN CARE OF . IN AFORESAID VIEW OF THE MATTE R, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF LD. DIT(E) AND DIRECT HIM TO GRAN T APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI). TO THE APPELLANT. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05/12/2014. SD/- SD/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JU DICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 5 TH DECEMBER, 2014 KV COPY TO:- 1) SRI RAMANUJA SAHASRABDI, C/O SRI S. RAMA RAO, F LAT NO. 102, SHRIYAS ELEGANCE, 3-6-643, STREET NO. 9, HIMAY ATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 029 2) DIT(E),, HYDERABAD 4)ADIT(E)-II, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD. 4 ITA NO. 1709/HYD/2014 SRI RAMANUJA SAHASRABDI DESCRIPTION DATE INTLS 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON SR.P.S. 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR SR.P.S 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER VP 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P.S./PS SR.P.S. 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.P S. 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.P.S. 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER