M/s. House of Abrahams Charitable Trust, Dindigul V. CIT, Madurai

ITA 1716/CHNY/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1186 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-01-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: T VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH A, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. & SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEO RGE, A.M. I.TA. NO.1716/MDS/2009 HOUSE OF ABRAHAM CHARITABLE TRUST, KODAIKANAL CHRISTIAN COLLEGE, PRAKASAPURAM, KODAIKANAL 624 101. [PAN: AAATH6569D] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), DINDIGUL. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI T. VASUDEVAN REVENUE BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB O R D E R PER U.B.S. BEDI, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER UNDER SECTION 12AA(1)(B)(II) R.W. 12A(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT PA SSED BY THE LD. CIT II, MADURAI DATED 04.09.2009 REFUSING TO GRANT REGISTRATION UND ER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS EARLIER DECIDED ON 20.04.2010 AND AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ORDER UNDER APPEAL WAS RECALLED IN M. A. NO. 164/MDS/2010 DATED 29.10.2010. 3. THE ASSESSEE TRUST FILED ITS APPLICATION ON 05. 03.2009 AND AS PER THE COPY OF THE TRUST DEED APPENDED TO THE APPLICATION IN FO RM NO. 10A, THE TRUST HAS BEEN CREATED ON 20.02.1991. AFTER OBTAINING THE REPORTS FROM LOWER AUTHORITIES AND PERUSING THE SAME, THE LD. CIT HAS PROCEEDED TO REF USE TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA AFTER HAVING GRANTED TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT LAW HELPS THOSE WHO ARE VIGILANT AND NOT THOSE WHO SLEEP OVER THEIR RIGHTS AND RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE DELHI ITAT (FB) IN T HE CASE OF MULTIPLAN INDIA LIMITED 38 ITD 320 AND ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MAD HYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN IT ITIT ITA NO. A NO. A NO. A NO.1716/MDS/10 1716/MDS/10 1716/MDS/10 1716/MDS/10 2 THE CASE OF LATE TUKOJI RAO HOLKAR VS. CWT (223 ITR 480), IT WAS HELD THAT NONE OF THE TWIN PARAMETERS VIZ. GENUINENESS OF THE TRUS T AND ACTIVITIES BEING CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TRUST DEED, AS PRESCRIBED HA VE BEEN ESTABLISHED. SO, REGISTRATION WAS HELD TO BE NOT ALLOWABLE TO THE AS SESSEE. 4. AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP IN APPEAL AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE TRU ST, WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED ON 20.02.1991. THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS MAINLY RUNNING TH E EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION IN THE NAME OF KODAIKANAL CHRISTIAN COLLEGE. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION ON 05.03.2009 AND NOTICE OF H EARING FOR 28.08.2009 WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST ON THE SAME DAY AT 1 P.M. SO THE ASSESSEE SENT AN ADJOURNMENT TELEGRAM TO THE LD. CIT. AGAIN 2 ND NOTICE WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE SAME DAY AFTERNOON FOR WHICH AGAIN THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT TIME. SO, THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR THE LD. CIT TO R EJECT THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST WHEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD HAS NOT BEEN AFFORDED NOR OUTCOME OF THE ENQUIRY MADE BY THE LD. CIT HAS BEEN CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE AS SESSEE. IT WAS THUS PLEADED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT AND RESTORIN G THE MATTER BACK ON HIS FILE TO RECONSIDER THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE AFRESH A FTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. DR DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJEC T IN CASE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK ON THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT TO GIVE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, CONSIDERED THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD AND FIND THAT ON BOTH THE OCCASION WHEN DATES OF HEARING WAS FIXED, THE ASSESSEE IS STATED IT ITIT ITA NO. A NO. A NO. A NO.1716/MDS/10 1716/MDS/10 1716/MDS/10 1716/MDS/10 3 TO HAVE RECEIVED THE NOTICES IN THE AFTERNOON OF TH E SAME DATE OF WHICH CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT F OR ADJOURNMENT BY SENDING TELEGRAPHIC APPLICATION. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS STRONGLY PLEADED THAT ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSE SSEE, THEREFORE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK ON THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT FOR RE- DECIDING THE APPLICATION AFRESH TO WHICH THERE IS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION FROM OTHER SIDE . THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND TO HAVE FAIR PLAY IN THE MATTER, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT IS TO BE SET ASIDE AND RES TORED BACK ON HIS FILE FOR RECONSIDERATION. AS SUCH, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK ON HIS FILE WITH THE DIRECTION TO RE-DE CIDE THE APPLICATION AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED SOON AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF HEAR ING ON 13.01.2011. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (U.B.S. BEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE. 13.01.2011 VM/- COPY TO : APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)- /CIT, /DR