Shri.Chandrashekara Bharathi Seva Trust, Mysore V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Bangalore

ITA 1725/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5250 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 13

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1724 & 1725/BANG/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : N.A. SHRI CHANDRASHEKHARA BHARATI SEVA TRUST, NO.342, 13 TH CROSS, 8 TH MAIN, B BLOCK, J P NAGAR EXTENSION, MYSORE DISTRICT. PAN: AAQTS 3382P VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BENGALURU. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI NARENDRA SHARMA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : MS. NEERA MALHOTRA, CIT(DR)(ITAT-2), BENGALURU DATE OF HEARING : 13.07.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.07.2017 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AG AINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) [THE CIT(E)] DENYING REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA AND RECOGNI TION U/S. 80G(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [THE ACT] RESPECTIVELY. 2. SINCE BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER, T HESE APPEALS ARE BEING DISPOSED OF THROUGH THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. ITA NO.1724 & 1725/BANG/2016 PAGE 2 OF 4 3. WITH REGARD TO APPEAL RELATING TO REGISTRATION U /S. 12AA OF THE ACT, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ALL THE REQUISITE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT(E), BUT T HE CIT(E) DID NOT TAKE COGNIZANCE OF THE SAME AND HAS DENIED REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT REQUISITE DETAILS WERE NOT FURNISHE D WITH REGARD TO GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST. IN SUP PORT OF HIS CONTENTION, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENT ION TO THE QUERY RAISED BY THE ITO(E) AND THE REPLY FURNISHED TO THE ITO(E) FO R ITS PERUSAL BY THE CIT(E). THE REPLY WAS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF TH E CIT(E) ON 22.07.2016. THEREFORE, THE CIT(E) WITHOUT LOOKING TO THE REPLY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAD DENIED REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT. ON ACCOUN T OF DENIAL OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT, THE CIT DID NOT GRANT RECOGNIT ION U/S. 80G(5) OF THE ACT. 4. THE LD. DR PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF CIT (E). 5. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF CIT(E) AS WELL AS THE DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT ITO(E) HAS RAISED QUERY VIDE LETTER DATED 15.07.2016 TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE IMMEDIATELY RESPONDED VIDE ITS REPLY DATED 20.07.2016, WHICH WAS RECEIVED IN THE O FFICE OF THE CIT(E) ON 22.02,2016. THOUGH IT WAS ADDRESSED TO ITO(E), BUT IT WAS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF CIT(E). BUT THE CIT(E) HAS PASSED THE OR DER MENTIONING THEREIN THAT THE REQUISITE INFORMATION WAS NOT FILED BEFORE HIM FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE ACT . ITA NO.1724 & 1725/BANG/2016 PAGE 3 OF 4 6. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE DETAILS FURNISHED BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE REQUISITE DETAILS B EFORE THE CIT(E), BUT IT ESCAPED THE ATTENTION OF THE CIT(E) AS IT WAS ADDRE SSED TO THE ITO(E) IN RESPONSE TO HIS QUERY. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT THE MATTER BE EXAMINED AGAIN BY THE CIT(E) IN THE LIGHT OF DETAIL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(E) AND R ESTORE THE MATTER TO HIS FILE TO READJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT. 7. SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT (E) DENYING REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT, WE ALSO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(E) NOT GRANTING THE REGISTRATION U/S. 80G(5) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE MATTER IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF CIT(E) FOR READJUDICATION O F THE ISSUE OF GRANT OF RECOGNITION U/S. 80G(5) OF THE ACT IN THE LIGHT OF MATERIAL ON RECORD AND THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 12AA OF THE ACT. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 14 TH DAY OF JULY, 2017. SD/- SD/- ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 14 TH JULY, 2017. / D ESAI S MURTHY / ITA NO.1724 & 1725/BANG/2016 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.