Elshadai Charitable Trust, Madurai V. ITO, Madurai

ITA 1756/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5188 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-04-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-10-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JR
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH B : CHENNAI [BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER] I.T.A NO. 1756/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : N.A ELSHADAI CHARITABLE TRUST PLOT NO.11 KALIAMMANKOVIL EAST STREET VAGAIKULAM (UTKADAI), RAMALINGAPURAM MADURAI 625 018 VS THE ITO WARD II(4) MADURAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI G.BASKAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B RENGARAJAN, JR. STANDING COUNSEL O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT-I, MADURAI, DATED 25.2.2010, PASSED U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE TRUST HAD APPL IED FOR RENEWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G OF THE ACT ON 1.9.2009. THE LD . CIT ASKED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONDUCT A PRELIMINARY ENQUIRY REGARDING THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST. THE REPORT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RECEIVED ON 18.12.2009 WHEREIN SHE QUOTED THE O BJECTS OF THE ITA 1756/10 :- 2 -: TRUST FROM THE TRUST DEED WITHOUT REFERRING TO THE ACTUAL ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE TRUST. THE TRUST WAS CREATED ON 6.7.2006 IT WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON 16.3.20 07 AND APPROVAL U/S 80G WAS GRANTED ON THE SAME DAY WHICH WAS VALID UPTO 31.3.2008. NOW THE ASSESSEE HAS APPLIED FOR RENEWAL OF THE APP ROVAL U/S 80G ON 1.9.2009. THE TRUST RUNS A HOME FOR THE ORPHANS AN D WIDOWS. THE LD.AR FILED COPIES OF ACCOUNTS TO SHOW THAT THE ACT IVITIES OF THE TRUST WERE ORIENTED TOWARDS THIS OBJECTS ONLY. BUT GOING BY TECHNICALITIES THAT THE TRUST HAD NOT OBTAINED APPROVAL FROM THE B OARD OF CONTROL, ORPHANAGES & OTHER CHARITABLE HOMES(SUPERVISION AND CONTROL) ACT, 1960, CHENNAI OR FIT INSTITUTION CERTIFICATE FROM THE CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND/O R CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL ADOPTION RESOURCE AUTHORITY CONSTITUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT INDIA, THE LD. CIT RE FUSED TO RENEW THE APPROVAL U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 3. BEFORE US, FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE- TRUST : 1. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TA X IS WRONG, ILLEGAL AND OPPOSED TO FACTS. THE ORDER IS L IABLE TO QUASHED AS THE ORDER SHOULD NOT ONLY BE PASSED A ND ALSO COMMUNICATED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF 6 MONTHS OR AT LEAST IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL U/S.8 0G OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT. ITA 1756/10 :- 3 -: 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX WENT WRONG IN I TS OBSERVATION THAT THE APPELLANT TRUST HAD NOT OBTAIN ED THE NECESSARY RECOGNITION BY THE BOARD OF CONTROL, ORPHANAGES & OTHER CHARITABLE HOMES (SUPERVISION AND CONTROL) ACT, 1960 OR 'FIT INSTITUTION CERTIFIC ATE' FROM THE CHILD WELFARE COMMITTEE. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX OUGHT TO H AVE SEEN THAT A RECOGNITION OR CERTIFICATE IS NOT REQUIRED F OR THE APPELLANT TRUST AND IN ANY EVENT IT CANNOT BE A REA SON FOR REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION. 5. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ERRED IN MAKIN G OBSERVATIONS WITHOUT APPLYING HIS MIND TO THE NATUR E OF THE ACTIVITY IN THE PROPER VIEWPOINT. THE COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, BEFORE ARRIVIN G AT THE UNTENABLE CONCLUSION. 6. IN ANY EVENT THE CONCLUSION OF THE COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX IS HYPER TECHNICAL AND SUPERFLUOUS. 7. THE APPLICATION IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED AND APPROVAL U/S.80G GRANTED . 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE TRUST REMAINED REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT A ND IS, UNDISPUTEDLY, CARRYING ON CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES BY PURSUING ITS C HARITABLE OBJECTS. SIMPLY BASING HIS FINDING ON TECHNICALITIES, THE LD . CIT HAS DENIED THE RENEWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPI NION, THIS IS NOT A VALID REASON TO DENY APPROVAL U/S 80G. HENCE, WE D IRECT THE LD. CIT TO GRANT APPROVAL U/S 80G TO THE ASSESSEE-TRUST BY IS SUING REQUISITE CERTIFICATE. ITA 1756/10 :- 4 -: 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STAND S ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 .4.2011 SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (HARI OM MARATHA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH APRIL, 2011 RD COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR