M/s. Jesus Heals Mission Trust, CHENNAI V. ITO, Coimbatore

ITA 2012/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 51726 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-08-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K E B RENGARAJAN JR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2012/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR :-- M/S. JESUS HEALS MISSION TRUST, DOOR NO. 18/270, M.G. R. NAGAR II, PODANUR, COIMBATORE-641 023. (PAN : AAATJ9072B) V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-III(1), COIMBATORE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN, JR. STANDING COUNSEL DATE OF HEARING : 24-08-2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 4-08-2011 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME-TAX-I, COIMBATORE REFUSING TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SEC TION 80G OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IN C. NO. 127(28 B)CIT-I/CBE/09-10 DATED 07-07-2010. 2. SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K.E.B. RENGARAJAN, JR. STANDING COUNSEL REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. THERE IS A DELAY OF 76 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL . THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONDONATION PETITION EXPLAINING THE DELAY. THE LEA RNED DR HAD NO SERIOUS I.T.A. NO.2012MDS/2010 2 OBJECTION TO THE REASONS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DELAY WAS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL WAS HEARD ON MERI TS. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRE SENTATIVE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12A(A) OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961 AS PARTLY RELIGIOUS AND PARTLY CHARITABLE TRUST. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED APPLICATION FOR RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT AND THE SAME WAS REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS REGIST ERED ONLY AS A PARTLY RELIGIOUS AND PARTLY CHARITABLE TRUST. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80G (5B) OF THE ACT TO SUBMIT THAT THERE WAS NO BAR IN REGARD TO THE PARTLY RELIGIOUS AND PARTLY CHARITABLE TRUST BEING RECOGNIZED UNDER SEC. 80G OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION T HAT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80G(5B) UPTO 5% OF THE TOTAL INCOME COULD BE USED F OR RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES. HE FURTHER DREW OUR ATTENTION TO EXPLANATION 3 WHICH DE FINED CHARITABLE PURPOSE TO SAY THAT IT DID NOT INCLUDE ANY PURPOSE THE WHOLE O R SUBSTANTIALLY THE WHOLE OF WHICH IS OF A RELIGIOUS NATURE. IT WAS THE SUBMISS ION THAT THE LEARNED CIT FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT A RELIGIOUS TR UST. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVING SCHOLARSHIP TO NEEDY STUDEN TS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT WAS NOT A SPEAKIN G ORDER. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE WA S RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT FOR RE-ADJUDICATION. I.T.A. NO.2012MDS/2010 3 4. THE LEARNED DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. A PER USAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT IT IS NOT A SPEAKING ORDER. IT IS FURTHER NOTICED THAT THE LEARNED CIT HAS REJECTED THE GRANT OF APPR OVAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST S REGISTERED AS PARTLY RELIGIOUS AND PARTLY CHARITABLE TRUST. IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80G(5B) AS ALSO THE EXP LANATION 3 TO SEC. 80G DEFINING CHARITABLE PURPOSE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE I SSUE MUST BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AND WE DO SO . IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 24/08/2 011. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 24 TH AUGUST, 2011. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE