M/s. Green Care Trust, CHENNAI V. ITO, Ooty

ITA 2121/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 212121714 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 26-08-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P B SEKARAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH C CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2121/MDS/2012 M/S. GREEN CARE TRUST DOOR NO.6.153, MASINAGUDI POST, THE NILGIRIS TAMILNADU 643 223. PAN : AABTG7206K (APPELLANT ) V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD I(1), OOTY. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI PB SEKARAN, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 26 AUG 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 AUG 2013 O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COIMBAT ORE, DATED 24.9.2012, PASSED IN CASE NO.1126/CIT-II/2011-12 UN DER SEC.12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). ITA 2121/MDS/2012 2 2. IT IS TO BE SEEN FROM THE CASE FILE THAT THE GR IEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE INSTANT APPEAL IS THAT IT HA S BEEN WRONGLY DENIED REGISTRATION UNDER SEC.12A OF THE ACT BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. 3. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRAT ION UNDER SEC.12A OF THE ACT CLAIMING ITS OBJECTS TO BE OF C ULTURAL RESEARCH ABOUT THE TRIBALS AND OTHER CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. IT PLEADED TO HAVE WORKED TOWARDS CREATING AWARENESS ABOUT PRESE RVATION OF ENVIRONMENT AND ALIKE PROBLEMS AMONGST SCHOOL CHILD REN. 4. IN THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE CIT, HE NOT ICED CERTAIN DISCREPANCIES IE., THOUGH THE TRUST DEED HA S BEEN EXECUTED ON 19.1.2009, THE IMPUGNED APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED ON 5.3.2005 ALMOST AFTER MORE THAN A PERIOD OF THR EE YEARS. HE IS ALSO STATED TO HAVE FOUND SOME IRREVOCABILITY CL AUSE AND ALSO CAME ACROSS THE TRUST DEED WHICH HAD NOT BEEN AMEND ED QUA THE EFFECT OF CHANGE OF TRUSTEE. IN THESE CIRCUMST ANCES, THE CIT SOUGHT EXPLANATION FROM THE ASSESSEE. ITA 2121/MDS/2012 3 5. IN REPLY, AS PER CITS ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE, T HE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO HAVE NOT FURNISHED GENUINE REAS ONS FOR DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPLICATION. THIS PROMPTED THE CIT TO DISMISS THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION . WHILST DECLINING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT ALSO HOLD S THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE DETAILS PERTAINING TO MISSING VOUCHERS AND ADDRESSES OF DON ORS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 6. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING, BOTH PARTIES REITERAT E THEIR RESPECTIVE PLEADINGS. 7. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO T HE MATTER. ADMITTEDLY, THE CIT HAS NOT DECIDED THE IS SUE OF REGISTRATION UNDER SEC.12A OF THE ACT ON MERITS. H E HAS OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO REASON STATED EXPLAINING DELAY BETWEEN THE FORMATION OF THE TRUST AND THE IMPUGNED APPLICA TION. THE CIT HAS ALSO TAKEN UP OTHER ISSUES PERTAINING TO MI SSING VOUCHERS ETC BY MAKING A PASSING REFERENCE ONLY. I N VIEW OF THE AFORESAID CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN VIEW OF THE FACT TH AT THERE IS NO ITA 2121/MDS/2012 4 DECISION ON MERITS OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE THAT THE APPLICATIO N IN QUESTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE RECONSIDERED O N MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BY THE CIT. THEREFORE, WE REM AND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF CIT FOR HIS ADJUDICATION AFRESH AFTER GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASS ESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AFTER HEARING ON MONDAY, THE 26 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( DR. O.K. NARAYANAN ) ( S.S. GODARA ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED : 26 TH AUGUST 2013 JLS. C.C: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/DR/G.FILE.