BHAVESH & MALA ZAVERI FOUNDATION, MUMBAI V. DIT (E), MUMBAI

ITA 2162/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 216219914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 24-06-2014
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH RANJAN PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: B N RAO
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 54; 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,MUMBAI - F BENCH. . , !'# !$%&' , %! () BEFORE S/SH.D.MANMOHAN, VICE-PRESIDEN T & RAJENDRA,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /. ITA NO.2162/MUM/2013, ! ! ! ! * * * * / ASSESSMENT YEAR-2013-14 BHAVESH & MALA ZAVERI FOUNDATION, 202, PRABHA KUNJ, 5 PEDDER ROAD, NEAR CADBURY HOUSE, MUMBAI-400026 VS DIT (E), PIRAMAL CHAMBEERS, PAREL, MUMBAI-400012 PAN: AABTB9688E ( !+, / APPELLANT) ( -.+, / RESPONDENT) !/0 !/0 !/0 !/0 1 1 1 1 % %% % / ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B.N.RAO !$) 2 1 % / REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJESH RANJAN PRASAD ! ! ! ! 2 22 2 0! 0! 0! 0! / DATE OF HEARING : 25-06-2014 3* ! 2 0! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25-06-2014 , 1961 2 22 2 !! !! !! !! 254 )1( % %% % &040 &040 &040 &040 (%5 (%5 (%5 (%5 ORDER U/S.254(1)OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961(ACT) PER RAJENDRA,AM %! %! %! %! () () () () !$%&' !$%&' !$%&' !$%&' % %% % ! ! ! ! : CHALLENGING THE ORDER DT. 31.01.2013 OF DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS) (DIT-E),MUMBAI, ASSESSEE HAS FILED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: ON FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE 1.THE LEARNED DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) { DIT(E)} ERRED IN REJECTING REGISTRATION OF THE APPELLANT TRUST U/S.12A / 12AA OF THE I. T. ACT, 19 61 2.THE LEARNED DIT(E) ERRED IN NOT CONSIDERING THE S UBMISSIONS MADE BY APPELLANT VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 17.1.2013 FILED WITH THE DIT(E) ON 18.1.2013 WHEREIN ALL THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE DIT(E) WERE REPLIED. HE ERRED IN ALLEGING THAT THE DETAILS CALLED FOR WERE NOT GIVEN AND/OR THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS WERE NOT PRODUCED. 3.THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED DIT(E) REJECTING THE APPLICATION U!S.12A OF THE APPELLANT TRUST IS BAD IN LAW, ILLEGAL, VOID BEING UNREASONABLE, UN JUSTIFIABLE AND BEING AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4.THE LEARNED DIT(E), WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICA TION OF THE TRUST PURSUING CHARITABLE OBJECTS OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE APPLICATION LENIENTLY WHEN ESPECIALLY THE APPELLANT HAD PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION. HE ERRED IN PASSING ORDERS ON 3 1. 1.2013 WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY ITS LETTER DATED 17.1.2013 WHICH WAS GLARIN GLY WRONG ON THE PART OF LEARNED DIT(E). THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO, ALTER, VARY, AMEND OR DELETE ANY OR ALL THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. ASSESSEE-TRUST HAD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTR ATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT AND HAD CLAIMED THAT TRUST WAS CONSTITUTED ON 10.12.2011 BY A TRUST-DEED ,THAT IT WAS REGISTERED WITH THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER, MUMBAI ON 29.02.2012. AS PER THE DIT-E,A NOTICE DATED 17.10.2012 WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE REQUIRING IT TO FURNISH CERTAIN DETAILS/DOCUMENTS LIKE PAN CARDS OF THE TRUSTEES AN D THE SETTLER, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT/ACCOUNTS, NOC IN RESPECT OF ITS OFFICE PREMISES,CERTIFICATE O F REGISTRATION ISSUED BY THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER ETC. HE DIRECTED THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF THE TRUST TO ATTEND OFFICE ON 05.11.2012 FOR THE PURPOSE OF PRODUCTION AND VERIFICATION OF O RIGINAL DOCUMENTS. AS PER THE DIT-E ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS WERE NOT PRODUCED FOR VERIFICATION.HE GAV E A FINAL OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE 2 ITA NO. 2162/MUM/2013 BHAVESH & MALA ZAVERI FOUNDAT ION ASSESSEE VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 21.12.2012 TO PRODUC E THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS FOR VERIFICATION ON 04.01.2012.AS PER THE DIT-E,NOBODY APPEARED BEFORE HIM OR FURNISHED NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR VERIFICATION. HE REFERRED TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 12AA(1)(B) OF THE ACT AND HELD THAT ONUS WAS ON THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS/I NFORMATION TO UNABLE THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY TO ARRIVE AT THE REQUISITE SATISFACTION ABOUT THE O BJECT OF THE TRUST AND GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITY, THAT ASSESSEE-TRUST HAD NOT PRODUCED ANY ORIGINAL D OCUMENTS FOR VERIFICATION, THAT IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE TO ASCERTAIN THE TRUE NATURE OF ITS OBJECT AND TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE SAME WERE WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE AS DEFINED IN THE S ECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT,THAT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD TO ENABLE HIM TO SATISFY ABOUT T HE OBJECT OF THE TRUST AND GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITY.INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA(1) (B)(II) R.W.S. 12A AND RULE 17A OF INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962 (RULES), HE REJECTED THE APPLICATION FO R GRANT OF REGISTRATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST . 3. BEFORE US,AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE (AR) SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A LETTER ON 17. 01.2013,THAT IT WAS RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF DIT-E ON 18.01.2013, THAT IN THE SAID LETTER IT WAS STATED THAT ALL THE DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED,THAT ORI GINAL PAN CARDS OF THE TRUST AND THE TRUSTEES, TRUS T -DEEDS ETC.WERE PRODUCED FOR VERIFICATION,THAT A FO UR PAGES DETAILED REPLY WAS FILED BEFORE THE DIT-E ALONG WITH TRUST-DEEDS ETC.,THAT VIDE ITS LET TER DATED 12.03.2013;RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF DIT-E ON 18.03.2013;AN APPLICATION U/S. 54 OF THE A CT SEEKING RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2013WAS FILED,THAT IN THAT LETTER IT WAS STAT ED THAT ALL THE DETAILS CALLED FOR WERE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM.DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (DR) LEFT TH E MATTER TO BE DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL BEFORE US.WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE - TRUST HAD FILED A LETTER,DATED 17.01.2013 IN THE OF FICE OF THE DIT-E AND VIDE HIS LETTER DATED 12.03.2013, ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR R ECTIFICATION OF ORDER PASSED BY THE DIT(E). AFTER CONSIDERING THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BEFORE US,DURIN G THE COURSE OF HEARING,WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT DIT-E HAD REJECTED THE APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY IT.WE FIND THAT THE LETTERS FILED BY THE T RUST BEAR THE STAMPS OF THE OFFICE OF THE DIT-E. IT IS A CLEAR PROOF OF RECEIPT OF THE DOCUMENTS BY THE DI T-E AND THEIR NON CONSIDERATION BY HIM. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE,MATTER IS REM ITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE DIT-E TO PASS A FRESH ORDER AFTER CONSIDERING THE PAPERS SUBMITTED BEFORE US. EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN ITS FAVOUR, IN PART. AS A RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE S TANDS ALLOWED 06 06 06 06 !/0 !/0 !/0 !/0 7!! 7!! 7!! 7!! (!8 (!8 (!8 (!8 2 22 2 4 44 4 )90 )90 )90 )90 2 22 2 $!0 $!0 $!0 $!0 : :: : . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH JUNE, 2014 . (%5 (%5 (%5 (%5 2 22 2 3* ! 3* ! 3* ! 3* ! % % % % &!! &!! &!! &!! ; ;; ; <(! <(! <(! <(! 25 $= $=$= $= , 201 4 2 22 2 4 44 4 > >> > SD/- SD/- ( . / D.MANMOHAN) ( !$%&' !$%&' !$%&' !$%&' / RAJENDRA) !'# / VICE PRESIDENT %! %! %! %! () () () () /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / MUMBAI, <(! /DATE: 25.06.2014. SK (% (% (% (%5 55 5 2 22 2 -0? -0? -0? -0? @%?*0 @%?*0 @%?*0 @%?*0 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE / !+, 2. RESPONDENT / -.+, 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A)/ A B , 4. THE CONCERNED CIT / A B 5. DR F BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI / ?C!4 -0 Q QQ Q , . . &!! . 6. GUARD FILE/ 4! ! .!?0 .!?0 .!?0 .!?0 -0 -0-0 -0 //TRUE COPY// 3 ITA NO. 2162/MUM/2013 BHAVESH & MALA ZAVERI FOUNDAT ION (%5!! / BY ORDER, / ! $! DY./ASST. REGISTRAR , /ITAT, MUMBAI