ARHAM SHREE DIVYADARSHAN RUJUDARSHAN CHARITABLE TRUST, MUMBAI V. DIT(E), MUMBAI

ITA 2202/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 56022 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 14-11-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K B MENON
• Assessee Lawyers: M SUBRAMANIAN
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. AND SHRI V. DU RGA RAO, J.M. ITA NO. 2202/MUM/2010 ARHAM SHREE DIVYADARSHAN RUJJUDARSHAN CHARITABLE TRUST, APPELLANT 31, LATIF HOUSE, 250, ST ROAD, KARNAK BUNDER, MUMBAI 400 009. (PAN AACTA5323J) VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) RESPONDEN T IT OFFICES, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI 400 012 APPELLANT BY : MR. M. SUBRAMANIAN RESPONDENT BY : MR. P.K.B. MENON DATE OF HEARING : 14/11/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 18/11/2011 ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI, PASS ED U/S 12AA(1)(B)(II) READ WITH SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, ON 20/01/2010 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUN DS OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE ORDER PASSED U/S 12AA(1)(B)(II) R.W.S 12A OF TH E ACT, 1961, IS INVALID AND BAD IN LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED DIT(E) ERRED IN REJECTING THE REGISTRAT ION APPLICATION AND THAT TOO WITHOUT EVEN GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEI NG HEARD. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED DIT(E) ERRED IN REJECTING THE REGISTRAT ION APPLICATION ITA NO. 2202/M/2010 ARHAM SHREE DIVYADARSHAN RUJJUDARSHAN CHARITABLE TR UST , 2 AND THAT TOO WITHOUT CONSIDERING FULLY AND PROPERLY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST REGISTERED WITH THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER, MUMBAI. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 12A O F THE ACT IN FORM NO. 10 A FOR REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST UNDER THE IN COME TAX ACT. IN RESPONSE TO THE APPLICATION, THE LEARNED ITO(E)(HQ) ADDRESSED A LETTER DATED 23/10/2009 REQUESTING THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH INFORMATION/DOCUMENTS MENTIONED THEREIN AND THE SAM E WAS RESPONDED IN TERMS OF A LETTER DATED 22/12/2009. TH EREAFTER, A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 18/12/2009 WAS ISSUED BY THE ITO (HQ)(E) AND WAS SERVED ON 24/12/2009. THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE INT ER-ALIA REQUESTED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN WHY SHOULD NOT TH E APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A BE REJECTED IN THE LIGHT OF JU DICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS AS HELD IN THE CASE OF STATE OF KERA LA V. M.P. SHANTI VARMA JAIN (1998) 231 ITR 787 (SC) AND GHULAM MOHID IN TRUST VS. CIT, 248 ITR 587 (J&K). THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS R ESPONDED VIDE ASSESSEES LETTER DATED 07/01/2010. THEREAFTER, TH E DIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI, REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT IT IS CLEARLY LAID DOWN IN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA (1)(B) A TRUST IS TO BE REGISTERED IF THE COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED ABOU T THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. AGGRIE VED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. THE PRELIMINARY CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN TH E GROUNDS OF APPEAL IS THAT THE DIT(E) REJECTED THE REGISTRATION APPLICATION WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS FULLY AND PROPERLY AND WITHO UT EVEN GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 4. BEFORE US, BOTH THE PARTIES AGREED THAT THE ISSU E MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE DIT(E) TO DECIDE T HE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE MATTER. ITA NO. 2202/M/2010 ARHAM SHREE DIVYADARSHAN RUJJUDARSHAN CHARITABLE TR UST , 3 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER T O RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF DIT(E) TO DECIDE THE ISSUE DE-N OVO AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASESSSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18 TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (V. DU RGA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 18 TH NOVEMBER, 2011 KV COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) CONCERNED. 4) THE CIT CONCERNED. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, A BENCH, I.T .A.T., MUMBAI. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASST. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., MUMBAI.