UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI BAPU NAGAR, Jaipur V. CIT-EXEMPTION, Jaipur

ITA 223/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2072 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K GUPTA
• Assessee Lawyers: HIMANSU GOYAL
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YA DAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 223/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI BAPU NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAAAU3028P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 1081/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI BAPU NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAAAU3028P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HIMANSU GOYAL JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI V.K.GUPTA (CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 17/05/2017 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17/05/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CIT (E), JAIPUR DATED JAIPUR 12.01.20 16 DENYING ITA NO. 223& 1081/JP/2016 UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI VS. CIT(E), JAIPUR 2 REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AS WELL AS U/S 80G OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE SAMITI. 2. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE SAMITI SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AND U/S 80G OF THE ACT FILED NECESSARY APPLICATIONS WITH THE LD. CIT (E) ON 10.07.2015. THEREAFTER, ON GOING THROUGH THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SAMITI AS WELL AS ACTIVITIE S ACTUALLY CARRIED OUT DURING THE PREVIOUS YEARS, THE LD. CIT (E) OBSERVED THAT THE ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN CARRIED FOR A PARTICULAR CLASS OF PEOPLE I.E. AGARWAL SAMAJ AND THE MAIN COMPONENT OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE SAMITI OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS WAS TOWARDS AGRASEN JAYANTI SM AROHA EXPENSES. THEREAFTER, REFERRING TO VARIOUS COURTS DECISION, IT WAS HELD THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE SAMITI AS WELL AS ACTIVITIES ARE NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE AS THEY ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARTICULAR GROUP OF PER SONS AND SAMITI WAS ACCORDINGLY NOT HELD AS CHARITABLE WITHIN THE MEANI NG OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND REGISTRATION U/S 12AA WAS REFUSED BY THE LD. CIT(E). 3. REGARDING APPROVAL U/S 80G, IT WAS STATED BY THE LD CIT(E) THAT SINCE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT IS A PRE CON DITION FOR GRANTING APPROVAL U/S 80G OF THE ACT, GIVEN THE FACT THAT SA MITI HAS BEEN DENIED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT, IT IS NOT ELIGIBL E FOR EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPLICATION SEEKING E XEMPTION U/S 80G WAS ALSO REJECTED. NOW, THE SAMITI IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST REJECTION OF ITS APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA AS WELL AS SECTION 80G OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 223& 1081/JP/2016 UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI VS. CIT(E), JAIPUR 3 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PURSUED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON PERUSAL OF THE BYE-LAWS OF THE SAMITI CONTAINING THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEES SAMITI, IT IS NOTED T HAT ONE OF THE OBJECT RELATES TO CELEBRATION OF MAHARAJA AGRASEN JAYANTI SMAROHA. THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE MAJOR EXPEND ITURE WHICH HAS BEEN INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE SAMITI OVER THE LAST THREE YEARS IS TOWARDS CELEBRATION OF AGRASEN JAYANTI SMAROHA. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. A/R SUBMIT TED THAT THE ASSESSEE SAMITI WISHES TO MODIFY THE SAID OBJECT CL AUSE AND THE MATTER MAY KINDLY BE REMANDED BACK TO THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTI ON). 6. THE LD. D/R DID NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTION TO THE SAME AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN APPROACH THE LD. CI T (EXEMPTION) WITH THE MODIFIED OBJECT CLAUSE. HOWEVER, THE REGISTRAT ION WHERE SO GRANTED BY THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION), WOULD BE APPLICABLE PRO SPECTIVELY AND CANNOT BE HELD RETROSPECTIVE. 7. IN LIGHT OF ABOVE, WE ACCORDINGLY DEEM IT FIT TO RE STORE BOTH THE MATTERS TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) TO EXAMINE TH E SAME A FRESH AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE MODIFIED OBJECT CLAUS E AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AR E ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17/0 5/2017 ITA NO. 223& 1081/JP/2016 UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI VS. CIT(E), JAIPUR 4 SD/- SD/- DQY HKKJR FOE FLAG ;KNO (KUL BHARAT) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 17/05/2017. * SANTOSH. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- UPNAGARIYA AGARWAL SAMAJ SAMITI, BAP U NAGAR, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 223 & 1081/JP/2016} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR