M/s. Shalom Gospel Prayer Ministry Trust, CHENNAI V. ITO, Coimbatore

ITA 2292/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1195 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-03-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S MOHARANA
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI. BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2292/MDS/2012 M/S. SHALOM GOSPEL PRAYER MINISTRY TRUST, 25-B1, KARUVALLUR MARIAMMAN KOIL STREET, UDAYAMPALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641 028. [PAN:AALTS5657A] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARDI, COIMBATORE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : DR. S. MOHARANA, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 04.03.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.03.2013 ORDER PER S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - I, COIMBATORE DATED 23 .11.2012 IN C.NO.127(345)/12A-SGPMT/CIT-I:CBE/2012-13, PASSED U NDER SECTION 12AA(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 [IN SHORT TH E ACT]. 2. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE AR REPRESENTING T HE ASSESSEE SUPPORTS I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.2 22 229 2929 292 22 2/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/12 1212 12 2 THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL AND VEHEMENTLY ARG UES THAT ITS APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT HAS BEEN WRONGLY REJECTED BY THE CIT. ACCORDINGLY, HE PRAYS FOR ACCE PTANCE OF THE APPEAL. 3. OPPOSING TO THIS, THE REVENUE STRONGLY SUPPORTS THE ORDER UNDER CHALLENGE. 4. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT ON 11.05.2012. THEREAFTER, THE CIT IN THE COURSE OF HE ARING SOUGHT FOR DETAILS OF ASSESSEES TRUST DEED, COPY OF INCOME AND EXPENDITU RE STATEMENT, ETC. THEREAFTER, HE CONSIDERED IN DETAIL THE MATERIAL AV AILABLE ON RECORD AND PASSED THE REJECTION ORDER. A PERUSAL OF THE SAME M AKES IT CLEAR THAT THE PRINCIPLE GROUNDS FOR REJECTION ARE THAT IT HAS BEE N FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT THE TRUST HAS BEEN CREATED WITH AN INT ENTION TO BENEFIT INDIVIDUAL TRUSTEES THEMSELVES IN THE GARB OF RELIGIOUS ACTIVI TIES. 5. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING BEFORE US, THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS REITERATED THE GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEAL, HOWEVER, THERE IS NO COGENT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD SO AS TO CONTROVERT THE FINDING S OF THE CIT. EVEN THE MATERIAL WHICH HAD BEEN PRODUCED ON RECORD BEFORE T HE CIT IS NOT FORTHCOMING. THEREFORE, MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ASSE SSEES ORAL SUBMISSIONS, WE HARDLY SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FIND INGS OF THE CIT. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. NO. NO. NO. NO.2 22 229 2929 292 22 2/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/12 1212 12 3 ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME ARE CONFIRMED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THURSDAY, THE 7 TH OF MARCH, 2013 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE-PRESIDENT (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 07.03.2013 VM/- TO: THE ASSESSEE//A.O./CIT(A)/CIT/D.R.