Anjali Bhattacharjee Technical Institute, Burdwan V. The Commissioner of Income Tax Burdwan, Burdwan

ITA 2782/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4474 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 16-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHCIDANDA SRIVATTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: PARTHA SARATHI GUPTA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2782 & 2784 / KOL / 2013 ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE KHAJA ANWAR BERTH, P.O. SRIPALLY, DIST BURDWAN, PIN-713 103 [ PAN NO. AACAAA 4559 R ] V/S . THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, ANNEXE, COURT COMPOUND, BURDWAN, P.O. BURDWAN PAN NO. /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY ASSESSEE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI GUPTA, AR /BY REVENUE SHRI SACHCIDANDA SRIVATTAVA, CIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 04-07-2016 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20-07-2016 / O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- BOTH APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BURDWAN VIDE NO.T 18/03 /CIT/BWN/13-14/1782 U/S 12A AND 80G(5)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 30.09.2013. SHRI PARTHA SARATHI GUPTA, LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENT ATIVE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND SHRI SACHCIDANANDA SRIVATTAVA, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. ITA NO.2782 & 2784/KOL/2-13 ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE V. CIT B WN PAGE 2 2. SINCE COMMON GROUNDS ARE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE AP PEALS THEREFORE WE HEARD THEM TOGETHER AND DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO DISP OSE OF THEM BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER. GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE PER ITS SE PARATE APPEALS IN ITA 2782/KOL/2013 AND 2784/KOL/2013 REPRODUCED BELOW:- GROUNDS IN ITA 2782/KOL/2013 1) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ORDER U/S.12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961 WAS NOT FAIR AND PROPER AND ON THE OTHER HAND THE SAME WAS MADE CONTRARY TO LAW, SOUND AND A DEQUATE PRINCIPLES. 2) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BURDWAN WAS NOT AT ALL UNJUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961 OF THE APPELLANT. 3) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE REASONS AND THE GROUNDS ADDUCED BY THE LD. COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX IN SUPPORT OF REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REG ISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE IT ACT, 1961 OF THE APPELLANT ARE NOT PROPER AND CO NVINCING AS HE HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTS GIVEN IN THE PAPER BOO K FILED ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 4) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE LD. CIT DID NOT ISSUE ANY NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT TO PRODUC E THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE REGIS TRATION CASE AND HE ASKED FOR THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THE FY 2012-13 ONLY ON 30/09/2013. 5) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE APPELLANT DULY EXECUTED ONE DEED OF AMENDMENT OF TH E MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OF THE SOCIETY WHEREIN THE DISSOLUTI ON CLAUSE OF THE REGULATION OF ASSOCIATION AND THE SAFEGUARD AGAINST THE FUND OF THE SOCIETY HAVE BEEN DULY INCORPORATED, BUT THE LD. CI T FAILED TO CONSIDER THE SAME AND APPLY HIS MIND IN THE CONTEXT OF DEED OF AMENDMENT DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING. 6) FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OUGH T TO HAVE GIVEN REASONABLE TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO PRODUCE THE NECESSARY RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WHICH HE ASKED TO PROD UCE ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING OF THE CASE ON 30/09/2013. ITA NO.2782 & 2784/KOL/2-13 ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE V. CIT B WN PAGE 3 7) FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUR DWAN ERRED BOTH IN POINTS OF LAW AND ON FACTS. 8) FOR THAT THE HUMBLE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO TA KE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS AND AMEND GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING. GROUNDS IN ITA 2784/KOL/2013 1) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE ORDER U/S. 80C(5)(VI) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 WAS NOT FAIR AN D PROPER AND ON THE OTHER HAND THE SAME WAS MADE CONTRARY TO LAW, SOUND AND ADEQUATE PRINCIPLES. 2) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BURDWAN WAS NOT AT ALL JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL TO INSTITUTION U/S 80G(VI) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 OF THE APPELLANT. 3) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE REASONS AND THE GROUNDS ADDUCED BY THE LD. COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX IN SUPPORT OF REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF APPROVAL TO INSTITUTION U/S. 80G(5)(VI) OF THE IT A CT, 1961 OF THE APPELLANT ARE NOT PROPER AND CONVINCING AS HE HAS N OT CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTS GIVEN IN THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON THE DATE OF HEARING. 4) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE LD. CIT DID NOT ISSUE ANY NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT TO PR ODUCE THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE CASE U/S. 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT, AND HE ASKED FOR THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THE F.Y 2012-13 ONLY ON 30/09/2013, WHICH COULD HAVE BE EN ASKED TO PRODUCE ON THE PREVIOUS OCCASION. 5) FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE APPELLANT DULY EXECUTED ONE DEED OF AMENDMENT OF TH E MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OF THE SOCIETY WHEREIN TH E DISSOLUTION CLAUSE OF THE REGULATION OF ASSOCIATION AND THE SAF E GUARD AGAINST THE FUND OF THE SOCIETY HAVE BEEN DULY INCORPORATED , BUT THE LD. CIT FAILED TO CONSIDER THE SAME AND APPLY HIS MIND IN T HE CONTEXT OF DEED OF AMENDMENT DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING. 6) FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OUGH T TO HAVE GIVEN REASONABLE TIME AND OPPORTUNITY TO THE APPELLANT TO PRODUCE THE NECESSARY RELEVANT DOCUMENTS WHICH HE ASKED TO PROD UCE ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING OF THE CASE ON 30/09/2013. 7) FOR THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BUR DWAN ERRED BOTH IN POINTS OF LAW AND ON FACTS. 8) FOR THAT THE HUMBLE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO TA KE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS AND AMEND GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING. ITA NO.2782 & 2784/KOL/2-13 ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE V. CIT B WN PAGE 4 3. SINCE ALL THESE GROUNDS IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE INTERLINKED, THEREFORE THESE ARE BEING TAKEN UP TOGETHER FOR ADJUDICATION. 4. INTER-CONNECTED ISSUE IS THAT LD. CIT ERRED IN R EJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12A AND 80G OF THE ACT. THE F ACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY AND ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITIES OF PROVIDING DIFFERENT TYPES OF VOCATIONAL COURSES. DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 20 12-13 ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12A AND 80G OF THE ACT ON 03.04.2 013. THE ASSESSEE IS PROVIDING DIFFERENT TYPES OF VOCATIONAL COURSES AND ITS MAJOR SOURCE OF INCOME IS FEES COLLECTED FROM THE STUDENTS FOR PROVIDING D IFFERENT TYPES OF VOCATIONAL COURSE. LD CIT DURING REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS OBSE RVED THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY ARE CHARITABLE AND COVERED UNDER ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES BUT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS SPECIFIED UNDER SE CTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. AS PER SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AN ORGA NIZATION WILL BE TREATED AS CHARITABLE UNDER THE CATEGORY OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES IF ITS AGGREGATE VALUE OF RECEIPTS IS LESS THAN 25 LACS PER ANNUM FOR THE SAID PURPOSE. ACCORDINGLY LD CIT REQUESTED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTS FOR THE FINANCIAL Y EAR 2012-13 ALONG WITH OTHER REQUISITES DOCUMENTS / EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT O F ITS CLAIM. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE SAME BEFORE LD. CIT. BESIDES THE ABOVE THE LD. CIT ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE DISSOLUTION CLAUSE O F THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY IS NOT PROPERLY MADE IN SO FAR IT DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY SAFE GUARD AGAINST THE FUND OF THE SOCIETY. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES, THE LD. CIT REJECTED THE REGISTRATION APPLICATION U/S. 12A AND 80G(5)(VI ) OF THE ACT. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF LD CIT ASSESSEE CA ME IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BEFORE US LD. AR SUBMITTED THA T THE REQUISITES DETAILS WERE NOT FURNISHED BEFORE LD. CIT DUE TO SOME UNAVO IDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FOR THIS REASON, HE REQUESTED THE BENCH TO REST ORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE ITA NO.2782 & 2784/KOL/2-13 ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE V. CIT B WN PAGE 5 FILE OF LD. CIT FOR ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY. ON THE CO NTRARY, LD. DR RAISED NO OBJECTION, IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FI LE OF LD. CIT. 6. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER AND IN THE INTEREST O F JUSTICE AND FAIR PLAY, WE ARE INCLINED TO GIVE ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESS EE AND THEREFORE, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO ASSESSEE. IT IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT ASSESSEE SHOULD COOPERATE IN THE REGISTRATION PROCEEDINGS. HENCE, THE GROUND OF ASSESSEES BOTH APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSE. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 20/ 07/2016 SD/- SD/- (#$) () (N.V.VASUDEVAN) (WASEEM AHMED) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP &'(- 20 / 07 /201 6 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /ASSESSEE-ANJALI BHATTACHARJEE TECHNICAL INSTITUTE, KHAJA ANOWAR BERH, P.O. SRIPALLY, DIS T. BURDWAN, PIN 713 103 2. / RESPONDENT-CIT, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, ANNEXE, COURT, C OURT COMPOUND, BURDWAN 3.'0'12 3 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 3- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5.6 78$$12, 12!, / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6.8;<=> / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ /' 12!,