M/s Batchu Foundation, Peddapuram V. The CIT, Rajahmundry, Rajahmundry

ITA 321/VIZ/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4376 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 30-04-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 15-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K V N CHARYA
• Section: 80G; 12AA

Judgement Text

ITA NO.321/VIZ/2011 BATCHU FOUNDATION, PEDDAPURAM IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI D. MANMOHAN , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 321 /VIZAG/ 20 11 ASSESSMENT YEAR : N.A. BATCHU FOUNDATION PEDDAPURAM VS. CIT RAJAHMUNDRY (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAATB 2231L APPELLANT BY: SHRI G.V.N. HARI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI K.V.N. CHARYA, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING: 30.04.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.04.2013 ORDER PER SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT:- THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE LD. CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION SEEKING RENEWAL OF EXE MPTION U/S 80G OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 2. THE FACTS NECESSARY FOR THE DISPOSAL OF THE APPE AL ARE STATED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS REGISTERED AS BATCHU FOUNDA TION. THE TRUST WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT BY THE CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY ON 03.06.2005 W.E.F. 03.09.1986. THEREAFTER, THE A SSESSEE APPLIED FOR RECOGNITION OF THE TRUST U/S 80G OF THE ACT AND THE SAME WAS ACCORDINGLY GRANTED BY THE CIT VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 25.06.2008 FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2008 TO 31.03.2011. IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT P ROVISO TO SECTION 80G(5)(IV) OF THE ACT WAS OMITTED W.E.F. 01.10.2009 , WHEREBY APPROVALS GRANTED U/S 80G OF THE ACT, WHICH WERE TO EXPIRE AF TER 01.10.2009 SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN. ITA NO.321/VIZ/2011 BATCHU FOUNDATION, PEDDAPURAM 2 HOWEVER, IGNORANT OF THE SAID PROVISION, THE ASSESS EE FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM 10G FOR RENEWAL OF CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION U/ S 80G OF THE ACT ON 31.03.2011. 3. THE LD. CIT RAJAHMUNDRY OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT PROVED THAT IT MAINTAINED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, WHEREAS ONE O F THE CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING RENEWAL OF RECOGNITION U/S 80G OF THE ACT IS MAINTENANCE OF PROPER BOOKS/RECORDS FOR THE RECEIPTS AS WELL AS EXPENDITU RE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE THIS CONDITION IS NOT FULFILLED, T HE APPLICATION IN FORM 10G FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 80 G OF THE ACT WAS REJECTED. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT, ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. COUNSEL SUB MITTED THAT UPON OMISSION OF PROVISION TO SECTION 80G(5)(IV) OF THE ACT, THE APPROVAL GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80G OF THE ACT UP TO 31.03.2011 SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY, UNLESS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRA WN AND THERE IS NO MANDATE FOR SEEKING RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION AFTER 01.10.2009. IN THIS REGARD, LD. COUNSEL PLACED BEFORE US, A COPY OF THE ORDER OF IT AT VISAKHAPATNAM IN THE CASE OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TRUST (ITA NO.312/VIZ AG/2011 DATED 31.10.2012), WHEREIN, UNDER IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES , THE TRIBUNAL SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D.R. FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES IN THE INSTANT CASE ARE IDENTICAL. HOWEVER, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE REVE NUE HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS CITED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE , WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS NO NECESSITY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO SEEK REN EWAL OF RECOGNITION U/S 80G OF THE ACT IN A CASE WHERE THE CERTIFICATE GRAN TED U/S 80G EXPIRES AFTER 01.10.2009. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE RECOGNITION U /S 80G WAS ACCORDED BY ITA NO.321/VIZ/2011 BATCHU FOUNDATION, PEDDAPURAM 3 THE CIT RAJAHMUNDRY TILL 31.03.2011 AND HENCE, THER E WAS NO NECESSITY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO SEEK RENEWAL. UNDER THESE CIRCUMST ANCES, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT. 6. AS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, THE APPEAL FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. SD/ - SD/ - (B . R . BASKARAN) ( D. MANMOHAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATED 30 TH APRIL, 2013 COPY TO 1 BATCHU FOUNDATION, SIVALAYAM STREET, PEDDAPURAM. 2 THE CI T, RAJAHMUNDRY 3 THE CIT (A) , RAJAHMUNDRY 4 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM