Aravinda Charitable Society, Kottayam V. CIT, Kottayam

ITA 373/COCH/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52208 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-08-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-06-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S VIJAYAPRABHA
• Assessee Lawyers: A GOPALAKRISHNAN FCAAR
• Keywords: Competent authority

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLAT E TRIBUNAL COCHIN BEN CH, COCHIN BEFORE S/SHRI N.VIJAYAKUMARAN, JM AND SANJAY AR ORA, AM I.T.A. NO. 373/COCH/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 ARAVINDA CHARITABLE SOCIETY, ANICKAD P.O., KOTTAYAM-686503 [PAN: AABTA 8229Q] VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOTTAYAM (ASSESSEE-APPELLANT) (REVENUE- RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SHRI A.GOPALAKRISHNAN, FCA-AR REVENUE BY MS.S. VIJAYAPRABHA, DR DATE OF HEARING 08/08/2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16/08/2011 O R D E R PER SANJAY ARORA, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE CONTESTING THE O RDER U/S. 80G(5)(VI) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' HEREINAFTER) BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOTTAYAM (CIT FOR SHORT) DATED 27.5.2009, REJECTI NG ITS APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL THERE- UNDER. 2. THE SOLE GROUND FOR REJECTION, AS STATED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, IS THE FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF ITS ACTIVITIES, AS WELL AS THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS CALLED FOR BY THE OFFICE OF THE LD. CIT FOR VERIFICATION/EXAMI NATION OF THE ASSESSEES CLAIM WITH REGARD TO THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES AND, CO NSEQUENTLY, ITS APPLICATION. 3.1 IT WAS AVERRED BY THE LD. AR, THE ASSESSEE S COUNSEL, BEFORE US, THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN APPEARING REGULARLY ON DIFFERENT DATES BEF ORE THE I.T.O. (TECHNICAL), I.E., THE OFFICER ATTACHED WITH THE OFFICE OF THE COMPETENT A UTHORITY, WHO VETS THE APPLICATION AND, I.T.A. NO. 373/COCH/2009 2 WHERE FOUND SATISFACTORY, PREPARES THE RECOMMENDATI ON (FOR APPROVAL) FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE SAID AUTHORITY. ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS, HE CONTINUED, AS REQUIRED OR CALLED FOR WERE DULY SUBMITTED, FURNISHING A COPY OF THE SAME, DULY CERTIFIED TO THIS EFFECT, IN THE FORM OF A VOLUMINOUS PAPER-BOOK (ON RECORD). WHEN ENQUIRED BY THE BENCH THAT WHY DID IT, IN THAT CASE, NOT MOVE A RECTIFICATION PETITION BEFORE THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, IT WAS EXPLAINED BY HIM THAT IT WAS NOT SURE IF SUCH A COU RSE WAS AVAILABLE IN LAW. THIS IS MORE SO AS THE RELEVANT PROCEEDINGS HAVE A TIME LIMIT AT TACHED THERE-TO; THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION BEING DATED 28.11.2008, SO THAT ANY REC TIFICATION, EVEN IF ENTERTAINED, WOULD INDIRECTLY RESULT IN AN EXTENSION OF TIME, WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE IN LAW. THE TRIBUNAL COULD, IF IT SO DESIRED, CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND VERIFY THE CLAIMS BEING MADE, AND TOWARD WHICH IT H AS RAISED TWO SPECIFIC GROUNDS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, ADVERTING TO THE ASSESSEES GROUND NO S. 1 & 8. 3.2 THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, WOULD SUBMIT THA T AN OFFICER OF THE RANK OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX COULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO ISSUE A FALSE STATEMENT, MORE SO IN A JUDICIAL ORDER, SUBJECT TO REVIEW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES, AND PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD. CLEARLY, THE ASSESSEES CLAIMS AND THE FINDINGS IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, ON WHICH IT IS BASED, ARE IN CONTRADICTION. HOWEVER, WE CONSIDER THAT IT WOULD N OT BE OF MUCH CONSEQUENCE TO ENTER INTO THIS CONTROVERSY AT THIS STAGE. THIS IS AS THE APPROVAL COULD ONLY FOLLOW A POSITIVE SATISFACTION AND CANNOT BE BY DEFAULT. THE LD. AR H AS MADE A SPECIFIC AVERMENT AT BAR, BESIDES CERTIFYING, THAT ALL THE DOCUMENTS FORMING PART OF THE PAPER-BOOK WERE FURNISHED BEFORE EITHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR THE OFFICE O F THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY; IN FACT, RAISED A SPECIFIC GROUND IN THIS REGARD. WE HAVE NO REASON TO DOUBT THE SAME, WHILE ANSWERING THE ASSESSEES GROUND/S WOULD REQUIRE US TO ISSUE S PECIFIC FINDINGS. AT THE SAME TIME, IF, AND TO THE EXTENT, THE ASSESSEES CLAIMS ARE FACTUA LLY INCORRECT, IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO DERIVE ANY BENEFIT IN ITS RESPECT FROM THE COMPETEN T AUTHORITY. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THEREFORE, WE ONLY CONSIDER IT FIT AND PROPER THAT THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT FOR ADJUDICATION OF THE ASSESSEES APPL ICATION ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH I.T.A. NO. 373/COCH/2009 3 LAW PER A SPEAKING ORDER, AFTER AFFORDING IT A REAS ONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND, OF COURSE, IN A TIME BOUND MANNER. WE DECIDE ACCORDING LY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (N.VIJAYAKUMARAN) (SANJAY ARORA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PLACE: ERNAKULAM DATED: 16TH AUGUST, 2011 GJ COPY TO: 1. ARAVINDA CHARITABLE SOCIETY, ANICKAD P.O., KOTTA YAM - 686503 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOTTYAM. 3. D.R., I.T.A.T., COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN. 4. GUARD FILE .