Green Valley Public School Education Society (Regd.), Delhi V. DIT(E), Delhi

ITA 4554/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 58514 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-01-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SALIL MISHRA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4554/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 ONWARDS GREEN VALLEY PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION SOCIETY (REGD.), I BLOCK, HATI NAGAR EXTENSION, BADARPUR, DELHI. PAN : AAAAG8512C VS. DIT (E), PLOT NO.15, 3 RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, LAXMI NAGAR, DISTT. CENTRE, DELHI 110 092. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJIV KUMAR, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI SALIL MISHRA, SR. DR ORDER PER I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION S), DELHI DATED 21 ST JUNE,, 2010. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ORIGINALLY FILE D WITH THE APPEAL WERE LENGTHY AND NARRATIVE. LD. AR HAS FILED REVISED CONCISE GROUNDS OF WHICH READ AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS E RRED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN REJECTING REGISTRATION APPL ICATION U/S 12A/12AA & 80G IGNORING THE SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, DISREGARDING THE EXPLANATIO N OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN L AW. 2. THE LD. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS ER RED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN IGNORING SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALLEGING THE SCHOOL IS NOT MAKING COMPLIANCE OF THE MANDATORY GUIDELINES FOR THE ADMISSI ON OF EWS STUDENTS, WHICH IS ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD I N LAW. ITA NO.4554/DEL/2011 2 3. THE LD. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS ER RED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN IGNORING THE SUBMISSIONS AND EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE VIZ., DETAILS OF A LL TEACHERS OF THE SCHOOL, BANK STATEMENT, BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LO SS ACCOUNT, EXPENSES DETAILS EXCEEDING RS.50000/- WHICH IS UNJUSTIFIED, BAD IN LAW AND UNCALLED FOR. 4. THE LD. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS ER RED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN NOT CONSIDERING THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO IN NOT PROVIDING ADEQUATE OPP ORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DESIRED INFORMATION AND D ETAILS, WHICH IS ARBITRARY, UNJUSTIFIED AND BAD IN LAW. 5. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES TO HAVE THE RIGHT TO ADD, AMEND OR MODIFY THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. THE LD. DIT (E) HAS DENIED THE GRANT OF REGISTRATI ON TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION COULD NOT ADHERE TO THE MANDATORY GUIDELINES ISSUED BY CBSE FOR ADMISSION OF EWS STUDENTS AND THE OTHER GROUNDS ON WHICH BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION IS DENIED TO THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE DI D NOT SUBMIT VARIOUS DETAILS WHICH WERE REQUIRED TO BE FILED BY LD. DIT (E). AGAINST THESE FINDINGS OF LD. DIT (E), IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ADMISSION OF EWS STUDENTS DEPENDS UPON FULFILLMENT O F CERTAIN CONDITIONS AND TO FULFILL THE SAME CERTAIN CERTIFICAT ES ARE REQUIRED AND IT IS NOT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ADMISSION OF E WS STUDENTS IN THE REQUESTED NUMBER IS FULFILLED. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY HIM THAT NON- ADMISSION OF EWS STUDENTS ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF CBSE CANNOT BE A GROUND FOR REJECTION OF CLAIM OF THE ASSE SSEE FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION. SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO NON-FURNISHING O F CERTAIN EVIDENCE, IT IS THE CASE OF THE LEARNED AR THAT ALL THE EVIDEN CES ARE READY WITH THE ASSESSEE. THE LEARNED AR HAS FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDE NCE IN THE PAPER BOOK FILED BEFORE US AND IT IS THE CASE OF THE L EARNED AR THAT IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE THE MATTER SHOULD BE R ESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF DIT (E) TO RECONSIDER THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAMINE ALL THE DETAILS TO BE FURNISHED IN THIS REGARD . ITA NO.4554/DEL/2011 3 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE O RDER OF LD. DIT (E) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FULFILL THE CRITERIA FOR ADMISSION OF EWS STUDENTS AND ALSO DID NOT FURNISH THE RE QUIRED DETAILS ASKED TO BE FURNISHED BY LD. DIT (E). THUS, HE SUBMITT ED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ESTABLISH ITSELF TO BE A CHARITABLE INST ITUTION AND, THEREFORE, LD. DIT (E) HAS RIGHTLY REJECTED THE APPL ICATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. NON-FULFILLMENT OF THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY CBSE OF EWS STUDENTS CANNOT BE VIEWED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE TO FIND OUT THAT WHETHER OR NOT THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARIT ABLE INSTITUTION. IMPARTING EDUCATION IS A CHARITABLE ACTIVITY WITHIN THE MEANING OF DEFINITION OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE GIVEN IN SECTION 2 (15). THE VIOLATION OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD MAY ENTAIL ACTION FROM CB SE, BUT IT CANNOT BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT CARRY OUT THE ACTIVITY RELATING TO CHARITABLE PURPOSE. SO FAR AS IT RELAT ES TO NON-FURNISHING OF OTHER DETAILS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF DIT (E) TO EXAMINE THOSE DOCUMEN TS AND RE-CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION ON THE BASIS OF M EMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AND THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THE ASSE SSEE AS PER REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 12A AND 12AA. WE DIRECT ACC ORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT, FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THE APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.01.20 12. SD/- SD/- [SHAMIM YAHYA] [I.P. BANSAL] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED, 25.01.2012. ITA NO.4554/DEL/2011 4 DK COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, DEPUTY REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES