M/s. Haryana Kickboxing Association, New Delhi V. CIT, Faridabad

ITA 6179/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3242 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: DR RAKESH GUPTA; LAKSHYA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH C, NEW DELHI BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6179/DEL./2014 HARYANA KICKBOXING ASSOCIATION, C/O M/S. RRA TAX INDIA, D-28, SOUTH EXTENSION, PART-I, NEW DELHI PAN- AAAAH5647P (APPELLANT) VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, FARIDABAD. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY DR. RAKESH GUPTA, ADV. & MR. LAKSHYA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY SMT. SIMRAN BHULLAR, CIT/DR ORDER PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT, FARIDABAD DATED 30.09.2014 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN REJECTING THE DEDU CTION U/S 80G(5) OF THE ACT AND THAT TOO WITHOUT GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNIT Y OF HEARING AND WITHOUT CONSIDERATION THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE A PPELLANT SOCIETY. 2. THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN OBSERVING AS UN DER WHILE DENYING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. (A) THAT THE AIMS & OBJECTS MENTIONED IN THE MEM ORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION APPEARS TO EXIST ON PAPER ONLY. DATE OF HEARING 17.01.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 26 .02.2018 ITA NO. 6179/DEL./2014 2 (B) THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS WORKING AGAINST THE INTEREST OF POPULARIZATION AND PROMOTION. (C) THAT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SOCIETY ARE NOT C OVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF 'CHARITABLE OBJECTS' PROVIDED AS PER PROVISIONS U/S 2(15) OF THE ACT. (D) THAT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE APPELLANT SOCIETY ARE AGAINST THE RIGHT TO EQUALITY. (E) THAT THE OBJECTIVES AND BYE LAWS OF THE APPE LLANT SOCIETY ARE AGAINST THE BASIC PRINCIPLE ENSHRINED IN THE CONSTITUTION O F INDIA. THAT IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER AND IN ANY CASE, ACTI ON OF LD. CIT IN REJECTING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80G IS BAD IN LAW AND A GAINST THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IS CONTRARY TO THE PR INCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AS THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITHO UT GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE, BY RECORDING INCORRECT FACTS AND FINDINGS AND THE APPELLANT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION UNDER THE SAID SECTION. 2. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS REGISTERED WITH THE DIST RICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES FARIABAD UNDER HARYANA REGISTRATION AND SOCIETIES A CT, 2012. THE SOCIETY ALSO GOT REGISTERED ON 20.12.1999 VIDE REGISTRATION NO. 2079 UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 AND LATER ON THE SOCIETY WAS GRANTED REVISED CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ON 15.09.2014 BY DISTRICT REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, FARIDABAD, HARYANA BEARING REGISTRATION NO. HR 019201401180. T HE SOCIETY HAD BEEN ALSO GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA(1)(B)(I) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ON 30.04.2014 VIDE REGISTRATION NO. CIT/FBD/TECH/12A/2014-15/97/1 0 DT. 30.04.14. THE ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR APPROVAL U/S. 80G(5)(VI) VIDE APPLICATION DATED ITA NO. 6179/DEL./2014 3 20.01.2014 IN FORM NO. 10G. THE LD. CIT BEFORE GRAN TING APPROVAL ASKED FOR CERTAIN DETAILS, COPIES OF DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSEE FILED DETAILED REPLY AS PER REQUIREMENT OF THE LD. CIT. FROM THE SUBMISSIONS MA DE, THE CIT WAS NOT SATISFIED AND DOUBTED THE OBJECTIVES MENTIONED IN T HE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION. THE LD. CIT ALSO ASKED TO FURNISH THE DETAILED NOTE ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY. HE ALSO OBSERVED THAT CERTAIN AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF SEC . 2(15) OF THE IT ACT. THE LD. CIT ISSUED LETTER NO. F. CIT/FBD/TECH/12A/2014-15/1 12/605 DATED 25.04.2014. BY THIS LETTER HE SPECIFICALLY ASKED WH ETHER ANY OBJECT IS COVERED UNDER THE RESIDUAL CLAUSE, I.E., OTHER OBJECT OF G ENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED ITS REPLY ON 05.05.2014. THE LD. CIT ALSO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE AS PER HIS LETTER DATED 26.09.2014 AND THE C ASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 30.09.2014. HE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY D ID NOT RESPOND TO PARA NO. 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 & 2.11 DESPITE AMPLE OPPORTUNITIES GI VEN AND THE APPLICANT SOCIETY DOES NOT HAVE ANY COGENT REPLY TO THE FACT THAT THESE CLAUSES KILL COMPETITION AND WORKS AGAINST BASIC SPRIT OF POPULA RIZATION AND PROMOTION. ALSO, IT IS AGAINST THE VERY CONCEPT OF GENERAL PUB LIC UTILITY. THE LD. CIT OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE I TS CLAIM THAT THE SOCIETYS AIMS AND OBJECTS ARE OF CHARITABLE NATURE AND ALSO COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY ITA NO. 6179/DEL./2014 4 CONCRETE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIV ITIES OF THE SOCIETY IN SPITE OF REPEATED OPPORTUNITIES GRANTED AND THEREFORE, RE JECTED THE APPLICATION. 3. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED T HAT THE LD. CIT DID NOT GRANT PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING AND SUBMISSION OF DOCUMENTS. WHATEVER DOCUMENTS WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE HIM WERE NOT CONSID ERED BEFORE REJECTING THE APPLICATION. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE SOCIETY HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA(1)(B)(I) OF THE ACT ON 30.04 .2014 BY THE LD. CIT AFTER BEING SATISFIED WITH THE CHARITABLE NATURE OF SOCIE TYS OBJECTS AS PROVIDED U/S. 2(15) OF THE ACT. HE, THEREFORE, REQUESTED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT FOR DECIDING THE APPLICATION AFRESH AFTER GRANTING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 4. THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSING THE MA TERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE L D. CIT HAS NOT PROPERLY CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE FACT THAT THE SOCIETY HAS ALSO BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S. 12A A(1)(B)(I) OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT FOR DECIDING THE ITA NO. 6179/DEL./2014 5 APPLICATION AFRESH AS PER LAW AFTER GRANTING REASON ABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTE D TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT AND SHALL NOT SEEK ANY UNNECESSARY ADJOURNMENT. WE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATIST ICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 TH FEBRUARY, 2018 SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) ( L.P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 26.02.2018 *AKS* COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES, NEW DELHI