PERMANENT FAMINE & RELIF, MUMBAI V. ITO 6(3)-1, MUMBAI

ITA 6554/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 62618 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-03-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-09-2010
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V SAXENA
• Assessee Lawyers: A H DALAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, C, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.MITTAL (JM) AND RAJENDRA SINGH(A .M ) ITA NO.6554/MUM/2010 THE PERMANENT FAMINE & RELIEF FUND TRUST, THE CHARITABLE DISPENSARY MAINTENANCE FUND TRUST AND THE CHARITABLE DISPENSARY BUILDING FUND, S/72-73, COTTON EXCHANGE BLDG., COTTON GREEN, MUMBAI-400033 PAN: AAATT4441N DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, MUMBAI-400012. APPELLANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 6.3.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 6.3.2012 APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.H. DALAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI V.SAXEN A O R D E R PER RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 2.7.2010 OF LD.CIT(A) U/S 80G OF THE IN COME TAX ACT, 1961. ONLY DISPUTE IS REGARDING REJECTION O F RENEWAL APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FIL ED AN APPLICATION U/S 80G ON 11.2.2010 FOR GRANT OF RENEW AL CERTIFICATE IN THE NAME OF THE PERMANENT FAMINE & RELIEF ITA NO.6554/MUM/2010 2 FUND TRUST, THE CHARITABLE DISPENSARY MAINTENANCE FUND TRUST AND THE CHARITABLE DISPENSARY BUILDING FUN D. THE DIT(E), HOWEVER, NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN G RANTED THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A VIDE CERTIFICATE DATED 13.12.1973 IN THE NAME OF THE PERMANENT FAMINE & RELIEF FU ND AND CHARITABLE TRUST, THE CHARITABLE DISPENSARY MAINTEN ANCE FUND TRUST. AS THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A WHICH WAS A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT WAS IN A DIFFERENT NAME, TH E DIT(E) REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR RENEWA L OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G AGGRIEVED BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE I S IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD EARLIER BE EN GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 80G FROM TIME TO TIME IN T HE SAME NAME AND ON THE BASIS OF THE SAME CERTIFICATE U/S 1 2A AND THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO REASON FOR THE DIT(E) TO REJECT THE RENEWAL CERTIFICATE. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE AP PLICATION WAS IN THE CORRECT NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IN WHICH TH E TRUST HAD BEEN REGISTERED UNDER BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUST VIDE ORDER DATED 20.5.1953 A COPY OF WHICH WAS PLACED AT PAG E 3 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THEREFORE, ONLY BECAUSE THERE WAS S OME MISTAKE IN THE NAME IN THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE U/S 12A, THE RENEWAL U/S 80G SHOULD NOT BE DENIED PARTICULA RLY WHEN IT HAS BEEN GRANTED IN THE SAME NAME EARLIER. ITA NO.6554/MUM/2010 3 3. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUPPORTE D THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E) AND ARGUED THAT RENEWAL U/S 80G CAN BE GRANT ED ONLY IN THE NAME IN WHICH THE TRUST WAS REGISTERED U/S 12A. 4. WE HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS, CONSIDERED THE RIVA L CONTENTIONS CAREFULLY. THE DISPUTE IS REGARDING DEN IAL OF RENEWAL OF CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. THE RENEWAL CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN DENIED ON THE GROUND T HAT THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE U/S 12A WHICH IS A MANDATO RY REQUIREMENT FOR GRANT OF CERTIFICATE U/S 80G WAS IN A DIFFERENT NAME. THE ASSESSEE HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE APPLIC ATION U/S 80G HAS BEEN MADE IN THE CORRECT NAME AND THERE WAS A MISTAKE IN THE NAME OF THE APPLICANT IN THE REGISTR ATION CERTIFICATE U/S 12A. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE E XEMPTION U/S 80G HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THE S AME NAME EARLIER BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, WHEN IT CAME TO THE NOTICE THAT THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE U/S 12A WA S IN A DIFFERENT NAME DUE TO MISTAKE, IT IS THE DUTY O F THE APPLICANT TO GET THE SUCH CERTIFICATE RECTIFI ED. THEREFORE, THE MATTER, IN OUR VIEW REQUIRES FRESH CONSIDER ATION AND THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN AN OPPORT UNITY TO GET CERTIFICATE U/S 12A RECTIFIED. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIM FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION AFTER ALLOWIN G THE ITA NO.6554/MUM/2010 4 ASSESSEE OPPORTUNITY TO GET CERTIFICATE U/S 12A REC TIFIED AND AFTER FRESH HEARING. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL STANDS ALLO WED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 6 TH MARCH, 2012. SD S D (B.R.MITTAL) (RAJENDRA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 6TH MARCH, 2012 SRL: COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT CONCERNED 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. DR CONCERNED BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER TRUE COPY ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI