Civil Contractors Association, Mangalore V. ITO, Mangalore

ITA 670/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95216 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-08-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G R REDDY CIT DRI
• Assessee Lawyers: EDMOND DSOUZA
• Section: 80G; 12A; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE A BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.670 & 671(BNG.)/2014 CIVIL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION, D.K.MANGALORE D.NO.1 N-12-741/14(2), FIRST FLOOR, RAGHU BUILDING, URWASTORES, MANGALORE APPELLANT PAN NO.AABAC7565N VS THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), MANGALORE RESPONDE NT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI EDMOND DSOUZA, CA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.R.REDDY, C IT-DR-I DATE OF HEARING : 25-08-201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-08-2015 O R D E R PER SMT ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JM: THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDERS OF THE CIT, MANGALORE BOTH DATED 31-03-2010 PASSED U/S 12A A(1)(B)(II) AND 80G OF THE IT ACT, 1961, WHEREBY THE APPLICATIONS SEEKI NG REGISTRATION U/S12A AND RECOGNITION U/S 80G OF THE ACT, WAS REJECTED. 2 ITA NO.670 & 671(B)/2014 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE KARNATAKA SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1960. THE ASSESSEE IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE SOCIETY WHICH MADE AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G IN FORM NO.10-A AND FORM NO.10-G O N 05-09-2013 RESPECTIVELY. 3. THE CIT, MANGALORE BY ORDER DATED 31-03-2014 PA SSED U/S 12AA(!)(B)(II) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 DISMISSING THE A PPLICATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S12AAHOLDING THAT HE IS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE OBJECT OF THE ASSOCIATION AND GENUINENESS OF ITS AC TIVITIES. SIMILARLY, AN APPLICATION FILED FOR RECOGNITION U/S 80G WAS ALSO REJECTED BY THE CIT. THE CIT DISTINGUISHED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THAT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS RELIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE N AMELY CIT VS SURAT ART SILK CLOTH MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATIONS (1980) 12 1 ITR 01 AND ALSO IN THE CASE OF CIT VS FEDERATION OF INDIA CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY (1981) 130 ITR 186. THE CIT OBSERVED THAT IN BOTH THE CASES THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE IS AN O BJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, WHEREAS IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE PRIMARY OBJECT I.E FIRST OBJECT AS PER THE MOA IS TO PUT AN EFFORT TOW ARDS GROWTH AND PROTECT PROFESSIONAL WELFARE OF SOUTH CANARA CIVIL CONTRA CTORS. HENCE, IT WAS 3 ITA NO.670 & 671(B)/2014 HELD BY THE CIT THAT THE OBJECT PRIMARILY STATED BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT AN OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY AS DEFINED IN SE C.2(15) OF THE IT ACT, 1961. THUS, THE CIT CONCLUDED THAT THE HONBLE SUP REME COURT DECISIONS CITED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE INS TANT CASE. 4. THE CIT ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAI LED TO FURNISH A DULY REGISTERED MOA INCORPORATING NECESSARY CLAUSES , AS INTIMATED IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 20-01-2014. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. WE FIND FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CIT D ATED 20-01-2014 DIRECTING THE ASSESSEE TO INCORPORATE CERTAIN AMEND MENTS IN THE MOA. THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE NECESSARY AMENDMENTS AND FILE D BEFORE THE CIT, THE PHOTOCOPIES OF THE AMENDMENTS MADE IN KANNADA W HICH WERE REGISTERED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETY, DAKSH IN KANNADA, MANGALORE DATED 15-03-2014. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE HA S TRANSLATED FROM 4 ITA NO.670 & 671(B)/2014 KANNADA TO ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND THE SAME IS PRODUCE D AT PAPER BOOK AT PAGE-10 BEFORE US. 7. THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNI SHED ORIGINAL/COPY OF THE REGISTERED MOA INCORPORATING T HE NECESSARY CLAUSES AS INTIMATED THROUGH SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 20-01- 2014, EVEN THOUGH HE HAD MADE THE NECESSARY AMENDMENTS IN KANNADA AND GOT THEM TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCE S, WE SET ASIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT, BEFORE WHOM THE ASSES SEE SHALL PRODUCE THE AMENDED MOA WITH TRANSLATION IN ENGLISH. THE CIT S HALL EXAMINE THE NEW/AMENDED MOA AND THEREAFTER, GOING THROUGH THE O BJECTS OF THE ASSOCIATION DECIDE THE ISSUE AS TO WHETHER THE OBJE CTS ARE OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY AND HENCE ELIGIBLE FOR EXE MPTION U/S 11 OF THE IT ACT, FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF DECISIONS OF THE APEX C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SURAT ART SILK CLOTH MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATIONS (19 80) 121 ITR 01 AND IN THE CASE OF CIT VS FEDERATION OF INDIA CHAMBERS OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY (1981) 130 ITR 186 (SUPRA). THE CIT SHALL AFTER SATISFYING HIMSELF WITH THE OBJECTS OF M/S CIVIL CONTRACTORS A SSOCIATION EXAMINE THE 5 ITA NO.670 & 671(B)/2014 AMENDED DEED AND THEREAFTER GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND RELIEF U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST AUGUST, 2015. SD/- (ABRAHAM P GEORGE) SD/- (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: BANGALORE: D A T E D : 31-08-2015 AM* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE