M/s. Rural Uplift Centre, CHENNAI V. ITO, Nagercoil

ITA 7/CHNY/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64244 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-09-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 30-08-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K RAJAGOPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ------- ITA NO. 07/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : -- M/S. RURAL UPLIFT CENTRE, GANDHI NAGAR, PARVATHIPURAM, VETTUMIMADAM-629 003 KANYAKUMARI DIST. V. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-I(1), NAGERCOIL. (PAN :AAAAR2484C) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K. RAJAGOPAL, JCIT DATE OF HEARING : 30.08. 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.09.2012 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, MADURAI DATED 15 -11- 2010 UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 ('THE ACT' FOR SHORT). 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT O N 10-05- ITA NO. 07 /M DS/2011 2 2000 AS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST. IT WAS ALSO GRA NTED EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT FROM 1-4-200 0 TO 31- 3-2001. THE CIT IN HIS ORDER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS COLLECTING SERVICE CHARGES. IT IS NOTHING BUT T HE AMOUNT COLLECTED @ 9% ON THE AMOUNTS GIVEN AS MICRO-CREDIT TO THE BENEFICIARIES. DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 T HE ASSESSEE SOCIETY DISBURSED MICRO-CREDIT TO THE MEMBERS TO TH E TUNE OF ` 34,19,000/-. SIMILARLY THE SOCIETY IS GIVING SUBSI DY OF ` 4,000/- FOR THE PURCHASE OF MILCH ANIMALS BY THE BENEFICIAR IES. THE MILCH ANIMAL COSTS AROUND ` 12,000/- TO ` 15,000/-. NO ACCOUNTS ARE MAINTAINED. THE BENEFICIARY HAS TO GI VE BACK ONE GOAT TO THE ASSESSEE AFTER ONE YEAR. ACCORDING TO THE CIT IT IS QUID PRO QUO WHICH IS AGAINST CHARITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY U/S 80G WAS REJEC TED. 3. AS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT, THE ASSESSEE CA RRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE DETAILS IN RESP ECT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WERE FILED BEFOR E THE CIT. THE LD. CIT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DETAILS SIMPLY REJECTED THE EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. IT IS SUBMITTED BY T HE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT IN FACT THE ASSESSEE IS ENJOYING ITA NO. 07 /M DS/2011 3 STILL THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT AND THAT THIS MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE LD. CIT TO RE-CO NSIDER THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE REASONABLE O PPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE RECORD S AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE AC T ON 10-05- 2000 AND ALSO GRANTED EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 80G O F THE ACT FROM 01-04-2000 TO 31-03-2001. ACCORDING TO THE LE ARNED CIT THE SOCIETY IS DOING COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY BY LENDING FUNDS @ 9% TO THE BENEFICIARIES. THE SOCIETY IS ALSO DISBU RSING SOME FUNDS TO THE BENEFICIARIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUYIN G OF THE ANIMALS. ACCORDING TO HIM, NO DETAILS WERE FILED. ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALL THE DETAIL S IN RESPECT OF THE DISBURSING OF THE FUNDS TO THE BENEFICIARIES WERE FILED BEFORE THE CIT. WE FIND THAT REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT WAS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 10-05-2000 AND EXEMP TION UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT WAS ALSO GRANTED UPTO 31-03- 2001. THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEFORE US IS DATED 15-11- 2010. ITA NO. 07 /M DS/2011 4 THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT WHAT HAD HA PPENED TO THE PERIOD IN BETWEEN 2001 TO 2009. IT IS NOT CLEA R, HOW ASSESSEE SOCIETY RECEIVING GOAT FROM THE BENEFICIAR Y AMOUNTS TO QUID PRO QUO . THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT WHY THE BENEFICIARIES ARE GIVING GOAT TO THE ASSESSEE S OCIETY. THE LEARNED CIT HAS NOT PASSED A DETAILED ORDER EXAMINI NG EACH AND EVERY ASPECT. IN OUR VIEW, THE ENTIRE ISSUE IN VOLVED IN THIS APPEAL HAS TO BE RE-CONSIDERED. WE THEREFORE SET A SIDE THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT AND DIRECT THE LEARNED CIT TO PASS A DETAILED ORDER AFTER EXAMINING THE ENTIRE ISSUE AND AFTER GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEA RD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 14 TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2012, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) ( V.DURGA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 14 TH SEPTEMBER, 2012. H. COPY TO : (1) ASSESSEE (2) ASSESSING OFFICER (3) C IT (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE