Grace Educational Trust, Bareilly V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Lucknow

ITA 707/LKW/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4868 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12AA; 12

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.707/LKW/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. CIT (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW. VS GRACE EDUCATION TRUST, M/6, VRINDAVAN COLONY, IZATNAGAR, BAREILLY. PAN:AABTG3886H (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) SHRI S. C. AGARWAL, ADVOCATE APPELLANT BY SHRI A. K. SINGH, CIT, D. R. RESPONDENT BY 01/01/2016 DATE OF HEARING 12/01/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE OR DER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW DATED 15/09/2015 PASSED B Y HIM U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLO WING GROUNDS: 1. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER WAS WRONG IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12 A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT WAS WRONG IN HOLDING THAT THE O BJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT TRUST WERE NOT GENU INE. 3. THAT THE LD. CIT WAS WRONG IN NOT CONSIDERING SUBMISSIONS DATED 26.08.2015 AND 08.09.2015 FURNISH ED BY THE APPELLANT TRUST. 4. THAT THE LD. CIT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING RE GISTRATION U/S 10A OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS OF 'ABSENCE OF SUFF ICIENT 2 MATERIAL REQUIRED FOR FORMATION OF SATISFACTION' WI THOUT INDICATING AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTED SUFFICIENT MATERI AL. 5. THAT THE LD. CIT ACTED ARBITRARILY IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE APPELLANT TRUST FORMED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE WHICH CARRIES OUT ITS CHARIT ABLE ACTIVITIES GENUINELY AS PER THE TRUST DEED UNDER WH ICH IT WAS FORMED. 6. THAT THE FOLLOWING CASE LAW CITED BY THE LD. CIT ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THE QUESTION UNDER DISPUTE IN AS MUCH A S THE CONTEXT AND RATIO OF CITED JUDGMENT ARE NOT APPLICA BLE TO PRESENT CASE: (A)ITA NO 809/LKW/2014 (ITAT LUCKNOW BENCH) (B)KIRTI CHANDRA TARAWATI CHARITABLE SOCIETY VS. DI T(E) (C) SELF EMPLOYERS SERVICE SOCIETY VS. CIT (D)CIT VS. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION SOCIETY 7. THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS AGAINST FACTS AND LA W. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A. R. OF THE ASSESSE E THAT AS MENTIONED IN GROUND NO. 3, TWO SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BEFORE L EARNED CIT ON 26/08/2015 AND 08/09/2015 BUT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER BUT LEARNED CIT HAS NOT CONSIDERED THESE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, THE MATTER MAY BE REST ORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT FOR FRESH DECISION. 4. LEARNED D. R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IN VI EW OF THESE FACTS THAT TWO SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE DATED 26/08/2015 AN D 08/09/2015 WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY LEARNED CIT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER , WE FEEL IT PROPER THAT THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DEC ISION AND THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT AND RESTORE THE MATT ER BACK TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH DECISION AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNI TY OF BEING HEARD TO THE 3 ASSESSEE. SINCE WE HAVE RESTORED BACK THE MATTER T O THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT FOR FRESH DECISION, WE DO NOT MAKE ANY COMMENT ON T HE MERIT OF THE ISSUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GAROD IA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER DATED:12/01/2016 *SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR