Shree Sai Pariwar Sewa Sansthan, Lucknow V. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

ITA 772/LKW/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 78611 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA

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.772/LKW/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR:N.A. SHRI SAI PARIWAR SEWA SANSTHAN, 286/56, NIWAZ KHERA, AISHBAGH ROAD, LUCKNOW. PAN:AAJTS1688M VS. C.I.T. - II, LUCKNOW. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI ABHINAV MEHROTRA, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, CIT, D. R. DATE OF HEARING 13/06/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0 4 /07/2014 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS AN ASSESSEES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED CIT - II, LUCKNOW DATED 04/10/2013 U/S 80G(5) OF THE ACT. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS UNDER: 1. BECAUSE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) READ WITH RULES THERE UNDER, OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT 1961 WITHOUT APPRECIATING AND EXAMINING THE TRUE NATURE OF OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. BECAUSE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUCKNOW HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW ON RELYING UPON THE REPORTS OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - RANGE 6. LUCKNOW WITHOUT GOING INTO THE SUBMISSION 2 FILED BY THE A SSESSEE AND WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE ASSESSEE WITH THIS EVIDENCE (PLEASE CONFIRM). 3. BECAUSE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUCKNOW HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN DRAWING THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT INVOLVED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIE S WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY CONCRETE BASIS OR REASON TO ARRIVE AT SUCH A CONCLUSION. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE IS AN ENTITY DULY GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AND IS RECOGNIZED AS UNDERTAKING CHARITABLE ACTIVITY, IN THE OWN VERSION OF THE DEPARTMENT, HENCE BENEFI T OF SECTION 80G CANNOT BE DENIED. 4. BECAUSE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUCKNOW HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN DRAWING THE CONCLUSION AND REFERRING TO THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT AS ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT INVOLVED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES, WHEREAS, A PERUSAL OF THE I&E A/C WOULD REVEAL THAT WITH WHATEVER LIMITED FUNDS, THE TRUST HAD ONLY CHARITABLE AND UNOBJECTIONABLE (CHARITABLE) ACTIVITIES HAVE UNDISPUTEDLY BEEN UNDERTAKEN. 5. BECAUSE THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX LUCKNOW HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND IN LAW IN FAILING TO APPRECIATE THAT IT IS THE PAUCITY OF THE FUNDS THAT HAS DISABLED THE TRUST TO CARRY OUT ITS DOMINANT OBJECTS. THERE BEING NO QUARREL TO THE PROPOSITION THAT THE TRUST IS INDULGING INT O PHILANTHROPIC ACTS, DENIAL OF EXEMPTION ON THE GROUNDS MENTIONED IN THE ORDER OF CIT, LUCKNOW ARE AGAINST THE WELL ESTABLISHED JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN THIS REGARD DRAWING THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT INVOLVED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES, IS A VERY CASUAL AND INAPPROPRIATE REMARK. 6. BECAUSE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LUCKNOW IS ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND IS LIABLE TO BE ANNULLED. 3 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LEARNED A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ONCE THE CREATION OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, RECOGNITION U/S 50G(5)(VI) SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DENIED BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN CREATED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. 4. LEARNED D.R. OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE REGARDING GRANTING APPROVAL U/S 80G WAS REJECTED BY CIT ON THE BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS NOT SUBMITTED COGENT EVIDENCE OF CARRYING OUT CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AS DISCUSSED IN ITS INSTRUMENTS I.E. THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT WORKING FOR ACHIEVING ITS DECLARED GOALS. NOW UNDER THESE FACTS, WE FIND THAT THE D ISPUTE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY A VERY RECENT DECISION OF THIS VERY BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SUPPORT FOUNDATION VS. CIT IN I.T.A. NO.785/LKW/2013 DATED 18/06/2014. IN THAT CASE ALSO , THIS WAS THE OBJ ECTION OF CIT THAT FROM THE RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. IN THAT CASE ALSO , IT WAS NOTED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO, REGISTRATION U/S 12A HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AS PER ORDER DATED 24/11/2010 AVAILABLE ON PAGE NO. 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE TRIBUNAL IN THAT CASE HAS HELD THAT ONCE THE CREATION OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES HAS BEEN ACCE PTED BY THE DEPARTMENT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, RECOGNITION U/S 8 0G(5)(VI) SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DENIED BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN CREATED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CA SE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS IN THAT CASE AND HENCE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY 4 REASON TO A TAKE A CONTRARY VIEW. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT AND DIRECT HIM TO GRANT APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSE E. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 0 4 /0 7 /2014. *C.L.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