Chandigarh Renewal Energy Science and Technology Promotion Society, Chandigarh V. CIT I, Chandigarh

ITA 793/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73428 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-01-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JYOTI KUMARI
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 793 /CHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : CHANDIGARH RENEWAL ENERGY VS. C.I.T. - I SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY CHANDIGARH PROMOTION SOCIETY CHANDIGARH AADCC 2295 B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI T.N. SINGLA RESPONDENT BY: SMT. JYOTI KUMARI DATE OF HEARING 28.1.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 30 .1.2014 O R D E R PER T.R.SOOD, A.M THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26. 6.2013 OF THE LD CIT-I, CHANDIGARH. 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLO WING GROUNDS: 1 THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT IS BAD AND AGAINST THE FACTS AND LAW. 2 THAT THE LD. CIT HAS WRONGLY REJECTED THE APPLICA TION FOR THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME -TAX AC T, 1961. 3 THAT THE LD. CIT HAS PASSED WRONG ORDERS US/ 12AA (1)(B)(II) OF THE ACT. 3 AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT IN TH IS CASE REGISTRATION HAS BEEN MAINLY REJECTED BECAUSE IDENT ITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY WAS NOT GIVEN BY THE SOCIETY . FURTHER IT WAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS EXAMINING THE P OSSIBILITY OF SEEKING EXEMPTION U/S 10(21)/10(23C) OF THE ACT. A CCORDING TO THE LD. COMMISSIONER THE SOCIETY WAS NOT SURE REGAR DING GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. 2 4 BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED THAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT U/S 12A TO GIVE INDIVI DUAL IDENTITY OF THE MEMBERS. THE SOCIETY IS MAINLY ENGAGED IN D ISTRIBUTION OF THE SUBSIDY TO THE PERSONS WHO HAVE INSTALLED SO LAR POWER EQUIPMENT (IN SHORT SPE). THE SUBSIDY WAS BEING RE CEIVED FROM CENTRAL GOVT AND THAT IS WHY VARIOUS OFFICIALS WERE MADE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY. HE ALSO REFERRED TO THE OB JECTS OF THE SOCIETY WHICH ARE PURELY CHARITABLE. 5 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. FOR THE REVENUE S TRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 6 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE FIND T HAT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR GIVING PERSONAL IDENTITY OF T HE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY U/S 12A OF THE ACT. FURTHER THE LD. CO MMISSIONER HAS NOT EXAMINED THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE SET ASIDE T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER AND REMIT THE SAME TO HIS FILE WIT H A DIRECTION THAT HE SHOULD EXAMINE THE OBJECTS AS WEL L AS THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES AND THEN DECIDE THE ISSUE OF REGISTRATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.1.2014 SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 30.1.2014 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR 3