Stonehill Education Foundation, Bangalore V. DIT(Exemptions), Bangalore

ITA 988/BANG/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5288 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 09-11-2010
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-10-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: G V GOPALA RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: G SITARAMAN
• Section: 80G; 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.988 & 989(BANG)/2009 M/S.STONEHILL EDUCATION FOUNDATION, 1 ST FLOOR, EMBASSY POINT, 150 INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE-1. VS. APPELLANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI G.SITARAMAN. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.V.GOPALA RAO. O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JM : THESE ARE ASSESSEES APPEALS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS) [DIT(E) FOR SHORT], BANGALORE, DATED 31-8-2009, REJECTING THE ASSESSEE S APPLICATIONS FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND 80G OF TH E INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT']. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S A COMPANY REGISTERED U/S 25 OF THE COMPANIES ACT AND IS RUNNING A SCHOOL BY NAME STONEHILL INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL. IT APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND ALSO U/S 80G OF THE ACT. VARIOUS DETAILS WERE CALLED FOR BY THE DIT(E) AND THE ASSES SEE HAS ITA 988 & 989(BANG)/2009 PAGE 2 OF 3 FURNISHED THE SAME. THE FIRST LETTER DATED 1-4-200 9 WAS ISSUED CALLING FOR DETAILS AND THE COMPANY FILED ITS REPLY ON 30-4-2009 ALONG WITH DETAILS. SUBSEQUENTLY, ANOTHER LETTER D ATED 18-8-2009 WAS ISSUED SEEKING FURTHER CLARIFICATION. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS REPLY ON 27-8-2009 SEEKING ONE W EEK TIME AND FILED THE DETAILS ON 31-8-2009. ON THE SAME DA TE, THE DIT(E) PASSED ORDERS REJECTING THE REQUEST FOR REGI STRATION U/S 12A AND ALSO U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 3. LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY TO P RESENT ITS CASE AND PRAYS THAT THE ASSESSEES CASE MAY BE ALLO WED TO BE RE-EXAMINED BY THE DIT(E). LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, HOWEVER, OPPO SED THE SAID PLEA STATING THAT THE DIT(E) HAS CONSIDERE D THE ASSESSEES REPLY BEFORE DISPOSING OF THE SAME ON 31 -8-2009 AND, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO NECESSITY FOR REMANDIN G THE ISSUE. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS REPLY ON 31-8-2009 AND THE D IT(E) HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON THE SAME DATE WHICH GIVES US AN IMPRESSION THAT ALL THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE NOT BEEN PROPERLY APPRECIATED BY THE DIT(E). THEREFORE , IN ORDER TO GIVE A FRESH OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE INTERESTS OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND BOTH T HE APPEALS TO THE FILE OF THE DCIT(E) FOR RE-EXAMINATION IN ACCOR DANCE WITH LAW. ITA 988 & 989(BANG)/2009 PAGE 3 OF 3 5. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE PRESIDENT (SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : BANGALORE DATED: 10 TH NOVEMBER, 2010 EKS COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE