SIGNING HANDS FOUNDATION,MUMBAI V. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 2680/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Signing Hands Foundation, which appealed against the decision of the CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai, rejecting their application for approval under section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT (Exemptions) had rejected the application based on certain clauses in the foundation's memorandum of association (MOA) that suggested the possibility of utilizing funds outside India, which was not aligned with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The foundation argued that they had amended these clauses and sought a reconsideration of their application. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a de novo consideration and directed the CIT (Exemptions) to reassess the application after allowing the foundation a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 398460 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SATYAPRAKASH R.SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: YOGESH JOIJODE
• Section: 80G

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2680/MUM/2025 (AY : 2025-26) (Physical hearing) Signing Hands Foundation 83, Tenerife, Little Gibbs Road, Hanging Garden, Malbar Hill, Mumbai-400006. [PAN No. ACSPT8705B] Vs CIT(EXEMPTIONS), Mumbai Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Yogesh Joijode, CA Revenue by Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT-DR Date of institution of appeal 18.04.2025 Date of hearing 03.06.2025 Date of pronouncement 03.06.2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order ofLd. CIT(E), Mumbai dated 20.02.2025. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the fact, circumstances of the case and in law, the hon'ble Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mumbai (hereinafter referred as \"Ld. CIT(E)\") erred in rejecting the application filed in Form 10AB for approval U/s 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stating that appellant is violated the statutory provisions of the income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as \"the Act\"). The Ld. CIT (E) erred in stating that appellant intends to apply or receive the funds outside India as per the MOA/ Objects. The Ld. CIT (E) erred in stating that appellant ought to have amended the clause of MO/ Objects to align with the provisions of the Act. the Ld. CIT (E) failed to consider the submissions made during the course of proceedings. It is prayed to your honour to allow the approval made U/s 80G of the Act and give necessary directions in this regard. 2. Your appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary on or before the date of hearing.” 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The Learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that ITA No. 2680/Mum/2025 Signing Hands Foundation 2 application of assessee for approval of fund under section 80G(5) was rejected by ld. CIT(E) by taking view that certain objects of the assessee trust conveys that its intention to utilise funds of outside India and that there is possibility in future that expenditure may incurred outside India. It was the observation of ld. CIT(E) that assessee trust ought to have amended such clauses to align with provisions of Income Tax Act. The ld AR of the assessee submits that no opportunity was allowed to the assessee to seek amendment of such object clauses, before rejection of application under section 80G(5). The assessee now has amended all such clauses, amended copy of memorandum of association (objects) is filed on record. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee was not allowed reasonable opportunity before rejection of their application, therefore, matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(E) to re-consider the application de novo. The assessee fulfil all requisite condition for obtaining approval under section 80G(5). 3. On the other hand, the ld. CIT DR for the Revenue supported the order of ld. CIT(E). 4. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the order of ld. CIT(E). We find that assessee filed application in Form 10AB for approval of trust under section 80G(5). The application assessee was rejected by ld. CIT(E) pointing out certain clauses of their object which includes “III(B)(1)-To establish and open branches in India or abroad. III(B)(9)- Objects of the company extend to the whole of India or anywhere for the interest of India”. Now, before us, the ld. AR of the assessee vehemently urged that the assessee trust has amended their object/memorandum of association by removing such words “abroad or anywhere” wherever they ITA No. 2680/Mum/2025 Signing Hands Foundation 3 appear in their object clauses and prayed for consideration of their application. 5. Considering the fact that assessee has now amended such portion of their object clauses about the places of activities and that application of assessee for approval of fund was not considered on merit, therefore, matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(E) to reconsider the matter afresh and to pass the order in accordance with law. Needless to direct that before passing the order, the ld. CIT(E) shall allow reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to provide all necessary information to prove their object and activities of the ld. CIT(E). 6. In the result, the appeal of assesseeis allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 03/06/2025 at the time of hearing. SSS/- Sd/-S PRABHASH SHANKAR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER - S/- Sd/-S PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, Dated:03 /06/2025 Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai "