GURU TEG BAHADUR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE SOCIETY,SANGRUR vs. CIT(E), CHANDIGARH

Following grounds has been raised in this appeal.

From the aforesaid grounds it is gathered that only grievance of the assessee relates to the rejection of the application seeking the registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’).

Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application in Form No. 10A on 27/03/2019 seeking registration under section 12A of the Act.

The Ld. CIT(E) issued a questionnaire through online portal and asked the assessee to comply the same electronically. The Ld. CIT(E) also asked the assessee to furnish the reply on additional queries, the said questionnaire and queries are reproduced by the Ld. CIT(E) at para 5 & 6 of the impugned order, for the cost of repetition the same are not reproduced herein.

In response the assessee furnished the fee structure of the school. However, the Ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee by observing in para 8 & 9 of the impugned order as under:

Now the assessee is in appeal.

Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that all the information which were asked to be furnished by the Ld. CIT(E) were duly furnished at the relevant time and were available on the record. Therefore the observation of the Ld. CIT(E) are factually incorrect.

In her rival submissions the Ld. CIT DR reiterated the observations made by the Ld. CIT(E) and submitted that the assessee did not furnish the requisite information in the form of certified copies of the documents which were furnished in the office of Registrar of Society and Firms, therefore, the genuineness of the activity of the society were not verifiable and the application moved by the assessee was rightly rejected by the Ld. CIT(E).

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case it is noticed that there is contradictory in the stand of the Department and the assessee. The Ld. CIT(E) has mentioned in the impugned order that certified copies of the Memorandum of Association and bye laws which were submitted in the office of the Registrar of Society and Firms by the assessee, were not produced before him. On the contrary the claim of the Ld. Counsel for the Assessee is that those documents were furnished. We therefore in the absence of clear facts on record and considering the contradictory stand of both the parties, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the Ld.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.