M/S. MADI BAI RAICHANDJI RATHOD CHARITABLE TRUST,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 31/BANG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 March 2021AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Exemptions) failed to examine the detailed activities and supporting documents submitted by the assessee. The CIT(Exemptions) also did not verify compliance with the conditions prescribed under Section 80G(5).

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, applied for recognition under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemptions) rejected the application citing lack of sufficient activities to verify genuineness.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemptions) was justified in rejecting the Section 80G application without a proper examination of the assessee's activities and compliance with statutory conditions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 80G(5),Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVANAND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN

For Appellant: Shri Prem Raj Rathod, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, D.R
Hearing: 09.03.2021Pronounced: 09.03.2021

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 25.9.2019 passed by Ld. CIT(Exemptions), Bengaluru rejecting the application filed by the assessee seeking recognition u/s 80G of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short].

2.

The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee was granted registration u/s 12AA of the Act by Ld. CIT(Exemptions), vide his registration certificate dated 27.8.2019. The assessee had also filed prescribed applications seeking recognition u/s 80G of the Act. The M/s. Madi Bai Raichandji Rathod Charitable Trust, Bengaluru

Page 2 of 3 Ld. CIT(Exemptions), however, rejected the application by observing that it is not possible to verify genuineness of the objects and activities of the Trust, in the absence of sufficient activities. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has filed a detailed letter dated 18.9.2019 before Ld CIT(E) describing various activities carried on by the assessee along with the evidences supporting those activities. He submitted that the Ld. CIT(Exemptions), without examining those documents, has rejected the application of the assessee seeking recognition u/s 80G of the Act.

3.

The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has otherwise complied with the conditions prescribed u/s 80G(5) of the Act and hence the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) was not justified in rejecting the application of the assessee. In this regard, the Ld. A.R. placed reliance on the following case laws, wherein it was held that the recognition u/s 80G cannot be refused if the assessee has complied with the conditions prescribed u/s 80G(5) of the Act: 1) Bharat Bhushan Jain Charitable Trust v CIT(E) (2019) 103 taxmann.com 296 (Delhi – Trib.) 2) Jasoda Devi Charitable Trust v CIT (2011) 15 taxmann.com 295 (Jaipur) 3) Anand Incubation Centre v CIT (E) (2017) 86 taxmann.com 250 (Jaipur – Trib.) 4) Badri Narain Kanta Devi Katta Charitable Trust v CIT(E) (2019) 112 taxmann.com 299 (Jaipur – Trib.)

4.

We heard Ld. CIT(DR) and perused the record. We notice that the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) did not examine the details of activities carried on by the assessee. Further, it is the case of the assessee that it has complied with the conditions prescribed u/s 80G(5) of the Act. We notice that the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) did not examine

M/s. Madi Bai Raichandji Rathod Charitable Trust, Bengaluru

Page 3 of 3 whether the conditions prescribed u/s 80G(5) of the Act has been complied with by the assessee or not. Under these set of facts, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) was not justified in rejecting the application of the assessee without properly examining the documents filed by the assessee and also without examining compliance of conditions prescribed u/s 80G(5) of the Act. Accordingly, we are of the view that the application filed by the assessee seeking recognition u/s 80G of the Act needs to be examined afresh. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(Exemptions) and restore all the issues to his file with a direction to process the application of the assessee in accordance with law.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →