RATNAWALI GAUSHALA ANAND DHAM,FAGI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD - 1 ,JAIPUR, JAIPUR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR
Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k
BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 92/JPR/2025
fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20
Ward-1,
Jaipur.
LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACAR9491B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Adv.
jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by : Shri Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing
: 12/08/2025
mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 26/09/2025
vkns'k@ORDER
PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT (A),
National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 25.11.2024 passed under section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
“1.1 The impugned intimation/assessment order u/s 143(1) dt. 17.02.2021 is bad in law, illegal, invalid, void ab-initio on facts of the case, for want of juri iction, and also barred by limitation and various other reasons and hence the same may kindly be quashed.
2
Ratnawali Gaushala Anand Dham, Jaipur.
2 The ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred on law as well as on the facts of the case in passing the exparty order in gross breach of law, without providing the adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also erred in not considering the true material and facts. Hence the order so passed and the additions/disallowance so made may kindly be deleted in full.
Rs. 97,37285/-: The ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 97,37,285/- made by the ld. AO by disallowing the entire expenses or revenue expenses of Rs. 1,01,49,790/- i.e. grossly erred in taking the entire gross receipts of Rs. 1,01,49,790/- as income or receipts in place of deficit of Rs. 4,12,5054/- and not allowed the exemption u/s 11 and 12. Hence the addition/disallowance so made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) is being totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts on the record and hence same may kindly be deleted in full.
1 The ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the action of the ld. AO in not allowing the exemption u/s 11 and 12 so denied by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) is being totally contrary to the provisions oflaw and facts on the record and hence same may kindly be directed to allow the same and addition be deleted in full.
2 Alternatively and without prejudice to above the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the action of the ld. AO in treating the assessee as an AOP in place of trust, however, if the AO has treated the assessee as an AOP then there is no question of making the addition of Rs. 97,37,285/- by applying the provision section u/s 11 and 12. Hence either exemption/claim u/s 11 and 12 so denied by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) is allowed if not allowed then the disallowance may kindly be deleted in full being an AOP not applicable provisions of section 11 and 12 and hence additions may kindly be deleted in full.
The ld. AO has grossly erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in charging interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C.The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest so charged being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, may kindly be deleted in full.
The appellant prays your honour indulgences to add, amend or alter of any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.”
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee Ratnawali Gaushala Anand Dham is a Public Charitable Society incorporated for the welfare and maintenance of astray/sick/old Cows and to provide protection to them following the old vedic
3
Ratnawali Gaushala Anand Dham, Jaipur.
tradition of India where cows were worshipped as mothers. The members have no vested interest or benefits in the society. Assessee has filed its Return of Income for assessment year 2019-20 declaring the total income of Rs. NIL on 31.10.2019, which was processed by the CPC under section 143(1) of the IT Act, 1961. The case was selected through compulsory scrutiny for the reason that registration/approval under various sections of I.T. Act, 1961 have not been granted or have been cancelled/withdrawn. Accordingly, a notice under section 143(2) of the IT Act, 1961 was issued to the assessee on 29.09.2019 which was e- mailed to the assessee on its mailing address. During the assessment proceedings, notice under section 142(1) of the IT Act, 1961 was issued on 21.01.2021. No submission has been made by the assessee. As per return of income filed, assessee has shown gross receipts of total income at Rs. 97,37,285/- and applied total income at Rs. 1,01,49,790/-. Thus, there was an excess application of income at Rs. 4,12,505/-. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee was asked to furnish the audit report in Form 10B and also to furnish copy of the registration under section 12A/12AA, in view of exemption claimed under section 11 as there was a taxable income at its end. Further, the assessee was asked to explain as to why the exemption claimed under section 11 may not be disallowed in view of the above. As the appellant failed to make any such submission with supporting proofs as needed as called for by 05.02.2021, the exemption so claimed under 4
Ratnawali Gaushala Anand Dham, Jaipur.
section 11 of the IT Act, 1961 was disallowed by the AO for the reasons discussed by the AO in his order. Thus, the AO assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 97,37,285/- vide his order dated 17.02.2021. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (Appeals). The ld. CIT (A) observed that the assessee was non-responsive during scrutiny before the AO and could not produce any such proof to adduce the claim of exemption under section 11 and 12 of IT Act, 1961 as reasoned in detail by the AO in the assessment order for AY 2019-20. The ld. CIT (A) further observed that it is clear that the appellant is not having valid registration u/s 12A or 12AA of the IT Act, as applicable for the assessment year 2019-20 and AY 2020-21 as needed as per the amended provision of IT Act to trust as applicable from assessment year 2018-19 onwards etc., all these finer facts as involving appellant clear failure, having no proof of such valid registration as filed before AO as available for its consideration as per law. Accordingly, ld. CIT
(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee as not maintainable.
Now, aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT (A), the assessee has come in appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds reproduced herein above.
At the time of hearing before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee submitted his written submission as under :-
5
Ratnawali Gaushala Anand Dham, Jaipur.
“1. Correct facts not considered in their true perspective and sense: At the very outset we would like to bring the correct facts and submission which have not been considered by the lower authorities in their true perspective and sense despite available on record. As the assessee is a Public Charitable Society incorporated for the welfare and maintenance of astray/sick/old Cows and to provide protection to them following the old vedic tradition of India where cows were worshipped as mothers. The members have no vested interest or benefits in the society.
The society does not carryon any business/commercialactivities nor alleged so by the lower authorities. In pursuance of its charitable activities by wayof Gaushala, the societyreceives five products from the cows milk, ghee, yogurt, cowdung/Gobar Khad, and cowurine. These five products, arecalled pancha-gavya, are alsorequired in all ritualisticceremonies performedaccording to the Vedicdirections. The society sellsthese products to meet out thecost of the Gaushala and itsobjectives for which it was made or created.Besides thesethe society alsoreceives the donation andcontribution from public as wellas from the founder andmembers of the society andsubsidy from the Government.
The society is registeredunder the Rajasthan SocietiesRegistration Act, 1958 with the