Loading judgment…
Facts
The applicant sought approval under Section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application on grounds of the trust being for the benefit of a specific community, not eligible under 80G(5)(B), and non-genuineness of activities. The applicant admitted to making a mistake in ticking the wrong column for new trusts instead of existing ones.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the applicant had already been granted approval under Section 80G(5) and had a registration under Section 12. However, deficiencies in providing details regarding the genuineness of activities were observed. The Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the applicant is eligible for approval under Section 80G when genuineness of activities and compliance with procedural requirements are in question, despite prior registration under Section 12.
Sections Cited
80G(5)(iii), 80G(5B), 80G, 12, 80G(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A-Bench” JAIPUR
Before: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 191/JPR/2025 Shri Digamber Jain Atiksha Keshtra cuke
lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 29/07/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: : 30/07/2025 vkns'k@ORDER Per: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER .
On 25.12.2024, Learned CIT(E) rejected the application furnished by the applicant seeking approval u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). It came to be rejected on the following three grounds :- Meant express for benefit of Jain religious community violating section 80G(5))iii).
Shri Digamber Jain Atiksha Keshtra Padampur, Jaipur Religious Trust are not eligible u/s 80G(5)(B)/violation of section 80G(5B)/ Non-Genuineness of activities. Feeling aggrieved by the rejection of approval, applicant is before this Appellate Tribunal.
2. Arguments heard. File perused.
3. Ld. AR for the appellant has only submitted that the application u/s 80G of the Act was not submitted to Learned CIT(E) under the relevant provision of law, and that applicant to proposes to file an application before Learned CIT(E) under the relevant provision of law.
4. In the written arguments, ld. AR for the applicant has submitted that the applicant-appellant has already been granted approval under clause (i) of Fourth proviso to 80G(5) of the Act, and that while furnishing application, which stands rejected, column meant for new trusts applying for the first time for approval was ticked, instead of the column meant for the trusts who have already been granted approval. Inadvertance is pleaded in this regard.
5. Learned AR has submitted that the appellant already stood registered u/s 12 of the Act.
Shri Digamber Jain Atiksha Keshtra Padampur, Jaipur As is available from the impugned order, online application submitted in Form no. 10AB was uploaded for seeking approval u/s 80G of the Act. In the course of arguments, Ld. AR for the appellant has candidly admitted that during pendency of the said application no request was made before Learned CIT(E) for rectification of the application u/s 80G of the Act, so as to seek relief under the relevant provision.
A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that while adjudicating on the issue of genuineness of activities of the applicant-appellant, Learned CIT(E) called upon the applicant-appellant to reply as regards certain queries which find mentioned at page 11 and 12 of the said order. When the applicant-appellant furnished reply to the show cause notice dated 01.12.2024, Learned CIT(E), after going through the material made available, observed as under:- “1. Except of ledger account of Preservation of Artistic/ Historical exp, Krishi Oopwan exp., Mela Utsav exp. and electricity exp. (wherein only cash and amount shown), not furnished any details of expenses/ activities like, bill/ voucher, payment details. Therefore, in absence of bills/vouchers of expenses the genuineness of activities is not proved.
Not furnish details for transaction more than Rs. 20,000/- in order to verify the nature of debit and credit entries. Thus, the nature of entries in bank account is unverified and activities do not seem genuine.
Neither furnished details of activities nor furnish details of beneficiaries as asked.
Not furnished details of salary like what work done by these employees as asked, thus, same are seems not genuine.
Not furnished details of repair & maintenance exp as asked.
Shri Digamber Jain Atiksha Keshtra Padampur, Jaipur 6. Neither furnish details of printing & TV telecast exp nor furnish pamphlet of printing and video of such telecast as asked, thus same are unproved. 7. Not furnished annual accounts for the F.Y. 2023-24 & 2024-25, thus not confirm whether what actually done in subsequent years. 8. Not furnished details of payment made to 13(3) persons.”
Ld. AR for the appellant submits that in case another opportunity is provided to the applicant-appellant to comply with all the directions of Learned CIT(E), the applicant shall comply with all directions so issued.
File reveals that notices dated 06.09.2024 and 01.12.2024 were issued to the applicant-appellant, but, still the applicant-appellant failed to furnish the above mentioned details/documents.
Keeping in view that the applicant-appellant stands already registered u/s 12, and deficiencies pointed out by Learned CIT(E) could not be removed as observed in the impugned order, for the purpose of approval under relevant provision of section 80G of the Act, we deem it a fit case to remand the matter to Learned CIT(E) for decision afresh. Result 10. As a result, in view of the above discussion and findings, the appeal is disposed of, for statistical purposes, and application u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act is restored to the files of Learned CIT(E) to its original number, Learned Shri Digamber Jain Atiksha Keshtra Padampur, Jaipur CIT(E) to dispose of the same afresh, in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the applicant.