DREAMPATH FOUNDATION,BANGALORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 892/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 June 2019AY 2018-194 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) did not pass a speaking order while rejecting the application. Therefore, the order was set aside, and the application was to be examined afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dreampath Foundation, filed an application seeking recognition under Section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) rejected this application.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection order passed by the CIT(E) was a speaking order. The need for a fresh examination of the assessee's application for 80G recognition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(vi),Section 80G(5)(iv)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI N.V VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDNET & SHRI B.R BASKARAN

For Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT
Hearing: 26.06.2019Pronounced: 26.06.2019

O R D E R Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 22/1/2018 passed by ld CIT(E), Bengaluru rejecting the application filed by the assessee seeking recognition u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee even though the assesee has been informed about today’s date of hearing on the last occasion. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte without the presence of the assessee.

3.

We have heard the ld DR and perused the record. The assessee is a trust and it filed an application seeking recognition u/s 80G of the Act before ld CIT(E). However, the ld CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee by observing that the trust is still in infant stage and further the applicant has not furnished sufficient detail or proof on the activities of the trust. However from the grounds of appeal furnished by the assessee, we noticed that the assessee has claimed to have filed a Note on the activities of the trust along with the photographs of events conducted and sample copies of the booklets published by the trust. We noticed that the ld CIT(E) has not discussed anything about details furnished by the assessee and on the contrary, the ld CIT(E) has observed that the assessee has not furnished sufficient details, i.e., the Ld CIT(E) has not spelt as to how the details furnished by the assessee are not sufficient to prove the activities carried on by the assessee trust.

4.

Under the set of facts we are of the view that the ld CIT(E) has not passed a speaking order while rejecting the application of the assessee. Accordingly we are of the view that the application of the assessee needs to be examined afresh by duly considering the details of the activities furnished by the assessee. Accordingly we set aside the order passed by the ld CIT(E) with the direction to examine the application of the assessee afresh in accordance sec.

80G(5)(iv) read with Rule 11AA of I.T Rules, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26th June, 2019.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(vi)

All 260 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →