MITHILA KAWARIYA ASHRAM vs. C.I.T.(EXEMPTION),

PDF · subscribers
ITA 36/PAT/2016Status: DisposedITAT Patna08 March 20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Exemptions) did not provide specific material to support the rejection. Therefore, the matter was set aside and remanded back to the CIT(Exemptions) for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mithila Kawariya Aashram, applied for approval under Section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(Exemptions) rejected the application, stating that the provided documents did not establish the genuineness and alignment of the assessee's activities with its aims and objects.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Exemptions) was justified in rejecting the application for 80G approval without substantiating the reasons for deeming the activities as not genuine or not in accordance with the aims and objects.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(vi)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH, PATNA

For Respondent: Smt. Archana Sinha, Sr. S.C
Hearing: 08.03.2018Pronounced: 08.03.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH, PATNA Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. Amit Shukla, JM ITA No. 36/Pat./2016 : Asstt. Year : ITA No. 37/Pat./2016 : Asstt. Year : Mithila Kawariya Aashram, Vs Commissioner of Income Tax Tiwari Tola, Rajbara, Anchal- (Exemptions), Katoria, Dist. Banka (Bihar) Patna (Bihar) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AADAM2620A Assessee by : Sh. Shikesh Jha, Adv. Revenue by : Smt. Archana Sinha, Sr. S.C. Date of Hearing : 08.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 08.03.2018 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: These appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders each dated 05.02.2016 of ld. CIT(Exemptions), Patna.

2.

Since, the appeal relates to the same assessee which were heard together so these are being disposed off by this consolidated for the sake of convenience and brevity.

3.

At the first instance, we will deal with the appeal in ITA No. 36/Pat./2016. The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the rejection of application for grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the ld. CIT(E), Patna.

3.

Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application in Form No. 10G of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 for for

2 ITA No. 36 & 37/Pat./2016 Mithila Kawariya Aashram grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act on 01.10.2015. The ld. CIT(E) asked the assessee to furnish certain documents/papers. In response, the assessee furnished the requisite papers/documents on 04.02.2016. However, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application moved by the assessee for grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act by observing that the accompanying papers/documents furnished by the assessee failed to establish that the activities of the assessee society were according to its aims & objects and that its activities were genuine.

4.

Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(E) without specifying any particular items which was not in accordance with the aims & objects of the assessee society, was not justified in rejecting the application filed by the assessee for grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.

5.

In her rival submissions, the ld. Sr. Standing Counsel for the department supported the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(E).

6.

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee by observing that the papers/documents furnished by the assessee failed to establish that the activities were genuine and according to aims & objects of the assessee society. However, he has not brought any material on record to substantiate that how and in what manner the activities were not genuine or were not in accordance with the aims & objects of the assessee society. We, therefore, deem it

3 ITA No. 36 & 37/Pat./2016 Mithila Kawariya Aashram appropriate to set aside this issue back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and by considering all the documents furnished by the assessee.

7.

In ITA No.37/Pat./2016, the facts are similar to the facts involved in ITA No. 36/Pat./2016. Therefore, our findings given therein shall apply mutatis mutandis. In that view of the matter, this appeal is also restored to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 08/03/2018)

Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (N. K. Saini) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 08/03/2018 *Subodh* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5.DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

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 →