IMDAD,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(E), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4918/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 July 20185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(E) for reconsideration. The assessee was given an opportunity to present its case and furnish documentary evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee society applied for approval under Section 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) refused approval because the assessee could not provide conclusive evidence of donors for substantial donations received and because the entire amount received was further donated to other societies.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) was justified in refusing approval under Section 80G(5)(vi) due to lack of conclusive evidence of donors and the nature of subsequent donations. Whether the assessee was provided with adequate opportunity to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(vi),Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N.K. SAINI & SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA

For Appellant: Shri W.A. Khan, Adv
For Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR
Hearing: 31.07.2018Pronounced: 31.07.2018

PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, J.M. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 28.05.2015 passed by the Ld. CIT (E), New Delhi

wherein, vide the impugned order, the Ld. CIT (E) has refused

grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") to the assessee society.

2.

Admittedly, the assessee society enjoys registration u/s 12A

of the Act w.e.f. 17.07.2014. The application for grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) has been refused on the ground that the 1 assessee had received donations of Rs. 1,11,000/- each from 36

parties and when the Ld. CIT (E) required the assessee society to give conclusive evidence of donors, the assessee society could not provide confirmation even from a single donor. The Ld. CIT (E)

has also noted that on perusal of the accounts of the assessee

society for the year ending 31.3.2014, it is revealed that an amount of Rs. 33,43,734/- i.e. almost the entire amount had been further donated to other societies. The Ld. CIT (E) was of the opinion that the genuineness of the charitable activities could

not be verified.

3.

The Ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has submitted that the assessee had provided complete details of the agent through whom the donations were received along with the PAN and affidavits of the 36 donors. It was submitted that these

evidences can be directed to be re-examined by the Ld. CIT (E) if so required. It was also submitted that making donation to societies having similar objects was covered by the object clause

of the assessee society and, therefore, the same also would not be a valid ground for refusal of approval u/s 80G of the Act.

4.

In response, the Ld. CIT DR submitted that adequate

opportunity had already been given by the Ld. CIT (E) but the 2 assessee had failed to furnish the documentary evidences. It was also submitted that since the entire donation received had been donated to other societies, no charitable activity had been carried

out by the assessee and, therefore, it was not a fit case for grant

of recognition u/s 80G(5) of the Act. The Ld. CIT DR placed

reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the 232 ITR 11 (Del) and of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the (All) wherein the Hon’ble Courts had held that approval u/s 80G

could not be granted unless carrying out of charitable activity is clearly demonstrated.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the submissions of the Ld.

AR that the documentary evidences will be furnished before the Ld. CIT (E) if an opportunity for the same is given, in the interest

of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the Ld.

CIT (E) to reconsider the application of the and, thereafter, pass

the order in accordance with law. Needless to say, the assessee

will be afforded proper opportunity to present its case.

3

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 31st July, 2018. (N.K. SAINI) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 31st JULY, 2018 ‘GS’

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 →