LAKSH EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. DIT (E), MUMBAI

During hearing of this appeal, nobody was present for the assessee, whereas, Shri R.P. Meena, Ld. CIT-DR, was present for the Revenue, It is seen that the assessee filed this appeal on 17/10/2012 and on various dates, the Bench was not functioning, however, registered notices for hearing were issued to the assessee. On 29/06/2015, 18/01/2016, 17/05/2016, 23/06/2016 and 17/01/2017, the assessee did not appear before this Tribunal. Today also, the assessee neither presented itself nor moved adjournment petition. One of the registered notice issued to the assessee was returned by the postal authorities. Various registered notices were issued to the assessee to which, there was no response from the assessee. The assessee has neither moved any new address before the registry of the Tribunal nor represented itself. It seems that the assessee has nothing to say, therefore, we have no option but to proceed ex- parte, qua the assessee and dispose off this appeal on the basis of material available on record. Shri R.P. Meena, Ld. CIT-DR, strongly defended the impugned order.

2.1. We have considered the submissions of Ld. CIT-DR and perused the material available on record. The facts, in brief, are that the assessee moved application on Form No.10A on 07/03/2012, in the office of the Ld. DIT(E). A notices dated 08/06/2012 was sent to the assessee to furnish certain details as is evident from para-2 of the impugned order. The managing trustee attended the office and filed certain submissions. On perusal of the audited accounts, it was found that the assessee received donation to the tune of Rs.6,77,000/-, fee income, expenses etc as is mentioned in para-3 of the impugned order. It was observed by the Ld. DIT(E) that the assessee trust was charging yearly fee of Rs.10,800/- (after 10% discount)from the children of play group and Rs.12,960/- for the nursery students (after 10% discount) from the students of junior K.G. and Senior K.G. The assessee trust was also charging additional fee of Rs.1000/-, per child for school kit/uniform. The Ld. DIT(E) relied upon the decision from Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust vs CIT (101 ITR 234 (SC) and section 2(1) of the Act. It was found that the assessee trust does not fulfil the mandatory requirement prescribed u/s 12AA read with rule 17A and consequently, the application for registration was rejected. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Before coming to any conclusion, we are of the view that at least the assessee was expected to before this Tribunal. As mentioned earlier, the assessee did not appear, one of the registered notice, sent to the assessee was returned back by the postal authorities. For remaining notices/registered notices, the assessee did not appear. The factual finding recorded in the order of the Ld. DIT(E) was neither controverted by the assessee nor any written submissions were filed. Therefore, in the absence of any effective representation/explanation from the assessee, we affirm the conclusion drawn in the impugned order.