SRI RADHA GOVIND BHAJAN KUTIR SEVA TRUST,MATHURA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.109/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2025-26
Sri Radha Govind Bhajan Kutir Vs. CIT (Exemption), Seva Trust, Mohalla Jatvan, Lucknow. Thakur Dham Colony, VPO Radhakund, Mathura PAN : AAVTS6985R (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. M.M. Agarwal, C.A. Department by Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT/DR
Date of hearing 23.04.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.04.2025
ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been directed against the order dated 18.12.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Lucknow
(hereinafter referred as “CIT(E), whereby he has rejected assessee’s application moved u/s. 80G(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as “Act”).
Assessee has filed this appeal on the ground that learned CIT(E) has erred in rejecting assessee’s application for approval u/s. 80G(5) of the Act,
ITA No. 109/Agr/2025
ignoring the fact that all requisite details were furnished by the
appellant/assessee before learned CIT(E).
Perused the records and heard learned representative for assessee
and ld. Departmental representative for Revenue.
Learned representative for assessee has submitted that assessee
submitted all the documentary evidences with respect to various activities
related to the objects of the assessee trust. However, ld. CIT(E) wrongly
remarked that only part reply/documents were submitted by assessee
before him and hence, he could not verify the genuineness of the trust in
consonance with the objects of the trust. Ld. AR has drawn attention of this
Tribunal towards order dated 24.09.2021 wherein the assessee trust was
registered u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(i) for A.Y. 2022-23 to A.Y. 2026-27 after verifying
genuineness of all the activities related to the main objects of the trust.
Learned AR submitted to set aside the impugned order and allow the
appeal.
Learned DR has submitted that the assessee did not file supporting
documents before ld. CIT(E) who could not satisfy himself in respect of
genuineness of activities and supported the impugned order.
2 | P a g e
ITA No. 109/Agr/2025
It is noticed that the assessee trust was registered on 24.09.2021 u/s.
12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act vide copy of order for registration at page 25 of
assessee’s paper book. It also appears that assessee filed reply dated
04.11.2024 in response to the notice dated 11.10.2024 issued by ld. CIT(E)
submitting required details asked for. We notice that the impugned order
reiterates at para-4 the objects of the trust.
It appears from the impugned order that ld. CIT(E) has mainly
mentioned that he is unable to arrive at the satisfaction about charitable
nature of the activities for want of bills, vouchers, photos, affiliation license,
fire NOC and news coverage by media etc. so as to substantiate charitable
activities claimed to have carried out by assessee trust for the recent
past/last three years, for which expenditure has been booked in the income
and expenditure account of the relevant years. It appears that the trust was
registered u/s. 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act on 24.09.2021 after the satisfaction
that said charitable activities were being carried out at that time. Hence, in
such circumstances, we deem it just and appropriate to afford
appellant/assessee an opportunity to file the aforesaid pointed
documentary evidences before ld. CIT(E) and make submissions afresh in
respect of the activities of the trust with reference to the objects of the trust.
Learned CIT(E) is directed to pass order afresh on merits after considering
3 | P a g e
ITA No. 109/Agr/2025
the additional documentary evidences and the submissions, if made by the
assessee. Needless to say that the principles of natural justice shall be
substantially complied with by ld. CIT(E). Appeal is accordingly allowed.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes. We restore the matter to ld. CIT(E) for passing the order afresh
in the light of above observations.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2025.
Sd/- Sd/-
(BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.04.2025 *aks/-
