No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
आदेश / ORDER
PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is emanating out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax –I, Pune dt.07.11.2014 passed u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The relevant facts as culled out from the material on record are as under :-
Assessee is a Trust which is stated to be formed on 10.10.2010 and registered by the Asst.Charity Commissioner,
Ahmednagar. Assessee made an application in form 10G to the CIT-
I, Pune for seeking approval u/s 80G(5) of the I.T Act. The request
for approval u/s 80G(5) was rejected by Ld.CIT vide order
dt.07.11.2014 for the following reasons :
(1) Assessee had failed to file the notice of accumulation
of income before the AO.
(2) With regard to e-bus facility, though the assessee
had provided the names of students to whom the
computer education was provided through e-bus
facility but no log book for the journeys performed
was produced, no details in respect of eye check-up
camps that were held by the assessee jointly with the
Trust and colleges were furnished.
He accordingly rejected the request of approval of under Sec.80G of
the Act. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT, assessee is now in
appeal before us and has raised the following grounds :
“1. That the rejection order passed u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act, is against the law and to the facts of the case. 2. That the Ld.CIT was further wrong for not appearing that the appellant society is already registered u/s 12A(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for doing charitable activities and also fulfil the conditions laid down u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act. 3. That the rejection order passed u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act is further bad in law, as no reasonable and proper opportunity was properly afforded to the appellant society to present their case before the Ld.CIT.”
Before us, Ld.A.R. reiterated the submissions made before AO
and Ld.CIT and further submitted that while considering the
approval under 80G of the Act, the enquiry should be confined to
finding out if the Institute satisfies the prescribed conditions
mentioned therein. He further submitted that as far as the aspect
of application of income is concerned, it has to be examined by the
AO at the time of framing assessment. He further submitted that
assessee has been granted approval u/s 12A of the Act and the same
is not withdrawn. He therefore submitted that Ld.CIT has wrongly
denied the registration and prayed that assessee be granted approval
u/s 80G of the Act. Ld.D.R. on the other hand, supported the order
of Ld.CIT.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material
on record. The issue in the present case is with respect to rejecting
the request of assessee for registration of Trust u/s 80G of the Act.
Before us, it is assessee’s submission that it is registered u/s 12A of
the Act and the approval has not been withdrawn. The aforesaid
submission of the assessee has not been controverted by the
Revenue. We find that Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in
the case of Sonepat Hindu Educational and Charitable Society Vs.
CIT (2005) 278 ITR 262 (P&H) has held that Registration of an
Institution u/s 12A of the Act is sufficient proof of it being
established for charitable purposes. It further held that in
continuing the purpose of the Trust for the purposes of approval
u/s 80G of the Act, it is important to find out the real purpose of
establishing the Trust rather than just relying on the objects,
memorandum and articles of the Trust Deed of the Trust. It further
observed that if Commissioner of Income Tax is satisfied that the
objects of the Trust are charitable, approval should not be denied on
mere technicalities.
Further it is a settled position of law that at the time of
granting approval u/s 80G of the Act, what is to be examined is the
object of the Trust and so far as the aspect of income is concerned,
same can be very well examined by the AO at the time of framing
assessment and for this proposition, we find support from the
decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Pujya
Shri Jalarambapa and Matushri Virbaima Chentable Trust reported
in (2015) 55 Taxmann. com 52 (Guj).
In view of the aforesaid facts and relying on the decisions cited
hereinabove, we are of the view that Commissioner of Income Tax
was not justified in refusing the registration u/s 80G of the Act. We
therefore direct the Commissioner of Income Tax to grant
registration u/s 80G of the Act. Thus, the grounds of the assessee
are allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced on 10th day of January, 2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) �या�यक सद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 10th January, 2018. Yamini
आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. The CIT-I, Pune. 4. Joint CIT, Ahmednagar Range, Ahmednagar. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “ए” / DR, 5. ITAT, “A” Pune; 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,स �या // True Copy //
व�र�ठ �नजी स�चव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune.