Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]
2 W.B. Academy of Echocardiography failed to carry out any activity which is covered by section 2 (15) of the Act. Therefore, he was not satisfied that the assessee society is genuinely engaged in any public charitable activity as per the stated objects. Hence, he rejected the application for grant of registration u/s. 12AA of the Act. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(E) has also rejected the application of assessee u/s. 80(G)(5)(vi) of the Act as he rejected the application of assessee for grant of registration u/s. 12AA of the Act. Aggrieved against the orders of CIT(E) on both the issues, assessee came in appeals before Tribunal.
We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. After hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the order of Ld. CIT(E), we are of the opinion that sofaras grant of registration u/s.12AA of the Act is concerned, Ld. CIT(E)’s jurisdiction is only to verify the objects of the institution and genuinity of the activities, meaning thereby that he has to satisfy himself that the objects are charitable in nature and the activities being carried on or to be carried on are genuine, meaning thereby that they are in consonance for achieving of charitable object and nothing else. Since we do not find any such ground in the order of Ld. CIT(E), the order passed by him is so set aside and the same is remitted back to his file for fresh consideration, as per law. Needless to say that assessee must be given adequate opportunity before passing the order in accordance to law These appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.