BOMBAY VISHA NAGAR VANIK CASTE FUND,MUMBAI vs. DIT (E), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5833/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 October 20163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the Director's order, restoring the case for fresh adjudication. The appellant was directed to submit original documents to clarify the trust's name and formation date.

What were the facts?

The Director of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected the appellant's application for registration citing discrepancies in the trust's name and formation date. The appellant argued that these were technicalities and the trust had been operating since 1880.

What were the issues?

Whether registration can be denied solely on technical discrepancies in the trust's name and formation date, and if the assessee should be given an opportunity to rectify such issues.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “B” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI JOGINDER SINGH & SHRI N.K. PRADHAN

For Appellant: Mr. H.N.Motiwalla
For Respondent: Mr. N.P.Singh, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 27/10/2016Pronounced: 27/10/2016

ORDER PER N.K.PRADHAN, AM:

The captioned appeal is directed against the order u/s 12AA(1)(b)(ii) r.w.s. 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) passed by the Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts which are essential for adjudication of this appeal are that the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) rejected the application for grant of registration of the appellant on the ground that the latter failed to furnish the relevant documents and materials before him in respect of difference in the name of the applicant trust as well as its formation.

3.

The ld counsel of the applicant trust submits that the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) failed to appreciate that the trust was established on October 22, 1880 and carried on charitable activities since then. He further submits that the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in refusing the registration only on technical irregularities particularly when the trust was assessed under 1922 Act and thereafter having PAN AAATB5212F.

4.

The ld. DR supports the order passed by the Director of Income Tax (Exemption).

5.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The dispute in the instant case is the prima facie difference in the name of the applicant and the date of formation of the trust. On a specific query from the Bench, the ld. counsel of the applicant submits that he is now in a position to file the original documents to clarify the name of the trust as well as its date of formation. In view of the above, we set aside the above order of the Director of Income Tax (Exemption) and restore the case to him to decide it afresh as per the provisions of the Act after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the applicant trust. The applicant trust is directed to file the relevant documents before the Director of Income Tax (Exemption).

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27 /10/2016

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →