M/S KRIYA YOGA DHYANA KENDRA,PALAKKAD vs. CIT EXEMPTIONS, KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 329/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2020-21Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that communication gaps could not be ruled out and decided to allow the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes. The case was remanded to the CIT (Exemption) for reconsideration with effective opportunities for hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 80G was rejected by the CIT (Exemption) for failing to furnish complete details and supporting evidence. The CIT noted deficiencies in mandatory clauses like area of operation, amendment, and dissolution.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT (Exemption) correctly rejected the Section 80G application without affording sufficient opportunities for the assessee to provide complete documentation and rectify deficiencies in the trust deed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 12AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Ms. Krishna K, Advocate
For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Hearing: 16.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2020-21 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/EXM/F/41/2019- 20/1020638369(1) dated 18.11.2019 rejecting its section 80G application u/s. 12AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") vide following detailed discussion: - “In response to the Hearing Notice vide DIN No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXN43/2922- 23/104981427(1) dated 16/02/2023 the applicant had not furnished the details/supporting evidences fully as requested for verification of the genuineness of the activities of the trust/society/institution. On verification of the documents submitted by the applicant, it is seen that the mandatory clauses such as area of operation, amendment, dissolution clause are not in proper manner.

Kriya Yoga Dhyana Kendra In view of the facts and circumstances as above, this application in Form 10 AB submitted by you for renewal of registration U/s 80G(5)(ii) is rejected.”

2.

It is sufficiently clear from a perusal of the CIT (Exemption)’s order that he has quoted the assessee’s failure in filing all the relevant details in the corresponding registration proceedings. Faced with this situation, the assessee’s case is that all the relevant evidences stand duly compiled, which will be produced before the learned CIT (Exemption)’s consideration in case one more effective innings is granted.

3.

Learned CIT-DR vehemently opposed the assessee’s request on the ground that the CIT (Exemption) herein had already afforded various opportunities and, therefore, this impugned order deserves to be upheld.

4.

We have considered the foregoing vehement rival stands and deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice that once various communication gaps in such an instance of section 80G proceedings could not be altogether ruled-out, the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground deserves to be reconsidered by the learned CIT (Exemption) preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. We order accordingly subject to a rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove in consequential proceedings.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →