M/S. SHREE NITAI GAURA HARI SANKIRTAN MANDAL TRUST,GHAZIABAD vs. CIT, GHAZIABAD

The only grievance of the assessee in this appeal relates to the rejection of application u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the application in Form No. 10A for grant of registration u/s 12AA of the Act on 12.02.2014. The assessee trust has been created on 19.05.2011, having the main objective of organizing Kirtan 2 Shree Nitai Gaura Hari Sankirtan Mandal Trust programs and spreading the teachings of Lord Shri Chaitanya Maha Prabhu through Sankirtan. The ld. CIT asked the Additional CIT, Range-2, Ghaziabad who held the jurisdiction over the case to ascertain the genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust. The assessee when asked by the Additional CIT, furnished certain details and documents. Thereafter the Additional CIT in his report stated that the assessee was performing only activities of kirtan & puja and there had been no expenditure on providing food, medicine or assistance in any shape to the poor and the needy. The ld. CIT also deputed one Income Tax Inspector to verify the activities of the assessee. The Income Tax Inspector furnished the report on the basis of which the ld. CIT held that the assessee was carrying out activities of Sankirtan but the said activity did not qualify in the nature of charitable activities. He accordingly rejected the application moved by the assessee for seeking the registration u/s 12AA of the Act.

Being aggrieved the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Income Tax Inspector visited only on the registered office and had given one sided report. It was further stated that most of the charitable activities are carried out by the assessee from the Ashram situated at Attall Chungi Kamra Van Shree Dham Vrindavan which was never visited for verification of charitable 3 Shree Nitai Gaura Hari Sankirtan Mandal Trust activities by the Income Tax Inspector. In support of the above contention, a reference was made to page nos. 43 to 83 of the assessee’s paper book. It was further stated that the assessee was running a Charitable Hospital at Ashram since long for medical treatment of the poor and needed person by distribution of free medicine. A reference was made to page nos. 97 to 109 of the assessee’s paper book. It was further stated that the assessee was also running the Yoga Classes, reference was made to page no. 94 of the assessee’s papper book. It was accordingly submitted that the activities undertaken by the assessee are charitable in nature but the ld. CIT did not appreciate the facts in right prospective and rejected the registration u/s 12AA of the Act.

In her rival submissions the ld. CIT DR supported the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT and submitted that performing the activities of kirtan & puja is not sufficient to hold that the assessee was engaged in the charitable activities.

We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case, it appears that certain documents which are now furnished by the assessee relating to the charitable activities performed at Ashram situated at Vrindavan where medical treatment of the poor and needed person was claimed to be done, were not before the ld. CIT. In the present case, it also appears that the Income Tax Inspector had not 4 Shree Nitai Gaura Hari Sankirtan Mandal Trust visited the place at Vrindavan from where charitable activities are claimed to have been undertaken by the assessee. In our opinion, in such type of cases the ld. CIT is required to see as to whether the activities and objectives of the assessee are charitable in nature or not. We, therefore, considering the totality of the facts deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the file of the ld. CIT to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within 6 months after receiving this order.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 24/09/2015)