SHRI SALASAR SATSANG PARIWAR,BELGAVI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 282/PAN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 July 2023AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the CIT(E)'s order to be non-speaking and restored the matter back to the CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. This was done in the interest of justice, considering the subsequent registrations obtained by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee applied for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(E) rejected the application citing a lack of noticeable charitable activities. However, the assessee later obtained 12AA registration and subsequent 80G registration.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(E) order rejecting the 80G application was justified, and if the subsequent registrations impact the decision for the intervening period.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G(5)(vi)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH : PANAJI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

Hearing: 14.07.2023Pronounced: 18.07.2023

BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.282/PAN./2019 Assessment Year 2018-2019 Shree Salasar Satsang The Commissioner of Pariwar, Shop No.9, CTS Income Tax (Exemptions), No.774, Shivkamal Complex, 6th Floor, Unity Building Sonal Galli Corner, Vadgaon, vs., Annex, P. Kalinga Rao Belagavi – 590 005 Road, Bengaluru. Karnataka PIN – 560 027. PAN AASTS9884L (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Pramod Y Vaidya For Revenue : Shri N. Shrikanth Date of Hearing : 14.07.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018- 2019, arise against the CIT(E), Bengaluru’s Order F.No.66/CIT(E)/BLR/80G/TRO(E)/19-20, dated 27.09.2019, involving proceedings u/s. 80G(5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance seeking sec.80G(5) registration, we note that the CIT(E),

2 ITA.No.282/PAN./2019 Bengaluru has not passed his totally non-speaking order which reads as under :

“In this case the trust had applied for grant of recognition u/s 80G of the Income Tax Act of 1961 on 29/03/2019.

The details submitted are verified. As verified from the documents and financials submitted, there are no noticeable charitable activities as on date from the date of formation of trust. Hence, in the absence of no noticeable charitable activities, the genuineness of the charitable activity could not be examined to decide to grant recognition u/s 80G of the I T Act. Hence, there is no option but to reject the application for grant of recognition u/s 80G (5)(vi) of the JT Act 1961, as not eligible. In this connection reliance is placed on the following Decisions:-

2.

Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Self Employers Institution Vs CIT reported in 247 ITR 18 has held that where there is no material before the Commissioner to be satisfied of the genuineness of the activities of the trust is a valid reason for rejection.

Accordingly, the application for recognition u/s 80G (5) (vi) of the Income Tax Act 1961 is hereby rejected.

3 ITA.No.282/PAN./2019 3. Learned counsel representing assessee inter alia has filed before us CIT(E) order(s) itself granting 12AA registration dated 21.12.2018, dated 15.03.2022 allowing sec.12AB relief as well as sec.80G registration dated 28.10.2022 as well. His case therefore, is that the assessee’s impugned substantive grievance is restricted only to the intervening period which has been claimed vide corresponding application dated 29.03.2019 filed before the CIT(E).

4.

Faced with this situation and in light of the fact that the CIT(E) impugned order is totally a non-speaking one, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant substantive grievance back to him in larger interest of justice for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 18.07.2023.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 80G(5)(vi)

All 260 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G(5)(vi) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →