Society of Jesus Mary Joseph of Raipur, Hyderabad v. DIT, Hyderabad

ITA 1360/HYD/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 136022514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAEAS6202R
Bench Hyderabad
Appeal Number ITA 1360/HYD/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant Society of Jesus Mary Joseph of Raipur, Hyderabad
Respondent DIT, Hyderabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 31-01-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 28-10-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. 1360/HYD/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR NIL M/S SOCIETY OF JESUS MARY JOSEPH OF RAIPUR ALER. (PAN AAEAS 6202 R) VS THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI E.S. RAGHUNATH RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AMLAN TRIPATHY O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS) HYDERABAD DAT ED 28.9.2010. 2. THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN IT S APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER PASSED U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT BY THE DIT(E) TO THE EXTENT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS CONTRARY TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE DIT(E) ERRED IN STATING THAT APPLICANT SOCIE TYS AIMS AND OBJECTIVES CAN BE SUMMED UP AS MIXED OBJECTIVES WHICH DO NOT E NTITLE THE SOCIETY FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 3. THE DIT(E) ERRED IN STATING THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY ARE NOT CHARITABLE NATURE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF S.2(15) OF THE ACT. 4. THE DIT(E) ERRED IN STATING THAT THE PRIMARY OBJ ECTIVE AS AFFIRMED IN THE AGREEMENTS CITED IN THE ORDER IS OF RELIGIOUS NATUR E WHILE OBSERVING THOUGH CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO HAVE CARRIED OUT ANY RELIGIOU S ACTIVITIES. 5. THE DIT(E) WHILE OBSERVING THAT THE SOCIETY HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY DETAILS RELATING TOP EXPENSES AND SOURCES OF FUNDS OF ITS A CTIVITIES BOTH RELIGIOUS AND NON RELIGIOUS HAS HELD THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF T HE SOCIETY ARE OF RELIGIOUS NATURE. ITA NO.1360/H/2010 THE SOCIETY OF JESUS MARY JOSEPH OF RAIPUR ALER 2 2 6. THE DIT(E) OUGHT TO HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE OBJEC TS STATED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION OF THE SOCIETY ARE EXCLUS IVELY OF CHARITABLE NATURE AS DEFINED IN S.2(15) OF THE ACT. 7. THE DIT(E) OUGHT TO HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE ACTIV ITIES STATED IN THE AGREEMENT REFERRED IN THE ORDER ARE NOT OF RELIGIOU S NATURE. 8. THE DIT(E) OUGHT TO HAVE OBSERVED THAT EVEN IF T HE ACTIVITIES STATED IN THE AGREEMENTS REFERRED IN THE ORDER ARE OF RELIGIOUS N ATURE STILL THE SOCIETY IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S12AA OF THE IT ACT. 2. IN THE NUTSHELL THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT 1961 ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETYS OBJECTS ARE MIXED ONE AS CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE E VIDENCE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 1 2AA OF THE ACT VIDE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A. THE LEARNED COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE WHOLE ISSUE REVOLVES AROUND A SI NGLE POINT WHETHER A TRUST/SOCIETY WHOSE OBJECTS ARE PARTLY RELIGIOUS AN D PARTLY CHARITABLE IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST MADE APP LICATION IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM AND IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER TO THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION U/ S 12AA. HE SUBMITTED THAT CARRYING OUT OF CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOU S ACTIVITIES DO NOT DISENTITLE THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA O F THE ACT. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE DIT(E) HYDERABAD WRONGLY OBSERVED THAT TH E TRUST WAS NOT COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 2(15) OF THE ACT. TO SUPPORT HIS CASE THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF ITA NO.1360/H/2010 THE SOCIETY OF JESUS MARY JOSEPH OF RAIPUR ALER 3 3 THIS TRIBUNAL B BENCH DATED 26.10.2010 IN ITA NO .352/H/2010 IN THE CASE OF REHOBOTH MISSION HYDERABAD WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT A TRUST CAN EITHER BE FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES OR FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR IT CAN BE FOR BOTH. ONLY A TRUST WHICH IS FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSE IS EXCLUDED AND DEBARRED FROM REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. A TRUST WHO SE OBJECT IS CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS IS NOT DEBARRED FROM REGISTRAT ION 4. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPR ESENTATIVE STRONGLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E). 5. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF THE S.12A A OF THE ACT. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE LANGUAGE OF THIS PROVISION TO SUG GEST THAT AN INSTITUTION OF MIXED OBJECTS IS PRECLUDED FROM GETTING REGISTRATIO N U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST IN QUEST ION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON NO NON-CHARITABLE OR NON-RELIGIOUS ACTI VITIES. WE PLACE RELIANCE ON THE JUDGEMENT OF ACIT V. BARKATE SAIFIYAH SOCIE TY 213 ITR 492 (GUJ) AND CIT V. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST 294 AITR 86 ( G UJ) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT A TRUST CAN EITHER BE FOR RELIGIOUS PURPO SES OR FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR IT CAN BE FOR BOTH. ONLY A TRUST WHICH IS FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSE IS EXCLUDED AND DEBARRED FROM REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. A TRUST WHOSE OBJECT IS CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS IS NOT DEBARRED FROM REGISTRATION. FURTHER IN THE CASE OF NEW LIFE IN CHRIST EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION V. CIT & OTHERS 246 ITR 532 (MAD) WHER EIN IT WAS HELD THAT FOR GRANTING OR REFUSING REGISTRATION U/S 12A IN RE LATION TO SUCH TRUST THE ONLY CONDITION PRECEDENT IS THAT AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION SHOULD BE ITA NO.1360/H/2010 THE SOCIETY OF JESUS MARY JOSEPH OF RAIPUR ALER 4 4 MADE IN TIME AND THE ACCOUNTS OF THE INSTITUTE SHOU LD BE AUDITED. ONLY ENQUIRY ABOUT OBJECTS OF THE TRUST CAN BE MADE U/S 12A OF THE ACT. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE JUDGEMENTS CITED BY THE L EARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE CASE CONSID ERED BY THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT SQUARELY APPLY TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE ON HA ND. THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY CONTRARY DECISION TO OUR NOTICE. I N OUR OPINION IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER CONSIDERATION THE DIT(E) SHOUL D NOT HAVE REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/ S 12AA OF THE ACT ON THIS REASON. THERE IS NO SUCH BAR SINCE THERE IS NO JUR ISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS JUDGEMENT ON THIS ISSUE TO THE CONTRARY. CONSEQUE NTLY WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH NECESSARY DETAILS TO THE DIT(E) AS REQUIRED BY HIM. THEREAFTER DIT(E) IS REQUIRED TO SATISFY HIMSELF R EGARDING THE CARRYING OUT OF THE CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF S.2(15) OF THE ACT AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW . 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 31. 1.20 11 SD/- SD/- N.R.S. GANESAN CHANDRA POOJARI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 31 ST JANUARY 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S NATARAJA IYER & CO. CA 1-10-126 ASHOKNAGA R HYDERABAD-20. 2. THE DIT (E) HYDERABAD 3. DIT HYDERABAD. 4. CIT HYDERABAD 5. THE D.R. ITAT HYDERABAD. NP