M S Pranathi Gramina Abhivrudhi Samsthe Bellary v. Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemptions Bangalore

In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal B Bench Bangalore Before Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav Judicial Member And Shri Inturi Rama Rao Accountant Member Ita Nos 1365 And 1366 Bang 2016 M S Pranathi Gramina Abhivrudhi Samsthe G Yerriswamy S O Basanna H No 242 Post Banavikallu 583126 Tq Kudligi Dist Bellari Pan Aacap 3738 R Vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemptions 6 Th Floor Unity Building Annexe P Kalinga Rao Road Bengaluru 560 027 Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri G Venkatesh Advocate Revenue By Ms Neera Malhotra Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 18 12 2017 Date Of Pronouncement 22 12 2017 O R D E R Per Sunil Kumar Yadav Judicial Member These Appeals Are Preferred By The Assessee Agains T The Orders Of Cit Denying The Registration Recognition Under Section 12 Aa And 80 G 5 Of The It Act 2 During The Course Of Hearing The Learned Counse L For The Assessee Has Invited Our Attention To The Order Of The Cit Passed Under Sect Ion 12 Aa 1 B Ii With The Submission That Cit Has Not Afforded Sufficient Time And Opportunit Y To The Assessee To Furnish The Details Sought By Him To Prove The Genuineness Of The Trust And Its Activities He Has Invited Our Attention That Cit Had Fixed The Hearing On 25 05 2 016 At 11 45 Am The Assessee Filed Certain Details However The Amended Copy Of Trus T Deed Could Not Be Produced And Assessee Sought Time To Produce The Same But The Cit Inste Ad Of Giving Time Had Rejected The Application For Registration And On Account Of Reje Ction Of Registration Under Section 12 A The Ita Nos 1365 And 1366 Bang 2016 Page 2 Of 3 Recognition Under Section 80 G Filed By The Assessee Was Also Rejected Having Observed That A Designated Officer Is Required To Examine The Cause With A View To Obtain The Satisfaction Of The Object Of The Trust He Further Observed That It Is Not Possible To Verify The Genuineness Of The Trust Or Its Activities The Learned Counsel F Or The Assessee Has Submitted That The Assessee Is Required To File All The Relevant Evidences And Prove The Genuineness Of The Trust And Its Activities And It Is For The Cit To Examine Himself Or To Call For Report From His Subordinates But He Cannot Deny The Registration Merely On The G Round That The Designated Officer Is Required To Examine The Genuineness Of Trust And It S Activities Whenever The Registration Is Required It Is For The Authorities Concerned To Exa Mine The Objects And The Activities Of The Trust Therefore The Cit May Be Directed To Grant Registration 3 The Learned Dr Placed Reliance Upon The Order Of The Cit 4 Having Carefully Examined The Orders Of The Auth Orities Below We Find That Cit Has Rejected The Registration Having Observed That Desi Gnated Officer Is Required To Examine The Genuineness Of Trust And Its Activities Since It Is Not Possible To Verify The Genuineness Of Trust And Its Activities He Rejected The Registrat Ion The Action Of The Cit Does Not Appear To Us To Be Reasonable We Accordingly Set Aside The Order Of The Cit In Both The Appeals And Restore The Matter To His File With A Direction To Re Examine The Claim Of Registration Of Trust And Recognition Of Trust Under Section 80 G 5 Also By Making Necessary Enquiries Either By Himself Or Through His Subordinates Accordingly The Appeals Of The Assessee Are Allowed For Statistical Purposes 5 In The Result Appeals Of The Assessee Are Allow Ed For Statistical Purposes Pronounced In The Open Court On 22 Nd December 2017 Sd Sd Inturi Rama Rao Sunil Kumar Yadav Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore Dated 22 Nd December 2017 Ns Ita Nos 1365 And 1366 Bang 2016 Page 3 Of 3 Copy To 1 Appellants 2 Respondent 3 Cit 4 Guard File By Order Sr Private Secretary Itat Bangalore