Guru Teg Bahadur Educational & Charitable Society, Sangrur v. CIT(E), Chandigarh

ITA 1519/CHANDI/2019 | 2019-2020
Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2021 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 151921514 RSA 2019
Assessee PAN AAEAG2981K
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 1519/CHANDI/2019
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant Guru Teg Bahadur Educational & Charitable Society, Sangrur
Respondent CIT(E), Chandigarh
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-03-2021
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 18-03-2021
Last Hearing Date 18-03-2021
First Hearing Date 18-03-2021
Assessment Year 2019-2020
Appeal Filed On 02-12-2019
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BE NCH A CHANDIGARH (VIRTUAL COURT) .. !' # $! BEFORE: SHRI. N.K.SAINI VP & SHRI RAJPAL YADAV VP ITA NO. 1519/CHD/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2019-20 GURU TEG BAHADUR EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE SOCIETY VILLAGE SALEMPUR TEHSIL DHURI SANGRUR THE CIT EXEMPTIONS CHANDIGARH PAN NO: AAEAG2981K APPELLANT RESPONDENT !' ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJIV SALDI C.A #!' REVENUE BY : SMT. C. CHANDRAKANTA CIT $ %! & DATE OF HEARING : 18/03/2021 '()*! & DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18/03/2021 $%/ ORDER PER N.K. SAINI VICE PRESIDENT THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DT. 25/09/2019 OF LD. CIT(E) CHANDIGARH. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAS BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL. 1. THAT THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT EXEMPTION ARBITRARILY RE JECTED THE APPLICATION OF APPELLANT WHICH IS ILLEGAL BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE FACTS ON RECORD. 2. THE TRUST IS RUNNING A SCHOOL AND THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT EXEMPTION HAD BROUGHT NOTHING ON RECORD THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF TH E TRUST ARE NOT GENUINE BUT REJECTED THE APPLICATION MERELY ON SURMISES AND CON JECTURE BASIS. 3. THAT THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT EXEMPTION HAD REJECTED A PPLICATION ON THE GROUND THAT RIGHT TO EDUCATION (RTE) ACT HAS NOT BE EN COMPLIED WITH THE SAME IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND IS ARBITRARY. 4. THAT THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT EXEMPTION WRONGLY REJECT ED THE APPLICATION STATING THAT CERTIFIED COPY OF MOA OF THE SOCIETY A ND BYE-LAWS WERE NOT 2 PRODUCED WHEREAS THE SAME WERE SUBMITTED AND ARE O N RECORD AND MOREOVER IT CANNOT BE MADE THE BASIS FOR REJECTING THE APPLICAT ION. 5. THAT ONLY THE FEES STRUCTURE OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE MADE THE BASIS FOR CONCLUDING THE PROFIT MOTIVE OF THE TRUST. THE ORDE R OF CIT EXEMPTION SPEAKS ABOUT COMPARABLE FEE STRUCTURE OF SIMILAR SCHOOLS WHICH W AS NEVER CONFRONTED OF THE APPELLANT. 6. THAT THE LD. PRINCIPAL CIT EXEMPTION WRONGLY REJECT ED THE APPLICATION STATING THAT THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE S OCIETY CANNOT BE VERIFIED WHEREAS THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY IS ALREADY ON RECORD. 3. FROM THE AFORESAID GROUNDS IT IS GATHERED THAT ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO THE REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION SEEKING THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ACT). 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FI LED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A ON 27/03/2019 SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 5. THE LD. CIT(E) ISSUED A QUESTIONNAIRE THROUGH ONLINE PORTAL AND ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY THE SAME ELECTRONICALLY. THE LD. CIT(E) ALSO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE REPLY ON ADDITIONAL QUERIES THE SAID QUE STIONNAIRE AND QUERIES ARE REPRODUCED BY THE LD. CIT(E) AT PARA 5 & 6 OF THE IM PUGNED ORDER FOR THE COST OF REPETITION THE SAME ARE NOT REPRODUCED HEREIN. 6. IN RESPONSE THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE FEE STRUCTURE OF THE SCHOOL. HOWEVER THE LD. CIT(E) REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE B Y OBSERVING IN PARA 8 & 9 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS UNDER: 8. THE APPLICANT HAS REPLIED TO THE ADDITIONAL QUE RIES RAISED ON 19.09.2018. A SPECIFIC QUESTION REGARDING ADHERENCE TO THE COMPUL SORY EDUCATION UNDER RIGHT TO EDUCATION ACT 2009 WAS ASKED FROM THE APPLICANT HOWEVER NO DETAILS WITH REGARD TO NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO ARE GETTING CONCES SIONAL FEES UNDER RTE ACT 2009 HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WHICH INDICATES THAT THE AC TIVITIES OF THE APPLICANT SOCIETY ARE NOT IN SYNC WITH THE RTE ACT 2009 WHIC H IS A NECESSARY COMPONENT TO FURTHER EXACERBATE THE ESSENCE OF CHARITY. FURTHER ON PERUSAL OF MOA IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE APPLICANT SOCIETY HAS NOT SUBMITTED THE CERTIFIED COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF A SSOCIATION AND BYE-LAWS 3 WHICH THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED IN THE OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES AND FIRMS/JOINT STOCK COMPANIES. IN THE ABSENCE OF THIS THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY CAN BE CORROBORATED WITH THE STATED AIMS AND OBJECTS THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. 9. IN THE ABSENCE OF DETAILS REGARDING RTE ACT NON -PRODUCTION OF CERTIFIED COPY OF MOA OF THE SOCIETY AND BUSINESS NATURE OF I NCOME RECEIVED THERE IS NO WAY THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY CA N BE CORROBORATED WITH THE STATED AIMS AND OBJECTS AS PER THE DOCUMENTS SUBMIT TED BY THE APPLICANT. ACCORDINGLY THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12A FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION IS REJECTED. 7. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. 8. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE INFORMATION WHICH WERE ASKED TO BE FURNISHED BY THE LD. CIT(E) WERE DULY FURNISHED AT THE RELEVANT TIME AND WERE AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THEREFORE THE OBSERVATION OF T HE LD. CIT(E) ARE FACTUALLY INCORRECT. 9. IN HER RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. CIT DR REITERATED THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE LD. CIT(E) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH T HE REQUISITE INFORMATION IN THE FORM OF CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE FURNISHED IN THE OFFICE OF REGISTRAR OF SOCIETY AND FIRMS THEREFORE THE GENUINENESS OF THE A CTIVITY OF THE SOCIETY WERE NOT VERIFIABLE AND THE APPLICATION MOVED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS RIGHTLY REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT(E). 10. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTI ES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE I T IS NOTICED THAT THERE IS CONTRADICTORY IN THE STAND OF THE DEPARTMENT AND THE ASSE SSEE. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS MENTIONED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AND BYE LAWS WHICH WERE SUBMITTED IN THE OFF ICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETY AND FIRMS BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE HIM . ON THE CONTRARY THE CLAIM OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THOSE DOCUMENTS WERE FURNISHED. WE THEREFORE IN THE ABSENCE OF CLEAR FACTS ON RECORD AND CONSIDER ING THE CONTRADICTORY STAND OF BOTH THE PARTIES DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO SET ASIDE TH IS CASE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. 4 CIT(E) TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 11. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED F OR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/03/2021) SD/- SD/- # $! .. (RAJPAL YADAV) ( N.K. SAINI) / VICE PRESIDENT / VICE PRESIDENT AG DATE: 18/03/2021 (+! -.- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 01 THE CIT(A) 5. -2 45&456789 DR ITAT CHANDIGARH 6. 8:% GUARD FILE