Late Shri Pradeep Sojatia shikshna Evam Samajik Nyas, v. The CIT- 1,

ITA 468/IND/2007 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 05-04-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 46822714 RSA 2007
Assessee PAN AAATL5506A
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 468/IND/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
Appellant Late Shri Pradeep Sojatia shikshna Evam Samajik Nyas,
Respondent The CIT- 1,
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 05-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 05-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 09-03-2010
Next Hearing Date 09-03-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 20-08-2007
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI V.K. GUPTA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.468/IND/07 LATE PRADEEP SOJATIA SHIKSHAN EVAM SAMAJIK NYAS INDORE PAN AAATL5506A APPELLANT VS COMMR. OF INCOME TAX-I INDORE RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI HP VERMA & SHRI A.GOYAL RESPONDENT BY : SMT. APARNA KARAN SR. DR O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH JM THIS APPEAL IS BY THE ASSESSEES AGAINST THE ORDER O F THE LEARNED CIT DATED 29.6.2007 ON THE FOLLOWING CONCISE GROUND S :- 01. THE LD. CIT INDORE ERRED IN NOT GRANTING REGIS TRATION U/S 12A 02. THE LD. CIT INDORE IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT COND ONING THE DELAY IN FILING OF APPLICATION. 03. THE LD. CIT INDORE ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE AC TIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE TRUST ARE NOT AS PER OBJECTS OF THE TRUS T DEED. 2 04. THE LD. CIT INDORE ERRED IN HOLDING THAT NEXUS BETWEEN THE TRUST THE UNSECURED CREDITORS AND M/S SAJOTIA AUTO PVT. LTD. WAS NOT ESTABLISHED AND THEREFORE THE TRUST WAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE FAMILY MEMBERS. 05. THE LD. CIT INDORE ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW BY REJECTING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AT THE STAGE BECAUSE IT WAS C ONSIDERED TO BE TOO EARLY TO GRANT REGISTRATION IN SUCH TYPE OF CASES. 2. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL WE HAVE HEARD SHR I H.P. VERMA ALONG WITH SHRI ASHISH GOYAL LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE AND SMT. APARNA KARAN LEARNED SR. DR. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENT S ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS CREATED ON 24.1.2003 AND WAS REGISTERED WITH THE REGISTRAR OF TRUSTS ON 8.7.2003 WITH THE OBJECTS OF PROMOTING EDUCATION. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE APP LICATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT WAS FILED ON 29.12.2006 AND THE REGISTRATIO N WAS APPLIED WITH EFFECT FROM 24.1.2003 I.E. FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTI ON AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 29.6.2007 IS CONTRARY TO FACTS AS NECES SARY DETAILS FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT WERE NOT CONSIDERED BY HIM I N RIGHT PERSPECTIVE. A PLEA WAS ALSO RAISED THAT THE PURPOSE OF OBTAININ G THE LOAN AND SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IN FDR WAS VERY MUCH EXPLAINED AS THE AS SESSEE TOOK SECURED LOANS OF RS.49.67 LACS AND UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.46.26 LACS AND MADE FDR OF RS. 50 LACS WHICH WAS MANDATORY FOR GETTING APPROVAL FROM ALL INDIA COUNCIL OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED 3 SYNOPSIS. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE UNSECURED LOAN S WERE TAKEN FROM TRUSTEES FOR OBTAINING FDR FROM THE BANK BY CLAIMIN G THAT THESE LOANS ARE INTEREST FREE FOR WHICH OUR ATTENTION WAS INVIT ED TO PAGES 40 33 AND 26 OF THE PAPER BOOK BY POINTING OUT THAT NO INTERE ST WAS DEBITED ON UNSECURED LOANS. A PLEA WAS ALSO RAISED THAT THE D EPOSIT OF FDR IS MANDATORY FOR GETTING APPROVAL FROM ALL INDIA COUNC IL OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION (AICTE) WHICH IS REQUIRED FOR RUNNING THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED PAPER BOO K RUNNING INTO 1 TO 80 PAGES. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH WHETHER ALL THE D OCUMENTS CONTAINED IN THE PAPER BOOK WERE FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT IT WAS FAIRLY ADMITTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DOCUME NTS LIKE AGREEMENT TO PURCHASE LAND AND LAND HOLDING BY SOJATIA PRIVAT E LIMITED (PAPER BOOK PAGES 52 TO 63) WERE NOT FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED SENIOR DR STRONGLY DEFENDED THE IMPUGNE D ORDER BY PLEADING THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF DOCUMENTS MENTIONED AT PAGES 52 TO 63 OF THE PAPER BOOK IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE LEAR NED CIT TO ARRIVE AT THE CORRECT CONCLUSION. HOWEVER THE LEARNED SENIOR DR HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED RESPECTIVE COUNSELS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILA BLE ON THE FILE. WITHOUT COMMENTING UPON THE MERITS OF THE CASE AND THE FACT THAT THE 4 DOCUMENTS MENTIONED AT SL. NOS. 52 TO 63 OF THE PAP ER BOOK BEING FRESH MATERIAL (NOT FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT) AND ARE VE RY MUCH NECESSARY IN COMING TO A CONCLUSION THEREFORE KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND ALSO THAT NO GRIEVANCE IS CAUSE D TO EITHER PARTY WE REMAND THIS APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT FOR F RESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO MENTION HERE THAT DUE OPPORTUNITY BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AT LIBERTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE IF ANY BEFORE THE CIT TO SUBSTANTIATE IT S CLAIM. RESULTANTLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF L EARNED REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH THE SIDES ON THE CONCLUSI ON OF HEARING ON 5 TH APRIL 2010. SD SD (V.K. GUPTA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER APRIL 5 TH 2010 COPY TO: APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR G UARD FILE *DBN/ 5 6