Shri Shyam Savitri Charitable Trust,, Harda v. The C.I.T., Bhopal

ITA 589/IND/2009 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 58922714 RSA 2009
Bench Indore
Appeal Number ITA 589/IND/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant Shri Shyam Savitri Charitable Trust,, Harda
Respondent The C.I.T., Bhopal
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 17-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 17-02-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 15-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 15-02-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 21-12-2009
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 589/IND/09 SHRI SHYAM SAVITRI CHARITABLE TRUST HARDA PAN AAITS-8198M APPELLANT VS COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX BHOPAL RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY S/SHRI H.P. VERMA & A. GOYAL RESPONDENT BY SMT. APARNA KARAN SR. DR O R D E R THIS APPEAL IS BY THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGING THE ORD ER DATED 30.9.2009 OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BHOPAL DENYING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT TO THE ASS ESSEE. DURING HEARING OF THIS APPEAL I HAVE HEARD SHRI H.P. VERM A ALONG WITH SHRI ASHISH GOYAL LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SMT. APARNA KARAN LEARNED SR. DR. AT THE OUT SET MR. VERMA PO INTED OUT THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 17 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL BE FORE THE TRIBUNAL WHICH MAY BE CONDONED. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED CONDONATION APPLICATION BY CLAIMING THAT THE DELAY OCCURRED DUE TO NON-ALLOTMENT 2 OF PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AS THE BANK DID NOT ACC EPT THE FEE IN THE ABSENCE OF NON-AVAILABILITY OF PAN AND THE PAN WAS ALLOTTED THEREAFTER ON 17 TH DECEMBER 2009 AND IMMEDIATELY ON 18 TH DECEMBER 2009 THE ASSESSEE PAID THE FEE THROUGH IN TERNET BANKING INSPITE OF THE FACT THAT PAN CARD WAS RECEIVED ON 2 2.12.2009. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED SR. DR CONTENDED THAT THE D ELAY MAY NOT BE CONDONED AND THE ASSESSEE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE MORE V IGILANT. KEEPING IN VIEW THE FACTS NARRATED IN THE APPLICATION I AM OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT IT IS A FIT CASE WHERE THE DELAY BE CO NDONED THEREFORE THE DELAY OF 17 DAYS IS CONDONED. 2. ON MERIT IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A NEWLY ESTABLISHED C HARITABLE TRUST DONATED RS. 2200/- TO ONE NEEDY STUDENT TO HELP HIM FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES BY CHEQUE. THE TOTAL INCOME WAS CLAIMED AT RS.5 730/-. THE CRUX OF THE ARGUMENTS IS THAT EVEN IF ONE OBJECT IS ACTED UPON THE REGISTRATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN. ON THE OTHER H AND THE LEARNED SR. DR STRONGLY DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER BY INVI TING MY ATTENTION TO THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT ALONG WITH THE R EPLY OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED 3 RESPECTIVE COUNSELS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILA BLE ON THE FILE. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT EVEN IF ONE OBJECT IS ACTED UPON REGISTRATION U/S 12AA CANNOT BE DENI ED FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE DECISION IN 108 T TJ (JD) 732. I HAVE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 3 RD SEPTEMBER 2009 ADDRESSED TO THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX REPLIED TO VARIOUS QUERIES RAISED BY THE REVENUE. I HAVE ALSO SEEN THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE TRUSTEES ARE MEMBERS OF THE S AME FAMILY. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT IT IS A NEWLY ESTABLISHED CHARITABLE TRUST. ON CONSIDERATION OF FACTS MENTIONED BY THE LEARNED RES PECTIVE COUNSELS IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EXPLAINED ITS CASE PROPERLY BEFORE THE LD. CIT AND ALSO HAS NOT ADDUCED ANY EVIDENCE IN TH E REQUIRED MANNER WHETHER ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES WERE ACTUALLY DON E BY THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPROACH THE LEARNED CIT AGAIN TO SATISFY HIM/HER ABOUT THE OBJECTS AND FULFILLMEN T THEREOF EVEN PARTLY THEREFORE THIS APPEAL IS REMANDED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BHOPAL FOR FRE SH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW FOR WHICH DUE OPPORTUNITY BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO AT LIBERTY TO FURNI SH EVIDENCE IF ANY TO 4 SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH THE SIDES AT THE CONCLUSI ON OF THE HEARING ON 15.2.2010. SD (JOGINDER SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER FEBRUARY 17 TH 2009 COPY TO: APPELLANT RESPONDENT CIT CIT(A) DR *DBN/