Uttar Bangal Maheswari Seva Trust, Siliguri v. CIT, SILIGURI, Siliguri

ITA 85/KOL/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 16-09-2011

Appeal Details

RSA Number 8523514 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAATU0479R
Bench Kolkata
Appeal Number ITA 85/KOL/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant Uttar Bangal Maheswari Seva Trust, Siliguri
Respondent CIT, SILIGURI, Siliguri
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 16-09-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 16-09-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 14-01-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BEN CH B KOLKATA () BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER. /AND . .. .!' !'!' !'. .. . #$ SHRI C.D.RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER % % % % / ITA NO . 85/KOL/2010 &' ()/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : (+ / APPELLANT ) UTTAR BANGAL MAHESWARI SEVA TRUST SILIGURI (PAN:AAATU 0479 R) - & - - VERSUS - . (./+ / RESPONDENT ) C.I.T. - SILIGURI + 0 1 #/ FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI S.K.TULSIYAN ./+ 0 1 #/ FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI R.K.SAHA #2 / ORDER ( (( ( . .. .!' !'!' !'. .. . ) )) ) #$ PER SHRI C.D.RAO AM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30.0.2009 OF THE CIT- SILIGURI. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEA L IS RELATING TO DENIAL OF RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE ARE THAT LD. CIT-S ILIGURI REFUSED TO RENEW THE REGISTRATION U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE IT ACT 1961. MA INLY BY OBSERVING THAT ASSESSEE IS CHARGING FEES FOR USAGE OF THE BHAWAN FOR CEREMONIE S AND THE AMOUNT IS ALSO NOT NOMINAL. HENCE IT IS CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD THAT THE CO NSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE HALL BY ASSESSEE IS PURELY OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY. 2 3.1. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT-SILIGURI IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING THE RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT BY STATING THAT ASSESSEE IS C ONDUCTING COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY DISQUALIFICATIONS LAID DOWN IN THE PROVISIONS ( I) TO (V )OF SECTION 80G OF THE AC T. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE RENEWAL OF REGISTRAT ION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT BY OBSERVING THAT THE ACTIVITY OF THE SOCIETY IS COMMERCIAL IN N ATURE. IN SUPPORT OF THIS HE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KALYANAM K AROTI VS CIT (LUCKNOW) AS REPORTED IN 314 ITR AT 295 AS WELL AS THIS TRIBUNAL S ORDER IN THE CASE OF DINODIA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY VS CIT SILIGURI VIDE ITA NO.113 2/KOL/2010 DATED13.04.2011. THEREFORE HE REQUESTED TO DIRECT LD. CIT TO GRANT R ENEWAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR APPEARING ON BEHAL F OF THE REVENUE RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF LD. CIT SILIGURI. 6. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ON CAREF UL PERUSAL OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF D INODIA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY VS CIT SILIGURI (SUPRA) HAS DIRECTED LD. CIT TO GRANT RENE WAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT BY OBSERVING THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX HAS ONLY TO SEE WHILE GRANTING RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OR CONTIN UING THEREIN WHETHER THE SOCIETY FULFILS THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN CLAUSES (I) TO (V) OF SECTION 80G(5) OF THE IT ACT. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THIS TRIBUNAL HAS CONSISTENTLY TAK ING A VIEW THAT WHILE GRANTING THE REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IS TO SATISFY THAT ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN CLAUSES (I) TO (V) OF SUB-SECTION OF SECTION 80G OF THE IT ACT ARE FULFILLED BY THE INSTITUTION OR FUND AS PER RULE 11AA(4) OF THE IT RULES 1962. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT AO WHILE DOING TH E ASSESSMENT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 DATED 29.11.2010 HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER : THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE DISCUSSED. T HE TRUST RUNS A COMMUNITY HALL AT CONCESSIONAL RATES. THE TRUST HAD SHOWN NET INCOME OF RS.3 88 150/- 3 AND CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. BILLS AND VOUCHERS AND REGISTERS FOR RECEIPTS AND EXPENSES AS APPEARING IN ITS INCOM E & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT WERE PRODUCED WHICH WERE CHECKED. THE TRANSACTIONS WERE ALSO VERIFIED FROM THE BANK STATEMENT OF ASSESSEE TRUST. THE EXPENSES AS DEBITED IN ITS INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT WERE ALSO VERIFIED KEEPING INTO PERSPECTIVE THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN SECTION 11 12 & 13 OF THE I.T.ACT. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE WE DIRECT LD. CIT TO GRANT RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE IT ACT. 8. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16.09.2011. SD/- SD/- MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER . .. .!' !'!' !'. .. . #$ #$ #$ #$ C.D.RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( (( ('$ '$ '$ '$) )) ) DATE: 16.09.2011. #2 0 .3 4#3(5- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. UTTAR BANGAL MAHESWARI SEVA TRUST AGRASEN ROAD KH ALPARA SILIGURI. 2 THE CIT SILIGURI. 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A)- 5. DR KOLKATA BENCHES KOLKATA /3 ./ TRUE COPY #2&:/ BY ORDER DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR ITAT KOLKATA BENCHES R.G.(.P.S.)