2013 (5) TMI 1003 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Non-adjudication of all grounds of appeal by CIT(A).
2. Validity of notice issued u/s 148.
3. Denial of benefits u/s 11 and 12 due to non-registration u/s 12A(a) r.w.s. 12AA.
4. Non-admission of evidences by CIT(A).
5. Incorrect computation of income and tax liability.

Summary:

1. Non-adjudication of all grounds of appeal by CIT(A):
The appellant argued that CIT(A) did not adjudicate all grounds of appeal distinctly and separately. The CIT(A) summarized the grounds as a single effective ground against treating the assessee trust as non-registered and denying benefits u/s 11 of the IT Act.

2. Validity of notice issued u/s 148:
The appellant contended that the notice issued u/s 148 was invalid. The Tribunal noted that the trust had been filing its returns for over 20 years and was registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The trust claimed it had lost its original registration certificate and had applied for a duplicate, which was not accepted by CIT. The Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's claim regarding the invalidity of the notice u/s 148.

3. Denial of benefits u/s 11 and 12 due to non-registration u/s 12A(a) r.w.s. 12AA:
The Tribunal observed that the trust was granted registration w.e.f. 1-4-2005 by CIT u/s 12AA(1)(b)(1). The trust claimed it was registered in 1975, but the certificate was lost. The Tribunal noted that the trust had been assessed to Income Tax for more than 20 years, and deductions u/s 11 and 12 were granted in past assessments (A.Y. 1982-83 and 1984-85). The Tribunal concluded that the trust should be considered registered u/s 12A for the years under appeal, as the Revenue could not provide evidence to the contrary.

4. Non-admission of evidences by CIT(A):
The appellant argued that CIT(A) did not admit or consider the evidences produced during the proceedings. The Tribunal noted that the trust had made efforts to obtain the 12A certificate and had filed an application u/s 7(1) of the Right to Information Act, 2005. The response from CPIO indicated that the records were weeded out and not traceable. The Tribunal found that the non-availability of records with the Revenue should not penalize the assessee.

5. Incorrect computation of income and tax liability:
The appellant disputed the assessed income of Rs. 8,53,766/-, arguing it was a total of expenditure and not income. The Tribunal found that the trust should be considered registered u/s 12A for the years under appeal, and the computation of income filed by the trust should be accepted.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeals, considering the trust to be registered u/s 12A for all the assessment years under appeal, and directed that the computation filed by the trust be accepted. The order was pronounced in Open Court on 10-05-2013.