9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 1332 - AT - Income TaxRecognition u/s 80 G denied - as per CIT-E in the absence of sufficient activities, it is not possible to verify the genuineness of the objects and the activities of the trust - AR submitted that, its application for grant of registration under section 12 AA of the Act is valid - HELD THAT - Undisputedly, assessee has been granted registration under section 12AA of the Act, and that there is nothing on record brought out by authorities below, or Ld.CIT DR regarding violation of objects of Trust. grant of approval/recognition under section 80 G of the Act, can act as catalyst to encourage prospective donors to look at intended activities/objects and possibly provide financial support through donations/contributions. In the facts of present case, assessee was holding valid registration under section 12 AA of the Act, as on date of impugned order, which conversely means that Ld.CIT (E) was satisfied with objects of assessee in not disputing the registration under section 12 AA. Reasons cited by Ld.CIT(E) are not the requirements mandated by provisions of the act, and cannot be the basis for rejection of assessee s application for recognition under section 80G. We also noticed that Ld.CIT(E) has not examined the application of assessee in terms of section 80 G (5) - we remand the question of grant of approval under section 80 G (5) (vi) of the Act to Ld.CIT (E) for fresh consideration - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes.
Issues:
1. Rejection of recognition under section 80G by Ld.CIT (E), Bangalore. 2. Grounds of appeal against the order of Ld.CIT (E). 3. Validity of the application for registration under section 12AA. 4. Rejection of application under section 80G based on insufficient activities. 5. Compliance with the provisions of section 80G and section 12AA. Issue 1: Rejection of recognition under section 80G by Ld.CIT (E), Bangalore: The appeal was filed against the order dated 22/07/19 by the Ld.CIT (E), Bangalore, rejecting recognition under section 80G. The appellant objected to the order on the grounds that it was prejudicial to their interest and erred in rejecting the application under section 80G (5) (vi) for reasons deemed arbitrary and impermissible. The Ld.CIT (E) was criticized for not appreciating the conformity of the appellant's objectives with the provisions of section 80G, making it eligible for recognition. The appellant sought the setting aside of the order and the grant of recognition under section 80G. Issue 2: Grounds of appeal against the order of Ld.CIT (E): The grounds of appeal included challenges to the factual and legal basis of the Ld.CIT (E)'s order, asserting that it was against the appellant's interest and beyond the provisions of the law. The appellant argued that the rejection was arbitrary and impermissible, emphasizing that the application could only be denied under specific circumstances outlined in the income tax rules. The failure of the Ld.CIT (E) to appreciate the appellant's objectives in line with section 80G was a key contention in the appeal. Issue 3: Validity of the application for registration under section 12AA: The appellant, a charitable trust established with specific objectives, had obtained registration under section 12AA of the Act. Despite this, the application for registration under section 80G was rejected by the Ld.CIT (E) citing insufficient activities to verify the genuineness of the trust's objectives. The appellant argued that the registration under section 12AA demonstrated the validity of their objectives, questioning the rejection based on lack of activities. Issue 4: Rejection of application under section 80G based on insufficient activities: The rejection of the application for recognition under section 80G was primarily due to the Ld.CIT (E) being unable to verify the genuineness of the trust's objectives and activities in the absence of sufficient activities. The Ld.CIT (E) relied on legal precedents to support the rejection, emphasizing the need for the Commissioner to be satisfied with the trust's objects and activities. The appellant contested this rejection, highlighting that there was no basis for it as the Ld.CIT (E) had previously granted registration under section 12AA. Issue 5: Compliance with the provisions of section 80G and section 12AA: The Tribunal observed that the grant of recognition under section 80G could encourage donations and support for the trust's activities. Given that the appellant had valid registration under section 12AA, the Tribunal concluded that the Ld.CIT (E) was satisfied with the trust's objectives. Relying on previous decisions, the Tribunal remanded the question of approval under section 80G back to the Ld.CIT (E) for fresh consideration, emphasizing the need for proper examination in line with the provisions of the Act. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues raised, arguments presented, and the Tribunal's decision regarding the rejection of recognition under section 80G.
|
