Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Baombay Panjrapole Trust, Mumbai vs Department Of Income Tax on 15 May, 2013
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, बी'
बी खंडपीठ मुंबई
अिधकरण 'बी
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
MUMBAI BENCHES "B" MUMBAI
सव[ौी डȣ. मुमोहन, उपाÚय¢ /एवं ौी राजेÛि, ले.स.
BEFORE SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT /AND
SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 5745/Mum/2011
िनधा[रण वष[ /Assessment Year 2008-09
I.T.O. (E) 1(1), M/s. Bombay Panjrapole Trust,
R.No. 505, Near Madhav Baug Post Office,
Piramal Chambers, Vs. Panjraple Compound,
5th Floor, Parel, Bhuleshwar,
MUMBAI-12. MUMBAI.
PAN: AAATB 4289 N
(अपीलाथȸ /Appellant) (ू×यथȸ / Respondent)
Revenue by : Shri Mohit Jain
Assessee by : Shri Girish Dave
सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 15-05-2013
घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 24-05-2013
आदे श / O R D E R
PER RAJENDRA, A.M./ राजेÛि, ले.स.
The present appeal is filed against the order dt. 06-04-2011 of CIT(A)-1, Mumbai. Assessing Officer (AO) has raised the following grounds:
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the anonymous donations of Rs.
79,83,170/- from the application of the provisions of Sec.115BBC of the I.T.Act,1961 on the ground that it is the wholly charitable trust without appreciating the provisions of law and facts of the case.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the anonymous donations of Rs.79,83,170/- from the application of the provisions of Sec. 115BBC of the I T. Act,1961 on the ground that provisions of sections 115BBC are inapplicable for merger donations of Rs. 10/- to Rs.150/-, without appreciating the provisions of law and facts of the case.
3. The Appellant prays that the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-1 Mumbai be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored' 2 ITA No. 5745/Mum/2011 M/s. Bombay Panjrapole Trust,
4. The Appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground which may be necessary.
2. Assessee-Trust, filed its return of income on 29-09-2008 declaring total income at Rs. NIL. Assessment was finalised by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) on 27-12-2010 determining the total income at Rs. 79.83 Lakhs.
3. Brief Facts of the Case:
Assessee is a Charitable Trust engaged in maintaining gaushalas, tending to other animals and birds doing research in animal husbandry and conducting schools and classes to educate the people in these fields. During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that it had collections i.e., Dharmau Box Collection and Dharmun (other collection) which were at Rs. 5.80 Lakhs and Rs. 1.02 Crores respectively on which the AO sought the assessee's reply. After considering the reply of the assessee, AO added (Dharmau Box Collection) Rs. 5,80,980/- and Rs. 74,02,187/- (part of other collection to the total income of the assessee.
4. Assessee preferred an appeal before the Fist Appellate Authority (FAA). After considering the submissions of the assessee, FAA held that the AO had nowhere said that the activity of the appellant trust was not for charitable purpose, that AO had also not said that the trust had anywhere indulged in any other activity, which was not covered by object of appellant trust, that the AO has mainly relied upon the provisions of Section 115BBC of the Act introduced on statute by Finance Act, 2006 w.e.f. 01- 04-2007, that the AO had misunderstood the intention of the law, while applying the provisions of Section 115BBC of the Act, that the said provision had not been brought on statute with the intention to check donations of meager amount of Rs. 10/- to Rs. 150/-, that the AO was not justified in invoking the provision of Section 115BBC of the Act, for taxing anonymous donations, which itself was not permitted as per Section 115BBC(2) of the Act, that appellant trust hold the registration u/s. 12A of the Act in continuation and that the amount of Rs. 84,36,407/- had been utilised by appellant trust for the cause of appellant trust only, that entire receipt was utilised by appellant trust for the purpose of object of the trust, that purpose behind introduction of Section 115BBC of the Act by Finance Bill, 2006 and the back ground behind introduction of this new provision was to ensure misuse of receiving anonymous or pseudonymous donations by charitable institution and trust, that the facts and situation in the case under consideration was anonymous donations which were received by the appellant trust from regular visitors for providing some eatable like green grass, gol laddu and dana to the animals and birds in the campus of the appellant trust, that the trust had maintained the details of such donations received on purchase of green grass, laddu and dana of Rs. 150/-, wherein the trust maintained account of identity of prayer indicating the name and address of such persons, that by any stretch of imagination, donations could not be considered as misuse of provisions in receiving donation or unaccounted money received by the assessee-trust. Following his own order for the year 2007-08, FAA deleted the addition made by the AO.
5. Before us, Departmental Representative (DR) relied upon the order of the AO. Authorised Representative (AR) Submitted that same issue was decided in favour of the assessee by the order of the 'B' Bench of the ITAT, Mumbai (ITA No. 3 ITA No. 5745/Mum/2011 M/s. Bombay Panjrapole Trust, 5714/M/2010 AY. 2007-08 dt. 25-07-2012).
6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that issue of dis-allowance of donation has been decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT, Mumbai vide its order dt. 25-07-2012 (supra). ITAT has decided the issue as under:
10. We are in agreement with the CIT(A) that the purport and purpose for bringing in section 115BBC is to curb the influx of unaccounted money by way of anonymous donations towards educational trusts and other religious trusts and certainly not to curb any and all of donations / offerings either in temples, muths and religious trusts, where
-
the collections are collected in donation boxes and that too ranging from as low as Rs.10/- to Rs. 150/-.
11. From the order of the CIT (A), we find that the assessee is running veterinary hospital for treatment of wounded and sick animals and birds. If we strictly accept the submissions of the DR, then we must also accept situations where we will find wounded and dead animals on the roads, in open, and at houses, rotting, spreading foul smell and diseases. Therefore, accordingly, the DR would accept a situation like this. We find that this trust has been in existence for the last 176 years, doing and performing a public good and service to humanity with sincere and good intentions, not even asking people to make contributions. Whatever contributions by way of donations are coming, are coming in small donations, which are put by public at large in donation boxes (dharmau). We also find that approximately Rs. 21 lakhs came as known donations, which were duly taken care in the return and informed to the revenue.
12. We also cannot ignore the decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court referred to earlier, besides the fact that the decision in the assessee's own case, wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has accepted the assessee, was a public trust and donations were exempted u/s. 52 of Bombay Trust Act. We also cannot ignore the fact that even the department has been accepting the status and service rendered to humanity and assessment results of the assessee till the preceding year.
13. Keeping in view all the above considerations and keeping in view the consistent approach from the department, we do not intend to deviate from the order of CIT (A) and hold the same to be correct application of law and facts.
14. In the result, the appeal filed by the department is dismissed.
Respectfully following the same, we decide the Grounds of Appeal Nos. 1 and 2 against the AO. So, upholding the order of the FAA, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue.
As a result, appeal filed by the AO stands dismissed.
पǐरणामःवǾप िनधा[रण-अिधकारȣ Ʈारा दाǔख़ल कȧ गई अपील नामंज़ूर कȧ जाती है .
Order pronounced in the open court on 24th May, 2013 आदे श कȧ घोषणा खुले Ûयायालय मɅ Ǒदनांक 24 मई,2013 को कȧ गई ।
Sd/- Sd/-
(डȣ. मुमोहन / D. MANMOHAN) (राजेÛि / RAJENDRA)
उपाÚय¢ /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सदःय / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
मुंबई Mumbai, Ǒदनांक Date: 24th May, 2013
TNMM
4 ITA No. 5745/Mum/2011
M/s. Bombay Panjrapole Trust,
आदे श कȧ ूितिलǒप अमेǒषत/
षत Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. Appellant/अपीलाथȸ
2. Respondent/ू×यथȸ
3. The concerned CIT(A)/संबƨ अपीलीय आयकर आयुƠ
4. The concerned CIT/संबƨ आयकर आयुƠ
5. DR "B" Bench, ITAT, Mumbai /ǒवभागीय ूितिनिध 'बी' खंडपीठ,आ.अ.Ûयाया.मुंबई
6. Guard File/गाड[ फाईल स×याǒपत ूित //True Copy// / BY ORDER, आदे शानुसार उप सहायक पंजीकार Dy./Asst.
उप/सहायक Registrar
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,
अिधकरण मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai