Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
M/S R.K. Educational & Social Welfare ... vs Cit (Exemptions), Chandigarh on 13 July, 2017
1
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No.217/Chd/2016
Assessment Years: 2014-15
M/s R.K. Educational & Social Vs. CI T(E)
Welfare Society C.R. Building, 5 t h Floor
V&P.O. Nabahi The. Sarkaghat Sector 17-E, Chandigarh
Distt. Mandi(H.P)
PAN No. AABAR9988C
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee By : Shri. R.R. Thakur
Department By : Shri. Ravi Sarangal
Date of hearing : 03/07/2017
Date of Pronouncement : 13/07/2017
ORDER
PER Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, AM
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT (E), Chandigarh dt. 30/01/2016 passed under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 rejecting the registration U/s10(23C).
2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in passing the order U/s 10(23C)(vi) which is not based on facts and circumstances which requires to be set aside to grant registration U/s 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act 1961.
2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has erred in holding that the Society is engaged in profit making by selling of Books Uniforms and earning by Transport business. These facilities are provided to the students only. The order is misconceived and require to be set aside for reconsideration and grant registration
3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed an application seeking registration under section 10(23C)(vi) before the CIT(E), Chandigarh for registration under section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act as on 01/01/2015. The Ld. CIT(E) 2 rejected the application holding that all the three conditions enumerated in the section 10(23C) need to be satisfied simultaneously The section reads as " (vi) Any university or other educational institution existing solely for educational purpose and not for the purpose of profit other than those mentioned in sub clause (iiiab) or sub clause (iiiad) and which may be approved by the prescribed authority"
The CIT(E) held that, in the applicant's case there is no specific aim mentioned in the by-laws/objects of the society. In addition to the aims of establishing the educational institution and organizing the seminars etc, other generic objects like undertaking social welfare activities etc. have been enumerated as other aims of the society.
4. Further the CIT(E) held that it was also not clarified how the society redeems itself in so far as charitable education is concerned. Failure of the applicant to answer queries raised during the course of proceedings leads one to safely presume that it did not discharge its responsibility to prove how its income is not exigible to taxes. The applicant's case in the past had been rejected in the past because of similar non appearance.
5. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that since no proper opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee, the case may be sent back to the file of the CIT(E) to decide the issue on merits.
6. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the CIT(E).
7. On perusal of the order of the CIT(E), Chandigarh we observe that in the was fixed before the Ld.CIT(E) on 04-01-2016,14-01-2016 and 18-01-2016. Finally hearing was held on 22-01-2016 where in the assessee was requested to submit details of the charitable activities undertaken by them by 25-01-16 .The assessee failed to turn up on the designated date leading to rejection of the registration. 3 In view of this we find that the order has been passed in clear violation of the principle of natural justice without giving the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard and to file relevant documents and evidences. In this view, we find it proper to sent the matter back to the file of CIT(E) to decide the issue on merits after giving necessary proper opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to comply with the requirements of the CIT(E) promptly.
9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced on 13/07/2017 in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) (Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The Departmental Representative