Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (7) TMI 683 - ITAT INDOREGrant of registration u/s 12AB & 80G Denied - receipts from parents of children - assessee is a society engaged in charitable activity for welfare of children suffering from autism [serious and non-curable disease] - HELD THAT:- In so far as 1st reason of receipts from parents of children is concerned, we find that (i) the assessee has not received amounts from parents of all 13 children residing in assessee’s campus, the receipts were from parents of 7 children only; and (ii) the receipts are not systematic i.e. neither in all months nor of identical or constant amounts. Furthermore, as argued by Ld. AR, there is no agreement creating any obligation or commitment on the part of parents to make payment to assessee. These factual aspects clearly demonstrate that the payments made by parents are in the nature of mere voluntary contributions and not in the nature of recovery of charges/fee. Had it been from parents of all children and it would have been systematic in terms of periodicity and amount, there might have been a signal of charge/fee but that is absent. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(E) is not correct in perceiving the amounts received by assessee as charge/fee. Regarding 2nd reason of payments to Shri S.K. Shrivastava and Shri Naveen Agrawal, on perusal of evidences placed by Ld. AR, we prima facie find that the payments are in the nature of re-imbursements of actual expenses incurred by those persons for the purposes of assessee. Regarding 3rdreason of issuance of receipts before grant of provisional registration, Ld. AR has demonstrated that there had been a confusion due to MM/DD/YYYY format in place of DD/MM/YYYY only and also there is a clear assertion by Ld. AR that the assessee has not issued any certificate in Form No. 10BE for donations prior to grant of provisional registration. During hearing, the Ld. DR, though dutifully supported the order of CIT(E), but could not rebut or contradict the submissions of Ld. AR. Thus concluded none of the reasons assigned by Ld. CIT(A) for rejection of registration is valid. Therefore, we are inclined to quash both of the impugned orders passed by Ld. CIT(E) denying registration to assessee u/s 12AB and 80G. We also direct Ld. CIT(E) to grant registration to the assessee u/s 12AB and 80G as applied for. Decided in favour of assessee.
|