TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 108X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s assailed the legality and validity of the order made by the CIT, Guntur, the second respondent herein, rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner under s. 80G of the IT Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), seeking recognition in respect of three schemes mentioned therein. 2. According to the petitioner, it is a charitable institution. It maintains ten temples specified in Sch. I, 22 education ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amely, (i) Sri Venkateswara Nitya Laddu Daana Endowment Scheme, (ii) Sri Venkateswara Balaji Archana Scheme, and (iii) Sri Venkateswara Udayasthamana Sarva Seva Scheme, which was rejected by the impugned order. 3. The impugned order of the second respondent reads: "With reference to the correspondence resting with the above cited letters, this is to inform you that the matter has been consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain income from the total income. Sub-s. (5) of s. 80G provides that s. 80G applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub-cl. (iv) of cl. (a) of sub-s. (2), only if it is established in India for a charitable purpose and if it fulfils the following conditions, among others, namely, the instrument under which the institution or fund is constituted does not, or the rules governi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is mind to the facts pleaded by the petitioner in its application. At any rate, the impugned order does not reflect either application of mind. by the CIT or the factors or reasons that weighed with him in passing the impugned order. In that view of the matter, we think it appropriate that the CIT should be directed to reconsider the application of the petitioner afresh and dispose of the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
