Commissioner Of Income Tax,, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur v. M/S Ratanwali Charitable Trust, B
High Court
22 May 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · jaipur
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Tax,, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur v. M/S Ratanwali Charitable Trust, B
Date of order
22 May 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Tax,, Jaipur-Ii, Jaipur v. M/S Ratanwali Charitable Trust, B, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: 3.3In that way of the matter the only thing which is required tobe said is whether the donation is used for the purpose for whichthe trust is created.
Decision: The appeal stands dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH ATJAIPUR
D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 255 / 2009
Commissioner of Income Tax,, Jaipur-II, Jaipur.
----Appellant
Versus
M/s Ratanwali Charitable Trust, B-423, Pradhan Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur .
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Appellant(s) : Mr. R.B. Mathur
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Gupta
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. JHAVERI
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR Order
22/05/2017
1.By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged thejudgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal hasallowed the appeal of the assessee.
2.While admitting the appeal, this Court framed the followingsubstantial question of law:
“Whether in the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was justified in law and has actedperversely in directing to grant renewal to theassessee of exemption u/s 80G (5) (vi) of the Act?”
3Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3.1Counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal has
seriously committed an error in reversing the view taken by theCIT(A) in as much as registration of the trust under Section 12-Awas wrongly refused.
3.2In our considered opinion, the very purpose of the trust isnot to look after the activities personally.
3.3In that way of the matter the only thing which is required tobe said is whether the donation is used for the purpose for whichthe trust is created.
3.4Thus the observations made by the Tribunal which reads as
under:-
“Vide object clause No.D(ii) of the Trust Deed wefind that it is one of the objects of the Trust tomaintain and construct, shelter for animals andbirds including construction and maintenance ofgoshala (paged No.7 of the paper book). We arethus of the view that the Ld. CIT was not justifiedin making observation that making donation is notone of the objects of the Trust. It is also registeredu/s 12AA of the Act. We thus do not find substancein the general observation of the Ld. CIT that theapplicant is not fulfilling the criteria for claiming therenewal of exemption U/s 80G.”find that it is one of the objects of the Trust tomaintain and construct, shelter for animals andbirds including construction and maintenance ofgoshala (paged No.7 of the paper book). We arethus of the view that the Ld. CIT was not justifiedin making observation that making donation is notone of the objects of the Trust. It is also registeredu/s 12AA of the Act. We thus do not find substancein the general observation of the Ld. CIT that theapplicant is not fulfilling the criteria for claiming therenewal of exemption U/s 80G.”
4.In view of the above the issue is answered in favour of
assessee against the department.
The appeal stands dismissed.
( VIRENDRA KUMAR MATHUR),J. (K.S. JHAVERI),J.
B.M.Gandhi
Sr. No.155.
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.