IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 #45 
         ITA 1273/2010  
 . 
 DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX                                        ..... 
 Appellant 
 . 
 . 
 Through Mr. Abhishek Maratha, Adv. 
 versus 
 . 
 NAGARA TRUST                                                     ..... 
 Respondent 
 Through None. 
 CORAM: 
 HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN 
 . 
 O R D E R 
                               26.08.2010 
 . 
 The present appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 
 1961 (for brevity ?the Act?) is directed against the order dated 8th January, 
 2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench : ?F? Delhi (for 
 short ?the tribunal?) in I.T. Appeal No.4272 (Del) of 2009 whereby the tribunal 
 has directed a remit to the Director of Income Tax which had rejected an 
 application for renewal of recognition of the respondent under Section 80-G of 
 the Act earlier granted in favour of the assessee-respondent. 
 We have heard Mr. Abhishek Maratha, learned counsel for the revenue who 
 has vehemently urged that the tribunal in the obtaining factual matrix should 
 not have remitted the matter but should have adjudicated the lis on the material 
 brought on record.   Learned  counsel  would  submit  that  when  the 
 ITA 1273/2010                                                        Page 1 of 3 
 facts are tell tale and easily perceptible, the tribunal would have been well 
 advised to dispose the matter finally.  Learned counsel for the revenue 
 submitted that when bare reading of the magazine `Nishaan? would clearly 
 demonstrate that it was a commercial venture, there was no justification or 
 warrant on the part of the tribunal to direct a remand. 
 To appreciate the aforesaid submissions canvassed by Mr. Maratha we have 
 carefully perused the order passed by the tribunal.  On a scrutiny of paragraph 
 4 of the order passed by the tribunal, it is vivid that the tribunal has noted 
 that there was no material to prove how the activities by way of publication of 
 magazine `Nishaan? has a religious flavour or the activities have become 
 commercial in nature. 
 Be it noted, the tribunal had also observed that the rejecting authority 
 had not taken note of the decision rendered by his predecessor.  Mr. Maratha, 
 learned counsel for the revenue would submit that the tribunal has exclusively 
 been guided by the said factor.  The aforesaid submission, in our considered 
 opinion, is sans substance inasmuch as the tribunal though has referred to the 
 same yet has addressed itself with regard to the lack of material on record and, 
 accordingly, directed a remand to the competent authority for reexamination for 
 the simon-pure reason  the  activity  is  the  most  important 
 . 
 ITA 1273/2010                                                        Page 2 of 3 
 thing which has to be analyzed on proper scrutiny. 
 In view of our aforesaid analysis, we are unable to accept the submission 
 of Mr. Maratha, learned counsel for the revenue and the result is inevitable 
 dismissal of the appeal in limine which we direct. 
 . 
 . 
 CHIEF JUSTICE 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 MANMOHAN, J 
 . 
 . 
 AUGUST    26, 2010 
 vk 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 ITA 1273/2010                                                        Page 3 of 3 
 . 
 $ 48