DARBAR SACHKHAND SAHEB CHARITABLE TRUST,KOLHAPUR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL,VP :

The ld. CIT(E) noted that the assessee did not furnish proper evidence in support of its reply and whatever was furnished was cryptic, inadequate and non-verifiable. That is how, he refused to grant registration thereby rejecting the assessee’s provisional registration granted on 07-04-2022. Aggrieved thereby, the assessee has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.

Copy of the assessee’s reply dt. 14-03-2023 along with the necessary photographs has been placed at pages 52 onwards of the paper book. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention that the assessee was granted provisional registration only on 07-04-2022 and the details of whatever little activities it carried out from that date till the requirement by the ld. CIT(E), vide his notice dt. 07-03-2023, were duly furnished along with necessary photographs. The registration was denied by observing that “the assessee failed to comply with the provisions of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and hence, the undersigned is unable to draw any satisfactory conclusion about genuineness of the activities of the assessee and has left no alternative but to reject the application”. The prescription of section 12AB(1)(b)(i) is that where the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (iv) or sub- clause (v) of the said clause, the CIT(E) may call for such documents or information from the trust or institution or make such inquiries as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about— (A) the genuineness of activities of the trust or institution; and (B) the compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects. Having seen all the documents furnished by the assessee as called for by him, the ld. CIT(E) failed to point out anything adverse either against the genuineness of the activities of the trust or the compliance of other laws. In our considered opinion, when the Trust Deed was there before the ld. CIT(E) and the assessee furnished all the necessary details of the activities carried out up to the stipulated date, there was no reason for the ld. CIT(E) to deny the benefit of registration u/s.12AB without specifically pointing out the non- fulfillment of the requisite condition(s) for the grant of registration. We, therefore, overturn the impugned order and direct to grant the registration u/s.12AB of the Act.

The ld. CIT(E) has given the same reasons for denial of approval u/s.80G(5) as were given in his order rejecting the grant of registration u/s.12AB. Following the view taken hereinabove in the context of appeal against registration u/s.12AB, we overturn the impugned order and direct to grant approval u/s.80G of the Act.