ST. JOSEPHS CHURCH,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Brief facts are that the assessee, St. Joseph’s Church, is an old religious-cum-charitable institution established in the year 1955 and registered as a public trust under the erstwhile Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, now known as the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, since 20.06.1955. The assessee filed an application in Form No. 10AB on 26.08.2025 under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act seeking renewal of its regular registration. During the course of proceedings, the learned CIT(E) required the assessee to furnish, inter alia, a self-certified copy of the instrument of trust or Memorandum of Association. In response, the assessee furnished the application made before the Charity Commissioner, the certificate of registration issued under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act and other documents evidencing its existence, objects and activities. The learned CIT(E), however, held that these documents merely evidenced the registration of the public trust and could not be regarded as an instrument or document evidencing its creation or establishment. In the absence of a formal trust deed, Memorandum of Association or a scheme settled by the Charity Commissioner or a competent Court, he concluded that the requisite satisfaction contemplated under section 12AB could not be arrived at and, accordingly, rejected the application.

The learned counsel further submitted that Rule 17A(2)(b) expressly recognises an applicant created or established otherwise than under an instrument and permits such an applicant to furnish a document evidencing its creation or

We have heard the parties and perused the material placed on record. The application for renewal has been rejected essentially for the reason that the assessee could not produce a formal instrument of trust or Memorandum of Association. It is, however, not in dispute that the assessee has been registered as a public religious-cum-charitable trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act since 20.06.1955 and has enjoyed registration and recognition under the Income-tax Act for several decades. The assessee had furnished before the learned CIT(E) the application made before the Charity Commissioner, the statutory registration certificate, its earlier registration under the Income-tax Act and other material evidencing its objects and continued activities. Significantly, the impugned order does not record any adverse finding

Rule 17A(2) draws a clear distinction between an applicant created or established “under an instrument” and an applicant created or established “otherwise than under an instrument”. While clause (a) requires the former to furnish a self-certified copy of the instrument creating or establishing it, clause (b) permits the latter to furnish a self-certified copy of the document evidencing its creation or establishment. Thus, the statutory framework expressly recognises that a religious or charitable institution may validly come into existence otherwise than through a formal written instrument. If the production of a formal trust deed were to be regarded as indispensable in every case, clause (b) of Rule 17A(2) would be rendered otiose. In such cases, the competent authority is required to examine the alternative documents evidencing the creation or establishment of the institution and cannot reject the application merely because a formal instrument, which never existed or is no longer available owing to the antiquity of the institution, has not been produced.

The reliance placed by the learned CIT(E) upon sections 3 and 5 of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882, is also misplaced. Section 1 of the said Act expressly provides that nothing contained therein applies to public or private religious or charitable endowments. The assessee is admittedly a public religious-cum-charitable institution registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, and its creation, existence and administration are therefore required to be examined in

This issue is directly covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench in St. Joseph’s High School v. CIT(E) (supra), wherein it was held that the absence of a formal trust deed or Memorandum of Association cannot, by itself, constitute a valid ground for rejecting an application under section 12AB where the institution was established otherwise than under an instrument and had furnished cogent statutory and documentary evidence of its creation, continued existence, objects and activities. It was further held that the registration under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act and the records maintained by the Charity Commissioner constitute relevant evidentiary material for the purposes of Rule 17A(2)(b).

The same principle has subsequently been followed in St. Ignatius Church v. CIT(E) (supra), involving an old religious- cum-charitable institution registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act since 20.06.1955. In that case, considering the long-standing statutory recognition of the institution, its registration under the Income-tax Act and the absence of any adverse finding concerning its objects or activities, the learned CIT(E) was directed to grant renewal of registration under section 12AB. The material facts of the present case are substantially identical, and no distinguishing feature has been brought to our notice.

We may also observe that the learned CIT(E), in the concluding portion of the impugned order, has himself recorded that the assessee’s existing registration would continue to remain valid until Assessment Year 2026-27 and that the rejection was intended to operate as a “gentle reminder” to formulate a suitable governing instrument or obtain a scheme from the Charity Commissioner or a competent Court. This observation itself indicates that the rejection was not founded upon any adverse conclusion concerning the assessee’s objects or the genuineness of its activities, but was principally intended to secure the formulation of a formal governing instrument. Such an administrative consideration, howsoever desirable it may

Accordingly, respectfully following the aforesaid decisions and considering that the assessee has been registered as a public religious-cum-charitable trust under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act since 20.06.1955, has enjoyed registration and recognition under the Income-tax Act for several decades and has furnished sufficient documentary material evidencing its creation, continued existence, objects and activities, we hold that the absence of a formal trust deed, by itself, could not have been treated as a fatal defect. The impugned order dated 30.03.2026 is therefore set aside, and the learned CIT(E) is directed to grant renewal of registration under section 12AB to the assessee in accordance with law. Considering that the existing registration is stated to be valid only up to Assessment Year 2026-27, the learned CIT(E) shall give effect to this direction expeditiously.