SHREE SHIV SHAKTI VADI GOUSHALA SEVA SAMITI,JALORE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the appeal (ITA No. 75/JODH/2025) relating to registration under section 12AB of the Act, the assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. The ld. CIT (E) has erred on facts and in law in rejecting the application filed by the assessee in Form No.10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB under the clause 12A(1)(ac)(iii) by holding that trust is not registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. 2. The ld. CIT (E) has erred on facts and in law in finding that trust has Non- Genuineness of activities decided the case without providing proper and appropriate opportunity before deciding the case rejecting the registration of trust as such. 3. The ld. CIT (E) has erred on facts and in law in the rejection u/s 12AB also led to the cancellation of the trust’s provisional registration of trust dated 18.10.2021 u/s 12A and provisional approval u/s 80G. 4. The Appellant crave liberty to add, amend, alter, modify or delete any of ground/s of appeal on or before its hearing before your honour. 3. In the appeal (ITA No.76/JODH/2025) relating to approval under section 80G of the Act, the assessee has raised the following grounds:

The assessee had also filed an online application in Form No. 10AB on 29.05.2024, seeking approval under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Act. By a separate order dated 25.11.2024, passed in Form No. 10AD the learned CIT(E) rejected the application seeking approval under section 80G. The

Before us, the learned Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the principal objection of the learned CIT(E) concerning non- registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 no longer survives. It was submitted that, pursuant to an application made in Form No. 6, the assessee has since been granted registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on 01.07.2025, vide Registration Certificate No. 32/2025/Jalore, issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Vibhag, Jodhpur.

The learned AR further submitted that the assessee had been granted provisional registration under section 12AB and provisional approval under section 80G. It was also submitted that the assessee was registered under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 vide

On the issue of genuineness of activities, the learned AR submitted that the assessee had furnished replies dated 03.10.2024 and 09.11.2024, together with substantial supporting material. It was contended that the complete bank book, cash book and ledgers comprising 88 pages were uploaded on the income-tax portal and that the books of account contained the particulars of the expenses and payments incurred by the assessee.

It was submitted that the bank statements and books of account for financial year 2023-24 had been furnished and that the audited financial statements for the earlier years were also available on the portal. The learned AR further submitted that the ledgers pertaining to fodder, grains, repairs and maintenance, along with the inward and outward register of cattle feed, had also been furnished.

As regards the salary expenditure, it was submitted that salary aggregating to Rs.4,00,260/- was paid to persons engaged as Gwalas and salary of Rs.1,10,000/- was paid to the Munim. According to the learned

The learned AR submitted that the assessee had received Government subsidy of Rs.5,88,000/- during financial year 2023-24 and that the activities of the Gaushala, including utilisation of the subsidy, were subject to monitoring by the Directorate of Gopalan, Rajasthan.

The learned AR also submitted that no payment had been made to persons specified under section 13(3) of the Act and that this fact had

It was, therefore, contended that the finding of the learned CIT(E) regarding non-genuineness of the activities was not justified. The learned AR prayed that registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G be granted to the assessee.

The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied upon the respective orders passed by the learned CIT(E). He submitted that since all the requisite details and supporting documents were not available before the learned CIT(E), both matters may be restored to the file of the learned CIT(E) for examination and fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The application seeking registration under section 12AB was rejected on two principal grounds, namely, non- registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 and failure to establish the genuineness of the activities. The application seeking approval under section 80G was rejected substantially as a consequence of the rejection of the application under section 12AB.

The assessee has also contended that several documents and details were furnished through the replies dated 03.10.2024 and 09.11.2024, whereas the learned CIT(E) recorded that the complete requisite material was not furnished. The nature and extent of compliance, including the books of account, vouchers, bank statements, cattle records, salary details, Government grant records, ownership documents and other supporting evidence, require verification at the level of the learned CIT(E).

The additional material now relied upon by the assessee, particularly the registration obtained under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, also requires examination by the statutory authority. We are, therefore, of the considered view that it would not be appropriate to issue a direction for grant of registration under section 12AB or approval

In view of the above facts, and having regard to the fair submission of the learned Departmental Representative, we consider it just and proper to set aside both the impugned orders dated 25.11.2024 and restore the applications to the file of the learned CIT(E) for fresh adjudication.

The learned CIT(E) shall examine Registration Certificate dated 01.07.2025, stated to have been issued under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and all other documents, accounts and explanations that may be furnished by the assessee. The learned CIT(E) shall adjudicate the application seeking registration under section 12AB afresh and shall thereafter, or simultaneously therewith, decide the application seeking approval under section 80G, in accordance with law.

Since the respective impugned orders also record cancellation of the provisional registration and provisional approval granted to the assessee, those aspects shall also be examined and decided afresh by the learned CIT(E) while disposing of the respective applications.

In view of our decision to restore both matters for fresh adjudication, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.