SCHOOL OF ST. JOHN THE EVANGELIST,ANDHERI EAST, MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), MUMBAI, CUMBALLA, MUMBAI

The assessee is a public charitable educational institution administering School of St. John the Evangelist, Marol, Andheri (East), Mumbai. The institution was established as a primary school in the year 1955 and has since been engaged in imparting education, which undisputedly constitutes a charitable purpose within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act. The school is established and administered by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Bombay and stands registered as a public trust under the erstwhile Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (now the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950). It is an admitted position that the assessee has remained continuously recognised by the educational authorities, has enjoyed registration under section 12A of the Act for several decades, was granted registration under the new regime by issuance of Form No. 10AC and has also been enjoying approval under section 80G. Upon the expiry of the earlier

During the course of the 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 as contemplated under Rule 17A of the Income- tax Rules, 1962. In response, the assessee explained that it had never been constituted under a separate written trust deed or Memorandum of Association and that, being a Catholic missionary educational institution, its internal administration was governed in accordance with Canon Law. The assessee further furnished the statutory application submitted before the Charity Commissioner at the time of registration under the Bombay Public Trusts Act together with the certificate of registration and other contemporaneous documents evidencing the creation, establishment and continued existence of the trust. The learned CIT(E), however, held that such documents merely evidenced registration of the trust and could not substitute the instrument creating or establishing the trust. According to him, in the absence of such constitutive document, it was not possible to record the satisfaction contemplated under section 12AB regarding the charitable objects of the trust, the genuineness of its activities

Aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the assessee is in appeal before us. At the very outset, both the learned representatives fairly submitted that the controversy arising in the present appeals is identical, both on facts and in law, to that decided by this very Bench in ITA Nos. 5646/Mum/2026 and 5849/Mum/2026, St. Joseph’s High School v. CIT(E.), as also in ITA Nos. 5620/Mum/2026 and 5642/Mum/2026, St. Thomas High School v. CIT(E.), pronounced on the same date. It was submitted that the impugned orders have been passed on identical reasoning, the statutory provisions involved are the same, the written submissions substantially overlap and the principal legal issue requiring adjudication is whether renewal of registration under section 12AB can be denied solely on the ground that the assessee, though admittedly registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act and continuously recognised under the Income-tax Act for several decades, was not constituted under a formal written trust deed. We shall, therefore, examine the controversy in the light of the findings recorded by us in the aforesaid decisions while independently considering the facts of the present case.

The learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions advanced before the learned CIT(E) and submitted that the rejection of the application proceeds on an erroneous interpretation of section 12AB of the Act read with Rule 17A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. It was submitted that the assessee has been in existence since the year 1955 and has throughout been carrying on the charitable activity of imparting education. According to the learned counsel, the assessee was never constituted under a separate written trust deed or Memorandum of Association and, therefore, squarely falls within the ambit of Rule 17A(2)(b), which expressly recognises institutions created or established otherwise than under an instrument. It was contended that the application submitted before the Charity Commissioner, the registration certificate issued under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, the continued recognition granted by the educational authorities, the registration under section 12A, the subsequent registration under section 12AB vide Form No. 10AC and the approval under section 80G, together with the uninterrupted acceptance of the assessee’s charitable status by the Department over several decades, constitute sufficient documentary evidence of the creation and establishment of the trust within the meaning of Rule 17A(2)(b). It was further submitted that there has been no change either in the charitable objects of the institution or in the nature of its

Per contra, the learned Departmental Representative relied upon the reasoning recorded in the impugned orders and submitted that production of the instrument creating the trust is an essential requirement for enabling the Commissioner to examine the charitable objects of the institution, the framework governing its administration and the fulfilment of the statutory conditions prescribed under section 12AB. According to the Revenue, the application submitted before the Charity Commissioner and the

We have carefully considered the rival submissions, perused the impugned orders and examined the material placed before us. At the outset, we find that the controversy arising in the present appeals is identical, both on facts and in law, to that decided by this very Bench in ITA Nos. 5646/Mum/2026 and 5849/Mum/2026, St. Joseph’s High School v. CIT(E.), as also in ITA Nos. 5620/Mum/2026 and 5642/Mum/2026, St. Thomas High School v. CIT(E.), both pronounced on the same date. Having independently examined the facts of the present case, we find that the reasoning adopted by the learned CIT(E), the statutory provisions involved, the documentary evidence produced by the assessee and the legal submissions advanced before us are substantially identical to those considered in the aforesaid decisions. The learned Departmental Representative has also not been able to point out any distinguishing feature, either on facts or in law, warranting a departure from the view

We have carefully considered the rival submissions, perused the impugned orders and examined the material placed before us. Upon such consideration, we find that the controversy involved in the present appeals is, in all material respects, identical to that which came up for consideration before this very Bench in ITA Nos. 5646/Mum/2026 and 5849/Mum/2026, St. Joseph’s High School v. CIT(E.), and thereafter in ITA Nos. 5620/Mum/2026 and 5642/Mum/2026, St. Thomas High School v. CIT(E.), both pronounced on the same date. In the aforesaid decisions, after an elaborate examination of the scope and ambit of section 12AB of the Act, Rule 17A of the Income-tax Rules, the provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 and the judicial precedents governing the field, we held that where a charitable institution has admittedly been established otherwise than under a written instrument, the absence of a formal trust deed or Memorandum of Association cannot, by itself, constitute a valid ground for refusing registration under section 12AB.

Having independently examined the facts of the present case, we find ourselves in respectful agreement with the

We have already, in our consolidated order of even date passed in ITA Nos. 5646/Mum/2026 and 5849/Mum/2026, St. Joseph’s High School v. CIT(E.), undertaken an elaborate examination of the scope and ambit of section 12AB of the Act, Rule 17A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the relevant provisions of the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 and the judicial precedents governing the controversy, including the decisions in Laxminarayan Maharaj v. CIT (supra), Ananda Social & Educational Trust v. CIT (supra), Chamber of Tax Consultants v. CIT (Exemptions) (supra), Pr. CIT

We also find that the learned CIT(E) has not recorded any adverse finding regarding the charitable objects of the assessee, the genuineness of its activities or the fulfilment of the conditions prescribed under section 12AB of the Act. There is equally no finding that the assessee has altered its objects, ceased to carry on educational activities or violated any statutory requirement material for achieving its charitable purposes. In these circumstances, and for the

We further find that the assessee has enjoyed uninterrupted recognition under the Income-tax Act for several decades and has continued to carry on the same charitable activity of imparting education without any material change in its objects or activities. In the absence of any distinguishing factual or legal circumstance, judicial consistency also demands that a similar view be adopted in the present appeals.

Accordingly, respectfully following our detailed decisions rendered in ITA Nos. 5646/Mum/2026 and 5849/Mum/2026 (St. Joseph’s High School v. CIT(E.)) and ITA Nos. 5620/Mum/2026 and 5642/Mum/2026 (St. Thomas High School v. CIT(E.)), both pronounced on the same date, we set aside the impugned order rejecting the assessee’s application for renewal of registration under section 12AB of the Act and direct the learned CIT(E) to grant renewal of registration in accordance with law. Since the rejection of approval under section 80G is purely consequential and no independent adverse finding has been recorded regarding the fulfilment of the statutory conditions prescribed thereunder, the said order is also set aside with a direction to grant approval under

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.