KALPNA CHAWLA EDUCATIONAL TRUST ,HISAR vs. CIT E , CHANDIGARH

On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh ("CIT(E)") rejecting the application filed under section 12AB of the Act for registration under section 12A(1)(ac) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("Act") is bad both in the eye of law and on facts. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by learned CIT(E) is invalid and illegal as the same has been passed in violation of the statutory conditions prescribed under the Income Tax Act. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) has been erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the application of the assessee for approval under section 12A(1)(ac)(ii) of the Act, despite the fact assessee has fulfilled all the conditions as provided under the Act and hence, eligible for registration. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application for registration under section 12A(1)(ac) (ii) of the Act, despite the fact that there is no adverse finding regarding the aims, objects and genuineness of activities of the trust and hence application for registration cannot be rejected. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application for registration despite the fact that activities rendered by the assessee are purely charitable in nature, falls within the definition of "charitable purposes under section 2(15) of the Act. 6. (i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) has erred in rejecting the application without bringing on record any material to show that the objects of the assessee trust are non-charitable or that the activities carried out are not genuine. (ii) That the rejection of registration is based largely on estimations, presumptions and considerations which are beyond the scope of section 12AB of the Act. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the application filed by the assessee by ignoring the settled judicial position that the scope of enquiry at the stage of granting registration is confined only to examining the objects of the trust/institution and the genuineness of its activities, and therefore the action of the learned CIT(E) is illegal, invalid, without jurisdiction and contrary to the judicial precedents in this regard. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(E) has erred both on facts and in law in rejecting the application without providing a fair and adequate opportunity to the assessee and in clear violation of principle of natural justice. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.” 2