SHRI. GAUSHALA,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ROHTAK

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3517/Del/2026 (Assessment Year : 2026-27) Shri Gaushala Vs. Income Tax Officer Kansal Singla & Associations, Exemption Ward Rohtak SCO 80-81, Sector – 17C, Zila Parishad Building Chandigarh – 160 017 Rohtak – 124 001 Haryana PAN No. AALAS 7020 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Shri T. N. Singla, C.A. Revenue by Shri Zafarul Haque Tanweer, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing: 11.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 24.08.2026

ORDER PER NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.01.2026 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, (Exemption), Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Ld. CIT(E)] for renewal of registration of trust under Section 12AB(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for A.Y. 2026-27. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a registered charitable society, duly registered under the Haryana Registration and

ITA No. 3517/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2026-27] Shri Gaushala vs. ITO Regulation of Societies Act, 2012, engaged in the welfare, protection and preservation of cows and other cattle, along with activities relating to rural development, rural employment generation and community service. The assessee filed an application for renewal of registration under section 12A(1)(ac) of the Act before the ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT(E) vide order in Form 10AD, granted approval under section 12AB(1)(b) of the Act by classifying the assessee as ‘Religious Entity’ instead of a charitable entity and rejected the application under section 80G of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(E), Assessee is now in appeal before us with the following grounds: 1. “That the order of approval in Form 10AD, passed by the Ld. CIT(E) is bad in law and against the provisions of the Act. 2. That the Ld. CIT(E) has wrongly considered the appellant as religious entity while granting the approval against application for renewal of registration u/s 12A(1)(ac) filed by the assessee. 3. That the Ld. CIT(E) without application of his mind has wrongly granted the registration for A.Y. 2027-28 to 2036-37 u/s 12AB(1)(b) to the appellant wrongly considering it as a religious entity. 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or withdraw any ground of appeal before the final date of hearing.” 4. Before us, the ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the application for registration under section 12AB was allowed treating the assessee as religious entity and consequently, the application under section 80G was rejected. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR relied on the orders of the ld.CIT(E).

Page 2 of 6

ITA No. 3517/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2026-27] Shri Gaushala vs. ITO 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. To adjudicate on the issue of the assessee being a religious entity, we take a look at the aim and objectives of the assessee, which are as followed: 1. To operate and manage the Gaushala Committee, Village Mandi Dabwali, District Sirsa. 2. To look after, movable/immovable property related to the Society, purchase or take on lease property. 3. To charge the prescribed fee from each member to become a member of the Society. 4. The main objective of the institution is to protect farming/crops in villages from stray cows. 5. To collect helpless, sick, disabled, old and stray cows and look after them according to its capacity. 6. To construct sheds for cows, arrange drinking water, arrange fodder, and construct sheds for storing fodder, etc. 7. To receive aid/assistance from the Central or State Government. 8. To arrange doctors and medicines for sick cows. 9. To purchase agricultural land, receive it as a donation, or take it on lease, etc., for cow fodder. 10. To look after the land of the institution and arrange green fodder for the cows. 11. The property and income of the institution shall be spent solely in the interest of the institution; no bonus or dividend shall be given to any member from it. 12. All members shall be honorary; no member shall take a salary. Any member of the executive body or general body who spends from their own pocket for the works of the institution, that amount shall be reimbursed to the member out of the income of the institution.

Page 3 of 6

ITA No. 3517/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2026-27] Shri Gaushala vs. ITO 7. From a careful perusal of the aims and objectives of the Trust, we find that there is no clause, object or activity in the Memorandum/Bye laws of the Society which refers to, authorizes, or is directed towards any religious purpose, religious institution or place of worship. The other objective of the institution is to protect farming/crops in villages from stray cows and to look after sick, disable, old and stray cows. In such factual matrix, we are of the view that the objects of the Trust qualifies as charitable in nature and is covered under the definition of “charitable purpose” in Section 2(15) of the Act. We do not find any factual foundation for the Ld. CIT(E) to have classified the assessee as a religious entity. In view of the above discussion, we therefore, hold that the assessee is eligible to be recognized as a charitable society. We accordingly, direct the Ld. CIT(E) to grant registration u/s 12AB of the Act as charitable entity. The ground is allowed. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No.3517/Del/2026 is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 24.08.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) (NAVEEN CHANDRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 24.08.2026 Priti Yadav, Sr. Ps* Page 4 of 6

ITA No. 3517/DEL/2026 [A.Y 2026-27] Shri Gaushala vs. ITO Copy forwarded to : 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI

Page 5 of 6