Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, World Jain Confederation, applied for registration under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(E) denied the registration citing objectionable objects in the assessee's MOA that were allegedly in violation of statutory provisions.
Held
The Tribunal held that denying registration to the assessee was a breach of the Rule of Consistency, as there were no changes in material facts or the objects of the Trust compared to previous years for which registration was granted.
Key Issues
Whether the denial of registration under Section 80G was justified when similar objects were accepted in previous years and the assessee had an existing registration since 2001?
Sections Cited
80G, 12A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA
Appellant /Assessee by : Shri Niraj D. Seth, Advocate Revenue / Respondent by : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 04.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 O R D E R PER: NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai [for short 'the CIT(E)] dated 13.11.2024 by which the CIT(E) denied the registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).
The representatives were heard at length. Case records carefully perused. We find that the CIT(E) has rejected the application for grant of approval under section 80G of the Act on the ground that there were objectable objects in the MOA which are in violation of statutory provisions. The objectable objects considered by the CIT(E) read as under:
“3(g) (ii)-To coordinate on research of all principles, rectification& applications of jain philosophy among various jain research institute/Foundation in India & abroad...." "3(j)- To organise & co-ordinate the participation of Jain in International conferences, seminar, connection and such other global or regional events.....". "3(I)- To institute scholarships and chairs on Jainism at major universities in India & Abroad." "3(p)- To promote exchanges of scholars, cultural leaders, creative artist and scientists and create satisfactory and systematic career opportunities for scholars at different levels within different regions in India and between different nations in the world...." 5.1 The use of such words in objects of applicant clearly conveys its intention to utilise funds outside India, thereby leaving open the possibility for future endeavours, which may involve expenditure outside the country. The applicant ought to have amended these clauses to align with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. However, it has failed to do so.”
We find that on similar objects 12A registration has been granted by the CIT(E) which is still in force. Further the assessee has been accorded approval under section 80G of the Act since 2001 and it is only in the impugned AY the approval has been declined.
We are of the considered view that this is breach of the Rule of consistency as there are no changes in the material facts nor in the objects of the Trust, therefore, we direct the CIT(E) to grant approval to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed.