ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMPAL WALE HUNMANJI DEVALAY TRUST, JAIPUR

PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM.

This Appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Ld. CIT (A)-III,

Jaipur dated 15.09.2016 pertaining to assessment year 2012-13.

The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal :-

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) has erred in allowing exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the IT Act notwithstanding the assessee failed to produce 12AA Registration Certificate during assessment proceedings. 2. Any other question of law as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be framed before the Hon’ble Tribunal in the interest of justice.”

Income Tax Act, 1961.

2 ITA No. 1095/JP/2016. M/s Shri Rampalwale Hanumanji Devealaya Trust, Jaipur.

scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s 143(3) of the act (hereinafter referred

to as the Act) 1961. While framing the assessment the Assessing Officer disallowed

the exemption on the ground that the assessee was not registered u/s 12AA of the

Act and the Assessing Officer also disallowed the expenditure claim on such income.

Aggrieved by this, the assessee preferred and appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who after

considering the submissions allowed the exemption. On the ground that the assessee was subsequently granted registration u/s 12AA of the Act on 9thOct, 2015.

Aggrieved by this, the Revenue has preferred the present appeal.

submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in granting the exemption when

admittedly the assessee was not registered u/s 12AA of the Act. Merely making an

application u/s 12AA would not entitle the assessee for exemption.

submissions as made in the written synoposis. Ld. Counsel for the assessee

submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the

decision of the Tribunal in the case of Shree Bhanushali Mitra Mandal Trust vs.

Income Tax Officer, ITA No. 2515 (AHD.)2015, Sree Sree RamKrishna Samiti V. puty

CIT Cir-2, 44 ITR (Trib.) 678 (Kol).

record. We find that Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue in para 5.3 as under:- “5.3 I have carefully considered the facts of the case, findings of the AO and submissions of the appellant. It is seen that after assement assessee was granted registration u/s 12AA on 09.10.2015. Therefore, the Ld. AR pleaded that exemption be allowed in view of amendment in Act.

3 ITA No. 1095/JP/2016. M/s Shri Rampalwale Hanumanji Devealaya Trust, Jaipur.

The contention of the Ld. AR that retrospective amendment was brought by statute in provisions of section 12AA vide Finance Act, 2014 carries weight as vide this amendment, it was said that if at any time registration is granted, the pending assessments shall also be deemed as covered with such registration and the benefit of provisions of section 11 shall be granted to the assessee for the past years and no action u/s 148 would be taken for any year prior to the year of granting registration u/s 12AA on account of non-availability of such registration in past years. The CBDT no. 1/2015 (F. No. 142/13/2014-TPL) dated 21.01.2015 wherein the intention of the Government has been explained to provide benefit to the genuine trusts and institutions. As per this amendment the pending assessment are also deemed to have been covered with the registration certificate u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the present case the assessment was completed by the Ld. AO on 27th March, 2015 and the assessee had applied for fresh registration during May, 2015 and therefore it is undisputed fact that during the assessment proceedings the assessee trust did not have registration certificate u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The same was granted on 09.10.2015. It has been claimed by the Ld. AR that since the registration certificate has been granted by the CIT (Exemption) during the pendency of the present appellate proceedings and hence benefit of the above amendment has to be allowed to it in view that appeal proceedings before CIT (Appeals) is an extension of assessment proceedings only and therefore the case of the appellant is covered with the above said retrospective amendment. For such purpose he has put reliance on the case decided by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad SMC Bench in the case of Shree Bhanushali Mitra Mandal Trust v/s Income-Tax Officer, Ward-3, Vapi (68 Taxmann.com 250) vide order dated 22.02.2016 and on the case decided by the Hon'ble Cochin Bench of ITAT in the case of SNDP Yogam v/s ADIT (Exemption) (68 Taxmann.com 152) wherein such view has been upheld. In my view the contention of the Ld. AR deserves to be allowed and hence the ground of appeal is decided in favour of the appellant.”

6.1 From the above, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of

the Tribunal rendered in the case of Shree Bhanushali Mitra Mandal Trust Vs.

Income Tax Officer and also in the case of SNDP Yogam vs. ADIT (E). The Co-

ordinate Bench in this Tribunal in the case of Sree Sree Ramkrishna Samiti Vs. CIT(supra) has held as under:-

4 ITA No. 1095/JP/2016. M/s Shri Rampalwale Hanumanji Devealaya Trust, Jaipur.

“6.13 We hold that since the only reason for denial of exemption u/s 11 was absence of registration u/s 12AA (which was granted to assessee society on 29.10.2010 with effect from 01.04.2010) for the relevant assessment years and on no other ground, the benefit of change in law as above by Finance Act 2014 should be available and for all the years, the benefit of exemption should be available on the date of registration as all the assessments were pending as shown above. In this connection, it requires mention specifically that all the receipts of the donation were proved on enquiry to have been received from the claimed donors and utilized for the specific purpose (construction of old age home) for which they were received. In conclusion, we hold that the insertion of the proviso to section 12A(2) of the Act has to be construed as retrospective in operation. Respectfully following the various judicial precedents relied upon and in the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the ground no. 3 to 8 raised by the assessee.”

6.2 In view of the above binding precedents, we do not see any reason to

interfere into the order of the Ld. CIT(A) same is hereby affirmed. Thus, Ground

raised in this appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on Wednesday, the 31st day of May 2017.

Sd/- Sd/- ( dqy Hkkjr) ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) ( KUL BHARAT ) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Jaipur Dated:- 31/05/2017. Pooja/ आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत

5 ITA No. 1095/JP/2016. M/s Shri Rampalwale Hanumanji Devealaya Trust, Jaipur.