M/. AGASTYA GURUKULAM PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTIONS,, CHENNAI

In making the above-observations, the ld.CIT(E) cited the following cases in support of his rejection:

Sole Trustee, LokaShikshana Trust V. CIT [1975] 101 ITR – 234.

New Noble Educational Society V. CCIT [2022] 143 taxmann.com 276.

Raja Sir Annamalai Chettiar Foundation V. CCIT [2020] taxmann.com 128.

Before us, the ld.AR for assessee argued that the ld.CIT(E)’s rejection orders are without any specific finding for the rejection on the issue of genuineness of the assessee’s activities as a trust. It was also argued that the assessee is registered for recognition with accredited educational body, NIOS and the recognition of NIOS is based on the systematic curriculum as per syllabus framed by NCERT. The ld.AR drew our attention to the accreditation granted by the NIOS to the assessee dated 28.11.2024 (Page No.36 to 46 of the paper book). Further, the ld.AR also shown us that the curriculum and examinations conducted by the NIOS is recognised is on par with the CBSE conducted courses. On the issue of application of income and scholarships, the ld.AR for assessee submitted that in the earlier years the income was applied & 377/Chny/2025 to charitable activities and that scholarships were given in earlier years too. In support of their arguments, the ld.AR counsel for assessee filed a paperbook containing the trust deed, audited financials for the past 4 years, reply letters (dated 07.11.2024, 11.12.2024, 18.12.2024) along with the documents attached for each letter, Details of recognition of NIOS by Ministry of Human Resources). On the other hand, the ld.DR supported the order of the ld.CIT(E). The ld.AR for assessee further submitted before us, that the recognition from NIOS, records of formal & systematic education such as Transfer certificate, NCERT-based syllabus, time table etc. must also be considered for the purpose of grant of registration u/s.12AB and section 80G of the Act. They also contended that the precedents relied upon by the ld.CIT(E) are distinguishable to the facts of the present case since the assessee has formal recognition from NIOS and the trust deed includes objects relating to education for below-poverty line, underprivileged student, which was also overlooked. In support of their arguments, the ld.AR for assessee relied on CIT(E) V. Unique Educational Society 168 taxmann.com 448.

Per contra, the ld.DR, supported the decision of the ld.CIT(E) and argued that the institution lacks systematic education and valid recognition and hence prayed for confirming the order of the ld.CIT(E).

We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials before us. The question arising here is whether, the assessee is eligible for registration u/s.12AB and u/s.80G of the Act and whether the assessee is providing formal, systematic education with a valid recognition. The ld.AR has consistently pointed out that the assessee has formal and valid recognition from NIOS.

It is admitted facts that the assessee is a public charitable trust with objects of imparting education and relief to poor. The assessee has applied for registration u/s.12AB and approval u/s.80G(5) of the Act vide Form 10AB. The :-5-:

On perusal of the records submitted by the ld.AR we find that the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS), formerly known as the National Open School, was established in the year 1989. The NIOS is an autonomous organisation set up by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India. Through the notification dated 11.12.2002, the ministry notified that the courses of NIOS are to be treated in equivalence of other boards and that the NIOS is also vested with power to conduct Secondary and Sr. Secondary levels of examinations. It is pertinent to note that students who have completed their schooling by way of NIOS are also eligible to be admitted into colleges including medical colleges. As such, NIOS also can accredit an institution so as to enable such institutions to teach and educate children. For any institution to obtain such accreditation, they have to fulfil certain norms and criteria. In the case of the assessee, which has obtained accreditation for Open Basic Education Programme (OBC programme) on 28.11.2024, they also have fulfilled the criteria required for such accreditation such as, trust being registered and carrying out its objects for at least 3 years, having libraries, trained teachers, etc.

We also note that in the MoU signed between the NIOS and the assessee, the assessee is to follow the academic calendar as prescribed by the NIOS and the syllabus is also to be prescribed by the NIOS, which is based on the NCERT-syllabus. The MoU also contains terms regarding the conduction of exams, duration of classes, etc.

Therefore, we are of considered view that the assessee is having formal and systematic education in place as mandated by the MoU with NIOS and that NIOS is an autonomous organisation set up Government of India and is authorised to give accreditation to institutions, which makes the accreditation & 377/Chny/2025 obtained by the assessee for OBE programme a valid one. Therefore, view of the ld.CIT(E) cannot be accepted that the assessee does not conduct systematic formal education in line with their objects of the trust.

Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the assessee is engaged in providing formal and systematic education with a valid recognition from a government body and therefore, the activity of education as carried out by the assessee would fall within the definition of “education” u/s.2(15) of the Act and the assessee is eligible for registration u/s.12AB of the Act and u/s.80G of the Act. We accordingly direct the ld.CIT(E) to grant the registration u/s.12AB and u/s.80G of the Act.