SATYAY MATAJI MANDIR MANGROLIYA PARIVAR TRUST- PITHVAJAL,AMRELI vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

Further ld. CIT(E) treated the following objectives of the trust for the benefit of these family, which are reproduced below: (1) To celebrate the festivals of Shri Satya Matajl through this organization and on the occasion of religious events/occasions by holding Shree Satyay Mataji Mandir Mangroliya Parivar Trust & 845/Rjt/2024 3 Mangrolla, Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani families together to organize Yajna-home Havan, Shobha Yatra and family ceremonies and gardens, flowers and to organize swing for playing of small children.

The ld. CIT(E) noticed from the above objects of the assessee and held that these objects are confined towards benefit of particular religious community or caste that is, Mangrolia, Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani family and not for the benefit of public at large. Therefore, ld. CIT(E ) asked the assessee to clarify that as to how there is no contravention of provision of section 12AB(4)

In response to the above show cause notice dated 05.08.2024, the assessee has neither submitted any reply nor has sought any adjournment. Therefore, ld. CIT(E) held that as the assessee has opted to remain silent, hence assessee`s case is to be decided based on material available on record. The ld. CIT(E) noticed that the object of the assessee as stipulated in the constitution of the trust, are charitable in nature but for the benefit of a particular religious community or caste i.e. Mangrolia Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani family. It also become evident from the fact that only the families with Mangaroliya surname which is a surname in Leuva Patel society and the members of the other three sub-surnames of the same family "Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani can join this organization. Further in this constitution, whenever the word "family" is mentioned, it shall be understood and recognized as referring to the families having the four surnames "Mangrolia, Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani. The ld. CIT(E) further observed that application referred to in clause (ac) of sub- section(1) of section 12A is not complete or it contains false or incorrect information and in this case, the disputed objects referred above are charitable in nature and found to be confined for the benefit of "Mangrolia, Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani family" caste and is a specified violation under clause(d) below explanation to section 12AB(4) of the Act for which registration of trust can be cancelled. In view of the above facts, the ld. CIT(E) held that the assessee has violated existing provisions and therefore is not eligible to get registered u/s 12A(1)(ac) (vi)-ITEM(B) of the Act, therefore, the assessee`s application was rejected.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us.

On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue submitted that assessee has neither appeared before the Ld. CIT(E) nor filed any details and documents before the Ld. CIT(E), moreover, the assessee submitted incomplete application. Therefore, assessee’s appeal may be dismissed. Alternatively, Ld. CIT-DR also argued that if the assessee’s trust case is remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(E) then in these circumstances, assessee should be instructed to file the amended objects of the Trust and after taking into account, the amended objects of the Trust, the Ld. CIT(E) may take the decision to grant registration in accordance with law.

We have carefully considered the facts of the case, the submission of the Learned Counsel for the assessee and ld.CT-DR for the Revenue and evidences Shree Satyay Mataji Mandir Mangroliya Parivar Trust & 845/Rjt/2024 7 on record. Though the facts have been discussed in detail in the foregoing paragraphs, however in the succinct manner, the relevant facts and background are reiterated in order to appreciate the controversy and the issue for adjudication. We note that assessee filed appeal before us, against the order of the Ld. CIT(E), rejecting the application for registration of the appellant u/s 12AB of the Act for the reason that the appellant is established for the benefit of a particular religious community or caste i.e. Mangrolia, Bhadkan, Vastani and Hirani Family. Hence, it is hit by provisions of section 12AB(4) and not entitled for registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. Besides, the assessee filed the incomplete application before the ld. CIT(E) and moreover, the assessee has not submitted the entire documents and evidences before the ld. CIT(E), in response to the show cause notice dated 5th August 2024. As we have noted above that in response to the notice of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee did not appear and did not file the relevant documents and evidences. Therefore, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to file the required details and documents before the Ld. CIT(E). About the issue raised by the Ld. CIT(E), pertaining to the activities of the Trust, for particular caste and community, we find that the Shri Satyay Mataji Mandir Mangrolia Parivar Trust (assessee under consideration) is open for all community and caste and we have also gone through the objects of the trust and we find that majority of the objects are for the benefit of general purpose/public, and not confined to any specific community and caste. Although Trust is registered in the name of the religious community and caste however, most of the objects are for the benefit of general persons and moreover this Mandir (Temple) is open for all the caste and community, who can go to the Mandir and worship the Satyay Mataji. Therefore, we find that taking into account, the objects of the Trust it appears that it is open for every caste and community and also for the benefit of the general public. Therefore, considering the above facts, we are of the view that Shree Satyay Mataji Mandir Mangroliya Parivar Trust & 845/Rjt/2024 8 the matter should be remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(E), with the direction to the assessee to file the complete documents and evidences, and also remove the defect in the application filed for registration. Therefore, we set aside the order of the ld. CIT(E) and remit the issue back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the assessee`s application for registration afresh.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms.

Since we have remitted the assessee`s appeal relating to registration in , which pertains to registration u/s. 12AB(1)(ac) of the Act, therefore, we direct the Ld. CIT(E) to examine the documents and evidences relating to approval u/s. 80G(5)(iii) of the Act relating to assessee’s appeal in and examine the conditions of section 80G(5) of the Act, and then grant approval u/s. 80G(5) (iii) of the Act, in accordance with law.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, in is allowed for statistical purposes. 14. In the combined result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.