GAYTRI PARIVAR TRUST BHORANJ ,HAMIRPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

आदेश/Order

Per Sudhanshu Srivastava, Judicial Member:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 15.11.2019 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(E)’], wherein vide impugned order the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected the assessee’s application for registration u/s 80G (5)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') .

ITA No. 71-Chd-2020 Gayatri Parivar Trust Bhoranj, Hamirpur 2

appeal :-

3.0 The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Trust

registered u/s 12AA of the Act vide order dated 29.06.2016 and has

been, undisputedly, carrying out charitable activities since 25.11.2014.

The assessee trust applied for registration u/s 80G of the Act on

16.05.2019 vide application in Form 10G which was rejected by the Ld.

CIT(E). As per record, it is seen that the assessee had filed an

application for approval u/s 80G earlier vide dated 10.12.2015, which

was rejected vide order dated 29.06.2016 on the ground that the

ITA No. 71-Chd-2020 Gayatri Parivar Trust Bhoranj, Hamirpur 3 application was pre-mature as the assessee had not yet been granted

registration u/s 12A of the Act. The assessee again filed an application

for approval u/s 80G of the Act on 4.01.2018, which was also rejected

vide order dated 28.07.2018 on the ground that the trust was overtly

religious. The assessee is now in appeal against this third order of

rejection of application vide order dated 15.11.2019.

4.0 The Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) drew our attention to the

object clause in the Trust Deed and submitted that the assessee Trust

was committed to induce spirit of morality in all human beings by way

of education and awareness and help others in improving the way of

living and eliminating materialistic aspects. It was submitted that the

trust emphasised focus on character building, inculcating positivity and

happiness without any discrimination on the basis of caste or creed. It

was further submitted that the main focus of the trust is on seven

segments of life viz, meditation, education, health, self-dependence,

environment, women empowerment and drug –addition free society.

4.1 The Ld. AR submitted that, although, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected

the assessee’s application for approval u/s 80G (5)(vi) of the Act by

observing that the objects of the Trust are of religious nature, he has

ignored the very crucial fact that the assessee trust is registered u/s

12AA of the Act. It was submitted that perhaps the Ld. CIT(E) has

considered only two out of 22 objects listed in the Trust Deed and

ITA No. 71-Chd-2020 Gayatri Parivar Trust Bhoranj, Hamirpur 4 reached this kind of erroneous finding. It was submitted that even a bare

reading of the objects would make it very obvious that the Trust focuses

on growth of the human being and not only on proposition of Gayatri

Mahamantra. It was submitted that the Gayatri Mahamantra is only used

as a medium for achieving objects of the trust i.e. infusing morality and

good mentality and, therefore, it could not be said that the objects of the

trust were overtly religious. It was submitted that it is undisputed that

Gayatri Mahamantra is now chanted by people from all walks of life and

from all over world and not necessarily only by Hindus.

4.2 The Ld. AR also submitted that the Ld. CIT(E) has also observed

that the assessee’s earlier applications (on two occasions) for approval

us 80G were rejected and the assessee had not filed any appeal against

the same and, therefore, the present application was liable to be

rejected. It was submitted that it is left to the option of the assessee

whether it chooses to apply for fresh registration or to file an appeal

against the rejection of the application by the same authority earlier and

the same cannot be ground for rejection of the application again.

4.3 It was also argued that since the assessee enjoys registration u/s

12AA of the Act, the approval u/s 80G of the Act cannot be denied

because, undisputedly, the assessee is carrying on charitable activities.

It was also submitted that while rejecting the assessee’s application, no

adverse inference has been drawn by the Ld. CIT(E) with regard to the

assessee’s charitable activities.

ITA No. 71-Chd-2020 Gayatri Parivar Trust Bhoranj, Hamirpur 5

4.4 It was also submitted that the assessee trust works under the

guidance of the main trust namely ‘Ved Mata Gayatri Trust’, Shanti

Kunj, Haridwar, which has same objects and the activities of the

assessee’s trust and the said trust is duly approved u/s 80G of the Act

and, therefore, there is no reason to deny registration u/s 80G to the

assessee trust in this case. The Ld. AR relied on a plethora of judicial

precedents in support of his contention that the assessee trust, on the

facts of the case, was eligible for registration u/s 80G of the Act.

5.0 Per contra, the Ld. CIT DR reiterated the observation of the Ld.

CIT(E) that the assessee’s application for approval u/s 80G of the Act

had been refused on earlier two occasions but the assessee trust had not

preferred any appeal before the appropriate Forum against such rejection

and, therefore, going by the principles of res judicata, the application

of the assessee had been rightly rejected. The Ld. CIT DR also

submitted that it is settled law that even if one objective is of non-

charitable nature, the approval can be denied. He also made a reference

to the two earlier orders of rejection in this regard and submitted that in

those two orders, the Ld. CIT(E) has also doubted the charitable nature

of the objects. The Ld. CIT DR, while vehemently supporting the orders

of the Ld. CIT(E), strongly argued that the assessee application for

approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act had been rightly rejected. The Ld.

CIT DR also relied on numerous judicial precedents in support of his

ITA No. 71-Chd-2020 Gayatri Parivar Trust Bhoranj, Hamirpur 6 contention that the assessee’s application for approval had been rightly

rejected.

6.0 We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the

material on record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the Ld.

CIT(E) denied the grant of approval u/s 80G of the Act on two grounds

– 1) that some of the objects of the assessee trust were overtly religious

in nature; and 2) the assessee did not prefer any appeal against the two

earlier orders rejecting the grant of approval. We have perused the

objects clause of the Memorandum of the Trust and the said object

clause enumerates as many as 22 objects and a plain reading of these

objects would not anywhere indicate that the objects are of religious

nature, as has been alleged by the Ld. CIT(E) in the impugned order. It

is also a fact on record that the assessee trust continues to enjoy benefit

of registration u/s 12AA of the Act and the Department has not initiated

any action to cancel the said registration. Thus, for all practical

purposes, the assessee trust continues to enjoy the benefit of registration

u/s 12AA of the Act, as its activities are charitable in nature. No doubt

has been raised about the charitable objects of the assessee trust. A

perusal of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(E) further shows that

even the Ld. CIT(E) has not doubted the charitable nature of the objects

of the assessee trust. Also there is no averment or allegation that the

assessee trust does not fulfill the conditions as required u/s 80G(5)(vi)

of the Act. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion, that the Ld.

ITA No. 71-Chd-2020 Gayatri Parivar Trust Bhoranj, Hamirpur 7 CIT(E) was not correct in rejecting the assessee’s application for

approval. Further, the Ld. CIT(E)’s observation that the assessee did

not prefer any appeal against the earlier orders rejecting the approval

also does not hold good as the choice is left open to the assessee

whether to file an appeal against the rejection of application or to file a

fresh application. The case laws, as have been relied upon by the Ld.

CIT DR, are also of no aid to the Department in, as much as, these case

laws are on an entirely different footing and are not relevant in the

present set of facts. Accordingly, looking into the facts of the case, we

are of the considered opinion that the Ld. CIT(E) was patently wrong in

rejecting the assessee’s application for approval u/s 80G (5)(vi) of the

Act and we direct the Ld. CIT(E) to grant approval to the assessee trust

u/s 80G of the Act.

7.0 In the final result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.

Order pronounced on 25.03.2022.

Sd/- Sd/- ( N. K. SAINI) (SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) Vice President Judicial Member Dated : 25.03.2022 “आर.के.” आदेशक ��त,ल-पअ.े-षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु/त/ CIT 4. आयकरआयु/त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. -वभागीय��त�न2ध, आयकरअपील%यआ2धकरण, च4डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड�फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायकपंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar