UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 cuke Uttrakhand Samaj The CIT, Vs. 51/117 Sec 5, Pratap Nagar Exemption Sanganer, Jaipur Jaipur

LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATU 6874 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent

fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 11/09/2024 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM

The present bunch of four appeals are filed by the assessee

aggrieved from the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption,

Jaipur dated 29/03/2024 [here in after ‘CIT(E)’ ] as detailed herein below.

Sl.No. Appeal No. Relates to issue DIN no of order Order dt. 1 ITA No. 775 Rejection of ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45 29/03/2024 registration u/s. 12A /2023- of the Act 24/1063657578(1) 2 ITA No. 776 Rejection of ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45 29/03/2024 provisional /2023- registration u/s.12A 24/1063657578(1) of the Act 3 ITA No. 777 Rejection of 80G ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45 29/03/2024

2 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) recognition /2023- 24/1063657645(1) 4 ITA No. 778 Rejection of ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45 29/03/2024 provisional /2023- recognition u/s. 80G 24/1063657645(1) of the Act

As is evident from the above table, though the appeal filed by the

assessee is four but in effect the order under challenge are two one is for

denial of registration u/s.12A of the act and another for denial of recognition

for 80G of the Act.

filed:

ITA No. 775/JP/20224

“1. Under the facts and circumstances, order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Jaipur under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act bad in law being non speaking, ignoring, without considering the submission and against the principle of natural justice. 2. The assessee has submitted a reply, but there was a typographical error in the mobile numbers in two cases. When the Inspector called the beneficiaries, they were suddenly fearful due to the involvement of the Income Tax department and were unable to provide proper answers. The assessee has submitted some photographs of distributing items at functions. The assessee purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice.

3 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) 3. The assessee has submitted a reply, but there was a typographical error in the mobile numbers in two cases. When the Inspector called the beneficiaries, they were suddenly fearful due to the involvement of the Income Tax department and were unable to provide proper answers. The assessee has submitted some photographs of distributing items at functions. The assessee purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. The society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society did not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The assessee, registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958, was also duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The society help to poors and needy persons. The society’s object and activity is fully charitable. Recognized as a charitable entity under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the society meticulously maintained proper books of accounts and records. Furthermore, the society promptly responded to notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption. However, it is apparent in this instance that the Ld. CIT Exemption's failure to overlook, consider without due diligence, and provide adequate opportunity for the assessee to be heard, demonstrates a disregard for the principles of natural justice. 5. That the appellant craves your indulgence to add, amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. The Paper Book will be filed at the time of the hearing.” ITA No. 776/JP/20224

4 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) 3. The assessee has submitted a reply, but there was a typographical error in the mobile numbers in two cases. When the Inspector called the beneficiaries, they were suddenly fearful due to the involvement of the Income Tax department and were unable to provide proper answers. The assessee has submitted some photographs of distributing items at functions. The assessee purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice. 4. The assessee has submitted a reply, but there was a typographical error in the mobile numbers in two cases. When the Inspector called the beneficiaries, they were suddenly fearful due to the involvement of the Income Tax department and were unable to provide proper answers. The assessee has submitted some photographs of distributing items at functions. The assessee purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. The society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society did not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice. 5. The assessee, registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958, was also duly registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959. The society help to poors and needy persons. The society’s object and acitivity is fully charitable. Recognized as a charitable entity under section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the society meticulously maintained proper books of accounts and records. Furthermore, the society promptly responded to notices issued by the Ld. CIT, Exemption. However, it is apparent in this instance that the Ld. CIT Exemption's failure to overlook, consider without due diligence, and provide adequate opportunity for the assessee to be heard, demonstrates a disregard for the principles of natural justice. 6. That the appellant craves your indulgence to add, amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. The Paper Book will be filed at the time of the hearing.” ITA No. 777/JP/20224

5 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) “1. Under the facts and circumstances, order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Jaipur under section 80G of the Income-tax Act bad in law being non speaking, without considering the submission and against the principle of natural justice . 2. The Honrable Supreme Court of India was decided in the matter of M/S New Noble Educational Society Versus The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 And Anr. On dated 19, October, 2022 as” It is held that wherever registration of trust or charities is obligatory under state or local laws, the concerned trust, society, other institution etc.” In the Compliance of the above mentioned order the Society was applied for registration as “Trust” under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on dated 24/01/2023. Thereafter society was fled application for withdraw form No. 10AB due to society does not have registration certificate as “Trust” of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 to the Honorable Chief Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions) on dated 02/03/2023. The society was done all compliance regarding trust registration with Honarable Assistant Commissioner (Pratham) Devsthan Vibhag Jaipur Khand, Jaipur. The society was received registration as “Trust” under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on dated 07/03/2024 in compliance of guidelines issued by the Honorable Supreme Court of India. The society was re-apply for permanent registration under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on dated 30/09/2023. 3. The Society submitted its application for renewal before the expiration of the provisional registration certificate issued under section 80G(5)(iii), bearing unique Registration No. AAATU6874AF20221, six months prior to its expiry. Additionally, the society filed Form 10AB after a delay from the commencement of activities. The Ld. CIT Exemption granted permission despite the withdrawal application by the assessee as “In the light of the above facts and applicant’s request to withdraw the aforementioned application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the applicant’s application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is rejected as ‘in limine’. However, the approval granted to the institution, if any, in Form No. 10AC will continue to exist till the expiry of the time period mentioned thereon unless cancelled separately as per law. Hence, the application of the applicant trust/institution is rejected as withdrawn. 4. Go Gram Eco Foundation V/s Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Jaipur ITA. No. 504/JP/2023 on dated 28 /11/2023 was decided as “----The assessee has all the reasons for recognition under section 80G of the Act at least from the date the assessee filed an application and therefore, in the light of this facts and circumstances of the case we direct the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue of registration under section 80G of the Act, 1961 in accordance with law from the date on which the assessee made an application for permanent registration.”

6 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) According to Circular No. 7/2024 issued by the CBDT, dated 25/04/2024, in the case of an application under clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, till 30.06.2024 in Form No. 10A and 10AB. Based on the aforementioned circular, the commencement of activities and the delay in filing the application in Form 10AB earlier are to be taken into consideration. 5. Commencement of activities and delay filing of Form 10AB under section 80G(5)(iii) decided by The honorable High Court Of Judicature At Madras in the matter of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such a classification. Accordingly, we hold that the impugned clause (ii) of the Circular, dated 24.05.2023 is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, would be ultra vires the Constitution. 6. 6.7. Because we find that clause (ii) of the impugned circular is unconstitutional, we direct the first respondent to consider the applications of the petitioners as to the recognition/approval in respect of clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act as within time and consider the same and pass orders thereon on merits as per law. 7. In the result, these Writ Petitions are allowed on the following terms:- (i) The clause 5(ii) of Circular No.6 of 2023 bearing F.No.370133/06/2023-TPL, dated 24.05.2023 of the first respondent is declared as illegitimate, arbitrary, and ultra vires the Constitution of India; (ii) The respondents are directed to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners as to the recognition/approval in respect of clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act as within time and consider the same and pass orders thereon on merits. 7. Therefore, owing to extenuating circumstances beyond our control, such as the registration of the Trust under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, as mandated by the honorable Supreme Court of India in the case of New Noble Educational Society Versus The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 And Anr, dated October 19, 2022. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of S. Nagaraj & Others Vs. State Of Karnataka & Another 4 SCC 595 was decided as “ Procedural provision should be so construed as to sub serve the course of justice and not to hinder it. It is a settled proposition of law that technicalities should not come in way in imparting the substantial justice.” Vivekananda Resham Khadi Gramodyog Sangha [2023] 155 taxmann.com 538 (Kolkata - Trib.) decided as Certificate's duration is beyond assessee's control; Sec. 10(23B) relief can't be denied due to technical violation

7 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) 8. The assessee has filed an appeal against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions, Jaipur under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to the Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jaipur. The appeal is presently pending before the Honorable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jaipur.

“1. Under the facts and circumstances, order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Jaipur under section 80G of the Income-tax Act bad in law being non speaking, without considering the submission and against the principle of natural justice . 2. The Provisional approval Registration Certificate, issued under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and bearing the unique Registration No. AAATU6874AF20221 dated 07/04/2022. The CIT's decision to pass the order, citing the lapse and cancellation of the provisional approval, without considering the relevant facts, was deemed both unjust and legally flawed. 3. The Honrable Supreme Court of India was decided in the matter of M/S New Noble Educational Society Versus The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 And Anr. On dated 19, October, 2022 as” It is held that wherever registration of trust or charities is obligatory under state or local laws, the concerned trust, society, other institution etc.” In the Compliance of the above mentioned order the Society was applied for registration as “Trust” under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on dated 24/01/2023. Thereafter society was fled application for withdraw form No. 10AB due to society does not have registration certificate as “Trust” of the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 to the Honorable Chief Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemptions) on dated 02/03/2023. The society was done all compliance regarding trust registration with Honarable Assistant Commissioner (Pratham) Devsthan Vibhag Jaipur Khand, Jaipur. The society was received registration as “Trust” under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 on dated 07/03/2024 in compliance of guidelines issued by the Honorable Supreme Court of India. The society was re-apply for permanent registration under section 80G(5)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on dated 30/09/2023. 4. The Society submitted its application for renewal before the expiration of the provisional registration certificate issued under section 80G(5)(iii), bearing

8 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) unique Registration No. AAATU6874AF20221, six months prior to its expiry. Additionally, the society filed Form 10AB after a delay from the commencement of activities. The Ld. CIT Exemption granted permission despite the withdrawal application by the assessee as “In the light of the above facts and applicant’s request to withdraw the aforementioned application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the applicant’s application for approval under clause (iii) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is rejected as ‘in limine’. However, the approval granted to the institution, if any, in Form No. 10AC will continue to exist till the expiry of the time period mentioned thereon unless cancelled separately as per law. Hence, the application of the applicant trust/institution is rejected as withdrawn.” 5. Go Gram Eco Foundation V/s Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), Jaipur ITA. No. 504/JP/2023 on dated 28 /11/2023 was decided as “----The assessee has all the reasons for recognition under section 80G of the Act at least from the date the assessee filed an application and therefore, in the light of this facts and circumstances of the case we direct the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue of registration under section 80G of the Act, 1961 in accordance with law from the date on which the assessee made an application for permanent registration.” According to Circular No. 7/2024 issued by the CBDT, dated 25/04/2024, in the case of an application under clause (iii) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act, till 30.06.2024 in Form No. 10A and 10AB. Based on the aforementioned circular, the commencement of activities and the delay in filing the application in Form 10AB earlier are to be taken into consideration. 6. Commencement of activities and delay filing of Form 10AB under section 80G(5)(iii) decided by The honorable High Court Of Judicature At Madras in the matter of Sri Nrisimha Priya Charitable Trust vs Central Board of Direct Taxes Prayer in W.P.No.27030 of 2023 Dated: 02.04.2024 decided as” 6.6. In the instant case, the differential treatment is not based on any substantial distinction that is real and pertinent to the object of the circular. The discrimination is artificial. The respondents are evasive and could not provide any rationale for such a classification. Accordingly, we hold that the impugned clause (ii) of the Circular, dated 24.05.2023 is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and accordingly, would be ultra vires the Constitution. 7. 6.7. Because we find that clause (ii) of the impugned circular is unconstitutional, we direct the first respondent to consider the applications of the petitioners as to the recognition/approval in respect of clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act as within time and consider the same and pass orders thereon on merits as per law. 7. In the result, these Writ Petitions are allowed on the following terms:-

9 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) (i) The clause 5(ii) of Circular No.6 of 2023 bearing F.No.370133/06/2023-TPL, dated 24.05.2023 of the first respondent is declared as illegitimate, arbitrary, and ultra vires the Constitution of India; (ii) The respondents are directed to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners as to the recognition/approval in respect of clause (i) of the first proviso to sub-section (5) of section 80G of the Act as within time and consider the same and pass orders thereon on merits 8. Therefore, owing to extenuating circumstances beyond our control, such as the registration of the Trust under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, as mandated by the honorable Supreme Court of India in the case of New Noble Educational Society Versus The Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax 1 And Anr, dated October 19, 2022. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of S. Nagaraj & Others Vs. State Of Karnataka & Another 4 SCC 595 was decided as “ Procedural provision should be so construed as to sub serve the course of justice and not to hinder it. It is a settled proposition of law that technicalities should not come in way in imparting the substantial justice.” Vivekananda Resham Khadi Gramodyog Sangha [2023] 155 taxmann.com 538 (Kolkata - Trib.) decided as Certificate's duration is beyond assessee's control; Sec. 10(23B) relief can't be denied due to technical violation.

wherein the fact as culled out from the records is that the application in

Form No. 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961

was filed by the applicant online on 29.09.2023. A letter/notice No.

10 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2023-24/1058863519(1) dated 19.12.2023 was issued

at the e- mail/address provided in the application requiring the applicant to

submit certain documents/explanations by 29.12.2023, in response to the

applicant has not respond. Vide show cause dated 02.03.2024 the

applicant was asked to submit the relevant information on or before

11.03.2024. The applicant submitted the submission which is placed on file.

Again a show cause was given on 27.03.2024 fixing the case on

28.03.2024, in response applicant filed reply but not found tenable. The ld.

CIT(E) on examination & details filed by the assessee noted that the claim

of the assessee u/s 12AB of the Act, the Commissioner of Income-tax

empowered to call for such documents or information from the trust or

institution as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about the

genuineness of activities of the trust or institution any may also make such

inquiries as he may deem necessary. Under that power ld. CIT(E) vide

letter dated 02.03.2024 asked the assessee to verify the genuineness of

activities. The assessee filed the reply submitting the registration under the

Rajasthan Public Trust Act and submitted cash book, ledger bills of

expenses, vouchers and donations receipts etc., for verification. In those

details the assessee submitted the details of the marriage gift distribution

as welfare expense. To verify that expenditure the ld. CIT(E) deputed an

11 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) Inspector, and he has furnished the report. Based on the report of inspector

ld. CIT(E) concluded that ;

Out of 10 people Only two people namely Smt. Lalita and Shri Raghuveer has accepted that the Uttrakhand Samaj was helped them during the period of covid.

• Phone number mentioned against the name of Pratap Singh and Vineeta denied to know about any Uttrakhand Samaj. • Shri Dharm Singh and Shree Shyam Offset have denied that they have never received any help from the trust. • It is important to notice that in the list provided by the applicant in the beneficiary there is Shri Hari Singh president of the trust, Shri Trilok Singh, member of the trust and Shri Pratap Singh, Vice president of the trust. • Shri Hari Singh did not pick the phone and rest all the trustee stated that they have never received any help from the trust. • Therefore, it is concluded that out of 10, three are trustee, three phone numbers are bogus and 2 have denied any help only 2 people are accepted to receive any help. • In view of above this act clearly states the expenses shown by the applicant is bogus in nature and is only using funds of the trust for personal benefit. Therefore, it is established that the applicant is indulged in misappropriation of funds in the garb of charitable activities.

Thereafter another opportunity was given to the applicant vide letter dated

27.03.2024, in response applicant filed its reply on 10 samples discussed in

the Inspector report and the correct fact were placed on record which reads

as under:-

12 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

He is fearful due to a call received from the Income Tax department. We

kindly request that you consider the above material and grant approval for

registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act 1961. The

ld. CIT(E) consider the reply but found not acceptable as; • Assessee claimed that mobile numbers are wrongly typed in two cases. • Persons are fearful so not accepted.

These contentions of assessee were only justifying its non-genuineness act

that mobile numbers wrongly typed, persons are fearful is not accepted by

ld. CIT(E). Based on that observation ld. CIT(E) noted that assessee giving

13 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) benefit to trustees/members and showing bogus activities and thus

application for registration was considered liable to be rejected. In view of

above discussion assessee’s claim of registration section 12AB was

considered as liable to be rejected. The ld. CIT(E) also clarified that

applicant’s provisional registration under clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-

section (1) of section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 07.04.2022 is

also being cancelled. Further assessee has failed to give proper

justification for regularization of provisional registration, thus with this order

provisional registration is also lapsed and cancelled.

registration as well as provisional registration, assessee preferred an

appeal in ITA No. 775 & 776 before us as stated hereinabove. Apropos to

the grounds so raised the ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has

placed reliance on the written submission which is reiterated here in below;

ITA No. 775/JP/2024

“We are submitting written submission to your honour against application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is rejected by CIT, Exemption, Jaipur and order passed under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are as under:- The society was registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958, with registration No. 879/JAIPUR/2000-2001 on 15/03/2001, under the name M/s Uttrakhand Samaj. The society also has a Trust Registration Certificate under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, dated 07/03/2024, with registration No. 58

14 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

JAIPUR, 2024. The society is engaged in running charitable activities. The Income Tax Department granted the society registration under section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) in Form 10AC, with unique Registration No. A AAATU6874AE20211, for the period from AY 2022-23 to AY 2024-25, dated 07/04/2022, The Income Tax Department was also granted the registration under section 80G(5)(iii) to the society in Form 10AC, vide unique Registration No. AAATU6874AF20221 for the period from 07-04-2022 to AY 2024.25 on dated 07/04/2022 in favour of M/s M/s Uttrakhand Samaj. 1. Under the facts and circumstances, order passed by Ld. CIT, Exemption, Jaipur under section 12AB of the Income-tax Act bad in law being non speaking, ignoring, without considering the submission and against the principle of natural justice.

The assessee has submitted some photographs of distributing items at functions. The assessee purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. The details of gift given to the beneficiaries with evidence as invoice and affidavit with Aadhar enclosing herewith:-

S. Name Address Adhar No Mobile No. Gift Item Proof of Gift item Purchased N o. 1 Trilok 163/288, 399842356 941437776 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Pratap 949 1 Fan Invoice No. 827, Dated Mehara Nagar, 10/11/2021 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 819909, dated r, Jaipur- 04/12/2021 Rs, 4350/- help 302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage.

2 Pratap 261/686, 239476104 921499142 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Pratap 113 2 Fan Invoice No. 827, Dated Rawat Nagar, 10/11/2021 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 819909, dated r, Jaipur- 04/12/2021 Rs, 4350/- help 302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1450.00.

15 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

3 Vinita 70/109, 889092017 954913799 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Rawat Pratap 913 1 Fan Invoice No. 827, Dated Nagar, 10/11/2021 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 819909, dated r, Jaipur- 04/12/2021 Rs, 4350/- help 302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1450.00.

4 Joga 40/51 976026151 946057401 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Pratap 618 1 Fan Invoice No. 741, Dated Adhikar Nagar, 21/10/2023 Payment vide i Sangane Cheque No. 349488, dated r, Jaipur- 04/02/2023 Rs, 1450/- help 302033, during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1450.00.

5 Hari 70/109, 393715969 982832137 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Pratap 379 5 Fan Invoice No. 1271, Dated Rawat Nagar, 06/05/2022 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 389463, dated r, Jaipur- 14/12//2022 Rs, 1400/- help 302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1400.00.

6 Raghu D-21, 924242555 894963646 Treatment Payment made of Rs. 5100 veer Anand 475 1 ( Corona) vide Cheque No. 819906 Singh Vihar, Dated 13/05/2023 help during Railway the treatment of Corona of Colony, Mr. Raghuveer Singh. Jagatpur a, Jaipur- 302017 7 Lalita F-29, 604318280 730001449 Husband’s Payment made of Rs. 5100 Fartyal Ram 681 0 Treatment vide Cheque No. 819902 Vihar, (Corona) Dated 13/05/2023 help during Vaishali the treatment of Corona of Nagar Husband of Mrs Lalita Fartyal Marg, Meenaw ala, Jaipur- 302034 8 Karam E-4/2, 809004411 952194834 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Rajastha 975 7 Fan Invoice No. 1313, Dated n 10/01/2021 Payment vide

16 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

Universit Cheque No. 389469, dated y 13/02/2023 Rs, 3750/- help Campus, during the Daughter’s Jaipur- Marriage as celling fan 302004 amounting of Rs. 1250.00.

9 Pratap F-298, 696042223 982838101 Smarika Payment made vide Cheque Singh Chitrkut 572 3 Exp. No. 389465, dated Negi Nagar, 06/01/2022 Rs, 20000/- for Ajmer typing Exp. of Sharika.. Road, Jaipur - 302021 10 Shree D-10, GST No. 960285581 Smarika M/s Shree Shyam Offset Shyam Sudhersh 08AAECE2 7 Exp. Private Limited Offset anpura 494D2ZP Invoice No. 1187, Dated Private Industrial 05/01/2023 Payment vide Limited Area, 22 Cheque No. 389466, dated Godam, 05/01/2023 Rs, 20000/-, Jaipur- Payment vide Cheque No. 302006 389464, dated 05/01/2023 Rs, 90000 for Printing Exp. of Sharika..

The above gift given for help to beneficiaries are genuine and verifiable. Copy of invoice and affidavit with Aadhar are enclosing herewith.

However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice.

The assessee has submitted some photographs of distributing items at functions. The assessee purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries.

The society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society did not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities.

17 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) However, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, ignored these facts and the reply, and acted without giving a proper opportunity, which is against the principles of natural justice.

The assessee complied with the notices issued by the Honorable CIT (Exemptions), Jaipur. The assessee also complied with requirements such as filing the Income Tax Return and the Audit Report with the Income Tax Department. Based on the above discussion, the assessee is engaged in genuine charitable activities. However, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, was ignore the facts and without giving proper opportunity and against the principle of natural justice.

Therefore, we request you to pass an order for the issue against the application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was rejected by the CIT (Exemption), Jaipur. We are requested to you pass an order for issue registration certificate under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to grant relief to the assessee.”

was placed on the following evidence / records:

ITA No. 775/JP/2024

S.No. Particulars Page No 1 Written submission 1-6

18 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

2 Copy of Order of Ld. CIT (E), Jaipur 7-18 3 Copy of Provisional Registration Certificate U/s 12AB of Income Tax Act, 1961. 19-21 4 Copy of Registration Certificate and Registration Deed Rajasthan Society 22-42 Registration Act, 1958 5 Copy of Registration Certificate under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 43 6 Copy of the bank account statement of the society for the Financial Year 2022- 44-47 23 7 Copy of the bank account statement of the society for the Financial Year 2021- 48-49 22 8 Copy of the bank account statement of the society for the Financial Year 2020- 50-51 21 9 Copy Receipts & Payment Account, Income & Expenditure Account with 52-55 Balance Sheet for the Financial Year 2022-23 10 Copy Receipts & Payment Account, Income & Expenditure Account with 56-59 Balance Sheet for the Financial Year 2021-22 11 Copy Receipts & Payment Account, Income & Expenditure Account with 60-63 Balance Sheet for the Financial Year 2020-21 12 Copy of letter of beneficiaries verified by the Income Tax Inspector 64 13 Copy of list of beneficiaries verified by the Income Tax Inspector with reply, 65-90 Affidavit, Adaar and Invoice of gift items purchased. 14 Copy of replied filed with Ld. CIT (Exemptions) dated 07/02/2024 91--97 15 Copy of replied filed with Ld. CIT (Exemptions) dated 20/03/2024 98-101 16 Copy of replied filed with Ld. CIT (Exemptions) dated 21/03/2024 102 17 Copy of replied filed with Ld. CIT (Exemptions) dated 27/03/2024 103-104 Income Tax Return Acknowledgement with Computation for the Financial Year 18 105-106 2022-23. 19 Income Tax Return Acknowledgement with Computation for the Financial Year 107-108 2021-22. 20 Income Tax Return Acknowledgement with Computation for the Financial Year 109-110 2020-21. 21 Audit Report in Form No. 10BB for the Financial Year 2022-23. 111-118 22 Audit Report in Form No. 10B for the Financial Year 2021-22. 119-122 23 Application under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules. 123-124

19 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) 6. The ld. AR of the assessee also moved an application under rule 29

of ITAT rules contending that the assessee could not get sufficient

opportunity to deal with the evidence already on record and the additional

evidence placed on record is in furtherance to the record already on record.

That additional evidence was placed on record at page 65-90 in the paper

book filed by the assessee. The petition filed by the assessee to admit the

additional evidence reads as under:

“The Appellant had filed an appeal before this Hon'ble Income Tax Appellant Tribunal against application for registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is rejected by CIT Exemption, Jaipur and order passed under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and paper book on dated 05/08/2024. The Appellant seeks to introduce new evidence via submitted in paper book dated 05/08/2024, which was not produced before the lower authorities due to The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT), Exemptions, Jaipur, was ignore the facts, reply with documents submitted and without giving proper opportunity and against the principle of natural justice. The details of the new evidence are as follows:-

The assessee has submitted the reply to the above-mentioned issues in Sr. No. 1 as new evidence in the paper book Sr No. 13, Page No. 65-90 as follows:-

• In reference to Sr. No. 1 above, regarding the issue with the Income Tax Inspector's verification report submitted to the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) as per paper book Sr. No. 12 Page No. 64, the assessee filed a reply on 27/03/2024, as per paper book Sr. No. 17 Page No. 103-104. However, the Ld. CIT (E) did not consider the submitted reply Gathering information from the beneficiaries was time-consuming. and the Ld. CIT (E) passed the order on 29/03/2024. Therefore, the assessee was unable to produce the above- mentioned documents before the Ld. CIT (E). The beneficiaries had changed their mobile numbers, which were not available to the assessee. The assessee has now received affidavits with identity proof from the beneficiaries. We are

20 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) submitting these affidavits, along with identity proofs and invoices, in support of our reply filed on 27/03/2024, as per paper book Sr. No. 13 Page No 65-90 for your consideration.

The new evidence is crucial and directly relevant to the matter under consideration. It will assist the Hon'ble Tribunal in arriving at a just and fair decision. Under Rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, the Tribunal has the power to allow additional evidence if it is of the opinion that such evidence is necessary for the adjudication of the case or for any other substantial cause. The Appellant submits that the new evidence is necessary for the adjudication of the case and its admission would serve the ends of justice. Please consider the above- mentioned application in the interest of natural justice to the assessee, otherwise, all efforts made by the Sanstha will be jeopardized.

In light of the above, the Appellant humbly prays that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to:

- Allow this application for the admission of additional evidence.

- Take on record the new evidence as listed above.

- Grant any other relief as deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

submission so filed vehemently argued that the contentions that 10

beneficiary selected and verified by the Inspector reports for which

payments were made by account payee cheque and thus, relevant material

placed on record has been in the form of additional evidence will clarify the

query and / or doubts raised by the ld. CIT(E), therefore, the ld. AR of the

assessee prayed to admit those additional evidence while dealing with the

appeal of the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee also submitted that

details of name of beneficiaries addressed, details of relief and mode of

21 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) payment for the items so given is filed before ld. CIT(E) on 22.03.2024

which has neither been discussed nor considered while passing the order

on 29.03.2024 and therefore, the finding of ld. CIT(E) is without

appreciation on the facts on record and therefore, if given a chance the

assessee will be better position if the matter be remanded back to the file of

the ld. CIT(E) so as to place on record justification for genuineness of

activities carried out by the assessee trust.

Inspector to verify the genuineness of the activities carried out by the

assessee that report of Inspector was said with the assessee but the

assessee could not controvert properly fact narrated in the Inspector report.

The ld. DR also relied upon the following finding of ld. CIT(E) about the

genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust; • Out of 10 people Only two people namely Smt. Lalita and Shri Raghuveer has accepted that the Uttrakhand Samaj was helped them during the period of covid.

• Phone number mentioned against the name of Pratap Singh and Vineeta denied to know about any Uttrakhand Samaj.

• Shri Dharm Singh and Shree Shyam Offset have denied that they have never received any help from the trust.

• It is important to notice that in the list provided by the applicant in the beneficiary there is Shri Hari Singh president of the trust, Shri Trilok Singh, member of the trust and Shri Pratap Singh, Vice president of the trust.

22 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

• Shri Hari Singh did not pick the phone and rest all the trustee stated that they have never received any help from the trust. • Therefore, it is concluded that out of 10, three are trustee, three phone numbers are bogus and 2 have denied any help only 2 people are accepted to receive any help.

• In view of above this act clearly states the expenses shown by the applicant is bogus in nature and is only using funds of the trust for personal benefit. Therefore, it is established that the applicant is indulged in misappropriation of funds in the garb of charitable activities.

Based on the above facts, the ld. DR relied upon the order of ld. CIT(E)

while rejecting the application permanent registration as well as withdrawal

of provisional registration granted to the assessee. Since the assessee is

not found eligible to be registered u/s 12A of the Act, the denial of

recognition u/s 80G of the Act is consequential and therefore, ld. DR on that

aspect relied upon the finding of ld. CIT(E).

on record. The Bench noted that ld. CIT(E) has rejected the applications of

the assessee u/s 12AB of the Act. He has done so while examining the

case of the assessee vide application dated 29.09.2023 by which the

assessee in Form no. 10AB seek permission for permanent registration

u/s. 12AB of the Act. While dealing with that application the ld. CIT(E) noted

that the activities of the trust are not genuine, so he rejected that application

23 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) and even cancelled the provisional registration granted to the assessee.

Aggrieved by that order of ld. CIT(E) the assessee in this appeal.

assessee is registered under the Rajasthan Society Regisration Act, 1958

since 15.03.2001. Since then the assessee is engaged in the charitable

activities. The assessee trust has also registered themselves as per the

Rajasthan Public Trust Act vide certificate issued on 07.03.2024. Based on

the application filed by the assessee trust they were already registered for

provisional approval u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) and 80G(5)(iii).

no. 10AB seeking registration u/s. 12AB of the Act, as per the power vested

upon him call for documents and information so as to verify the

genuineness of activities. The assessee filed the required details and

information. Ld. CIT(E) in support of the information so filed by the

assessee deputed the inspector Shri Raghvendra Pratap Singh Inspector

working in his office to verify the information filed by the assessee. The said

inspector deputed by Ld. CIT(E) made a sample verification of the relief

activities undertaken by the assessee and he submitted the report to the ld.

24 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) CIT(E). On perusal of report the ld. CIT(E) noted that out of 10 people Only

two people namely Smt. Lalita and Shri Raghuveer has accepted that the

Uttrakhand Samaj had helped them during the period of covid. Phone

number mentioned against the name of Pratap Singh and Vineeta denied

knowing about any Uttrakhand Samaj. Shri Dharm Singh and Shree Shyam

Offset have denied that they have never received any help from the trust.

Ld. CIT(E) also noted in the list provided by the applicant in the beneficiary

there is Shri Hari Singh president of the trust, Shri Trilok Singh, member of

the trust and Shri Pratap Singh, Vice president of the trust. Shri Hari Singh

did not pick the phone and rest all the trustee stated that they have never

received any help from the trust. Therefore, ld. CIT(E) concluded that out of

10, three are trustee, three phone numbers are bogus and 2 have denied

any help only 2 people accepted to receive any help. Based on these

observations ld. CIT(E) noted that the expenses shown by the applicant are

bogus in nature and is only using funds of the trust for personal benefit.

Therefore, it is established that the applicant is indulged in misappropriation

of funds in the garb of charitable activities. Except this there are no adverse

comments on any of the information placed on record.

25 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) 12. So far, the allegation based on the inspector’s report, ld. CIT(E)

arrived at a conclusion that the claim of registration under section 12AB

was liable to be rejected on the grounds that;

Non-Genuineness of Activities and non-compliance

The bench noted that rejection made by the ld. CIT(E) was in two

parts second one is on account of non-compliance of the matter we note

that there were four notices issued on 19.12.2023, 13.01.2024 02.02.2024

09.02.2024. All these notices were issued within 30-40 days’ time giving

very short time and ultimately later compliance was and order has been

passed after considering the required information called for by the ld.

CIT(E) and there is no finding in the order that the assessee has not

submitted any details that has been called for. In fact, based on the

information further investigation was also carried out. Thus, we are of the

considered view that second part of the reasons cannot be a basis to reject

the registration to the assessee trust.

we note that apple of discord for deciding the application of the assessee

adversely is based on the report of the inspector. The relevant claim,

counter claim and our finding on the issue is tabulated herein below;

26 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

S.No. Name Address Adhar No Mobile No. Gift Item Facts / Remarks 1 Trilok Singh 163/288, 399842356 941437776 Celling Facts Mehara Pratap 949 1 Fan M/s Deep Trading Company Nagar, Invoice No. 827, Dated Sangane 10/11/2021 Payment vide r, Jaipur- Cheque No. 819909, dated 302033 04/12/2021 Rs, 4350/- help during the Daughter’s Marriage.

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

He said that he is the member of the trust and he has not received any amount from the trust as help

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

We note that the facts recorded by inspector is correct but at the same time the assessee in fact has not given any amount to him. Whereas it has given gift at the time of marriage of his daughter. This fact is further supported by filling the identity proof and duly executed an affidavit. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee in providing the gift at the time of marriage of poor family member is a charitable activity. 2 Pratap 261/686, 239476104 921499142 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Rawat Pratap 113 2 Fan Invoice No. 827, Dated Nagar, 10/11/2021 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 819909, dated r, Jaipur- 04/12/2021 Rs, 4350/- help 302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1450.00.

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

27 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

He said that he is vice president of the society and did not receive any amount of the trust.

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

We note that it is not under dispute that the assessee has purchased the gift item to be given as relief at the time of marriage of daughter of Shri Pratap singh. He has accepted this fact by filling the identity proof and duly executed an affidavit. It is also noted that Shri Pratapsing has not received any money is also correct based on the facts. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee in providing the gift at the time of marriage of poor family member is a charitable activity. 3 Vinita Rawat 70/109, 889092017 954913799 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Pratap 913 1 Fan Invoice No. 827, Dated Nagar, 10/11/2021 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 819909, dated r, Jaipur- 04/12/2021 Rs, 4350/- help 302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1450.00.

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

Wrong number

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

The marriage gift is given in kind The gift given at the time of marriage of his daughter. This fact is further supported by

28 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

filling the identity proof and duly executed an affidavit by Smt. Vinita Rawat in furtherance to the details already on record. Her identity proof and affidavit placed on record. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee in providing the gift at the time of marriage of poor family member is a charitable activity.

4 Joga Singh 40/51 976026151 946057401 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Adhikari Pratap 618 1 Fan Invoice No. 741, Dated Nagar, 21/10/2023 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 349488, dated r, Jaipur- 04/02/2023 Rs, 1450/- help 302033, during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1450.00.

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

No reply

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

The marriage gift is given in kind The gift given at the time of marriage of his daughter. This fact is further supported by filling the identity proof and duly executed an affidavit by Shri Joga singh in furtherance to the details already on record. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee in providing the gift at the time of marriage of poor family member is a charitable activity. 5 Hari Singh 70/109, 393715969 982832137 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Rawat Pratap 379 5 Fan Invoice No. 1271, Dated Nagar, 06/05/2022 Payment vide Sangane Cheque No. 389463, dated r, Jaipur- 14/12//2022 Rs, 1400/- help

29 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

302033 during the Daughter’s Marriage as celling fan amounting of Rs. 1400.00.

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

Shri Hari Singh did not respond the call. Further Shri Pratap singh vice president of the trust stated that shri Harisingh is president of the trust.

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

The marriage gift is given in kind for daughter and not to the office bearer. The gift given at the time of marriage of his daughter. This fact is further supported by filling the affidavit and identity proof. Affidavit is duly executed before notary public in furtherance to the details already on record. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee in providing the gift at the time of marriage of poor family member is a charitable activity. 6 Raghuveer D-21, 924242555 894963646 Treatme Payment made of Rs. 5100 Singh Anand 475 1 nt( vide Cheque No. 819906 Dated Vihar, Corona) 13/05/2023 help during the Railway treatment of Corona of Mr. Colony, Raghuveer Singh. Jagatpur Contention of the inspector a, Jaipur- and CIT(E) 302017 Confirmed the medical relief

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

As it is not disputed the assessee activities to be

30 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

considered as charitable in nature. 7 Lalita F-29, 604318280 730001449 Husban Payment made of Rs. 5100 Fartyal Ram 681 0 d’s vide Cheque No. 819902 Dated Vihar, Treatme 13/05/2023 help during the Vaishali nt treatment of Corona of Nagar (Corona Husband of Mrs Lalita Fartyal Marg, ) Meenaw Contention of the inspector ala, and CIT(E) Jaipur- 302034 Confirmed the medical relief

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record

As it is not disputed the assessee activities to be considered as charitable in nature. 8 Karam E-4/2, 809004411 952194834 Celling M/s Deep Trading Company Singh Rajastha 975 7 Fan Invoice No. 1313, Dated n 10/01/2021 Payment vide Universit Cheque No. 389469, dated y 13/02/2023 Rs, 3750/- help Campus, during the Daughter’s Marriage Jaipur- as celling fan amounting of Rs. 302004 1250.00.

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

He said he did not receive any help from the trust.

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record The marriage gift is given in kind for daughter and not to him. The gift given at the time of marriage of his daughter. This fact is further supported by filling the affidavit and identity proof. Affidavit is duly executed before notary public in furtherance to the details

31 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

already on record. Therefore, the expenditure incurred by the assessee in providing the gift at the time of marriage of poor family member is a charitable activity 9 Pratap F-298, 696042223 982838101 Smarika Payment made vide Cheque Singh Negi Chitrkut 572 3 Exp. No. 389465, dated 06/01/2022 Nagar, Rs, 20000/- for typing Exp. of Ajmer Sharika. Road, Contention of the inspector Jaipur - 302021 and CIT(E)

Wrong number

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record As is evident from the receipt and payment account placed on record that the assessee is in receipt of money under the head Sharika receipt of Rs. 2,28,700 and the assessee has paid the typing and charges for an amount of Rs. 20,000/- by account payee cheque thus when the trust has collected fund from activity that activity related expenses cannot be considered as non genuine expenses. 10 Shree D-10, GST No. 960285581 Smarika M/s Shree Shyam Offset Shyam Sudhersh 08AAECE2 7 Exp. Private Limited Offset anpura 494D2ZP Invoice No. 1187, Dated Private Industrial 05/01/2023 Payment vide Limited Area, 22 Cheque No. 389466, dated Godam, 05/01/2023 Rs, 20000/-, Jaipur- Payment vide Cheque No. 302006 389464, dated 05/01/2023 Rs, 90000 for Printing Exp. of Sharika..

Contention of the inspector and CIT(E)

Shri Amit received the phone

32 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E)

and stated that he has not receive any help from the trust

Finding based on the submission and additional evidence placed on record As is evident from the receipt and payment account placed on record that the assessee is in receipt of money under the head Sharika receipt of Rs. 2,28,700 and the assessee has paid the 1000 piece book printing with lamination. The bill is in the name of trust issued by Shri Shayam offset. The payment has been made to them by an account payee cheque. Thus, it is not in dispute that the assessee has not paid to him yes he has not been any help but the amount for the work done by them. Therefore, when the trust has collected fund for activity of fund raising that activity related expenses cannot be considered as non genuine

As is evident from the observation recorded in the order of the ld.

CIT(E) and additional evidence placed on record and disused herein above

so as to clarify the misunderstanding on the facts by placing on record

affidavit, identity of person and bill for the items used to give relief to the

poor. All this evidence does not deal any cash payments or

misappropriation of funds. It is also evident that no member or office bearer

is directly benefited by the activity for which the report of the inspector we

33 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) have on each of the observation of 10 example selected given our

observations that the observation on each of reason cannot be a reason to

reject the approve of the trust as the relief to the poor and fund raising

activity is part of the object of the society trust and therefore, the denial of

registration to the trust is not appropriate. Thus, the reasons for refusal to

register the applicant-assessee trust does not appeal to us as valid

reasons. Considering the explanation of the assessee and evidence

submitted before us we deem it fit that these aspects of the matter needs to

be reconsideration. Therefore, we restore the matter to the file of the ld.

CIT(E) to reconsider the application of the assessee trust for registration

u/s. 12AB of the Act in accordance with law and after according reasonable

opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Based on the observations recorded herein above the appeal filed by

the assessee in ITA no. 775/JP/2024 allowed, for statistical purpose.

cancellation of provisional registration of the assessee. Since we have in

ITA no. 775/JP/2024 restored the matter to the file of ld. CIT(E) to grant the

registration u/s. 12AB to the assessee the trust we hold that the

cancellation of provisional registration of the trust being consequential the

34 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) appeal of the assessee ITA no. 776/JP/2024 also restored to the file of the

ld.CIT(E).

Based on the observations recorded herein above the appeal filed by

the assessee in ITA no. 776/JP/2024 allowed, for statistical purposes.

rejection of the recognition of the assessee u/s. 80G of the Act and the said

approval u/s. 80G was denied to the assessee on the following grounds ;-

- Approval u/s. 80G cannot be granted without registration u/s. 12AB

- Commencement of activities

The appeal of the assessee in ITA no. 778JP/2024 relates to cancellation of

provisional registration u/s. 80G of the Act.

assessee has not made the application in Form no. 10AB u/s clause (iii) of

first proviso to sub section (5) of section 80G of the Act within the period

time period of at least six months prior to expiry of period of the provisional

approval or within six months of commencement of its activities, whichever

is earlier. Ld. CIT(E) also noted that he did has power to condone such

35 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) delay the same was not considered. On this aspect of the matter CBDT

vide circular no.7/2024 dated 25-04-2024 condone that delay and the

assessee be given that circular benefit being beneficial in nature.

As regards the first reasons since we have restored the matter of

registration of the applicant – assessee u/s. 12AB to the file of the ld.

CIT(E) we deem it fit to restore the matter of registration to the file of the ld.

CIT(E) who will decide the issue of recognition of the assessee trust u/s.

80G of the Act in accordance with law and after providing sufficient

opportunity of being head.

Based on the observations recorded herein above the appeal filed by

the assessee in ITA no. 777 & 778/JP/2024 allowed, for statistical

purposes.

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11/09/2024.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼ Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh ½ ¼ jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) (Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member

36 ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj vs. CIT (E) Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 11/09/2024 *Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Uttrakhand Samaj, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT, Exemption, Jaipur 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA Nos. 775 to 778/JP/2024) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत