VEDA SROUTHA GURUKULAM,EDAPPAL, MALAPPURAM vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION

When the appeal was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and there was also no adjournment application. Therefore, we proceed to hear the appeal exparte qua the assessee. 2.1 The only issue raised by the assessee is that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) erred in rejecting the registration application u/s. 12A of the Act.

At the outset, we note that the assessee has been denied registration u/s 12A of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) on the reasoning that the activities of the assessee are miniscule. Therefore, it is premature to grant registration u/s 12A of the Act.

Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us.

The learned CIT-DR before us vehemently supported the order the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). 6. We have heard the learned CIT-DR and perused the materials available on record. It is the admitted position that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has to verify the activities of the trust to find out whether they are in consonance with the objects of the trust. But such a condition cannot be imposed in the case of fresh registration of a trust u/s 12A of the Act. It is for the reason that the assessee could commence its activities only after having a valid registration u/s 12A of the Act in an effective manner. Thus, we are not convinced with the basis adopted by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) for rejecting the application u/s 12A of the Act. Furthermore, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) has not pointed out any-flaw in the objects of the trust.Nevertheless, in the interest of justice and fair play, we restore the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(Exemption) for granting registration as per the provisions of law. Hence, the ground of appeal