Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by the assessee-trust is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemptions), Ahmedabad [in short the ld. CIT(E)] dated 29/03/2023 in rejecting the application of assessee-trust for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act). The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “(1) The learned CIT(Exemption) was not justified in rejecting application u/s 12AB, particularly when all the details sought were fully complied. (2) The learned CIT(E) took a very narrow view in the matter and was driven by extraneous consideration. (3) The appellant craves leave to add, alter or vary any of the grounds of appeal.”
Shri Balkrishna Shudhhadwait Sthanik Mahasabha Vs CIT(E) 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is filed an application for registration under Section 12AB of the Act in Form 10AB in accordance with Rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, (in short, the Rules) on 07/09/2022 . The assessee furnished necessary details at the time of filing application electronically/online including copy of original registration alongwith memorandum of association/constitution deed/trust deed of assessee. The assessee also furnished copy of certificate of registration and PAN and the details of activities with the audited financial statements for last two financial years. On perusal of details of assessee in different documents, the ld CIT(E) found that as per PAN/ Form- 10AB the name of assessee is “SHRI BALKRISHNA SHUDHHADWAIT STHANIK MAHASABHA”, however, in the certificate of registration issued by the Charity Commissioner, the name of assessee is mentioned as “SHRI BALKRUSHNA SHUDHHADWAIT TRUST ”. Similarly, in self certified copy of translated copy of registration certificate, appears as “SHRI BALKRISHNA SHUDHHADWAIT STHANIK MAHASABHA, MATAMANDIR”. Further, in audited accounts for the year ending on 31,03.2021 & 31.03.2022, the name of assessee is appearing as “SHRI BALKRISHNA SHUDHHADWAIT STHANIK MAHASABHA TRUST”. Thus, there is a mismatch in the name of PAN database vis-à-vis certificate of registration. The ld. CIT(E) was of the view that the assessee has not furnished required details and decided to disposed of application on the basis of material available on record. In absence of requisite details, the verification of object of trust could not be verified. The ld. CIT(A) rejected the application of assessee Shri Balkrishna Shudhhadwait Sthanik Mahasabha Vs CIT(E) for want of compliance by holding that Section 12AB of the Act makes it clear that before granting registration, he has to satisfy himself about genuineness of the activities of the trust and to verify that activities are in consonance with object of the trust or institution. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(E), the assessee has filed present appeal before this Tribunal.
We have heard the submissions of learned Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Departmental Representative (ld. CIT-DR) for the revenue. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee furnished complete details while filing/uploading required details at the time of filing of application. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that they have furnished copy of trust deed, registered under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act, bearing registration No. A-736 Surat. Same registration number is mentioned in all evidences of assessee trust about its activities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee is an educational and religious trust. The trust is in existence from 1934, though, it was registered with Charity Commissioner in 1953 under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act. There is no change in the object and activities of the assessee-trust. The assessee was granted provisional registration certificate under section 21A(1)(ac)(iii) on 30.03.2022. The name of trust was wrongly mentioned due to inadvertence. The correct name of the assessee is “SHRI BALKRISHNA SHUDHHADWAIT STHANIK MAHASABHA”. The different name is mentioned due to inadvertence, the ld. CIT(E) rejected the application instead of considering it in a broad way. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that he has Shri Balkrishna Shudhhadwait Sthanik Mahasabha Vs CIT(E) filed copy of PAN card of assessee, registration certificate under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act having registration No. Surat/A-735. The assessee is filing its return of income by with PAN: AAIT 1682 C. The audited financial statement also mentioned the registration number and the name of assessee trust and PAN. The trust deed also clearly mentioned the name of assessee trust. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the application of assessee was rejected in a mechanical way without seeking any clarification for explanation from the assessee. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has fulfilled all the conditions and appeal of assessee may be allowed.
In alternative submission, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that the matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(E) with direction to consider the application of assessee afresh and to pass he order in accordance with law. The ld AR for assessee submits that he is ready to make correction in the Form- 10AB and at other places with the satisfaction of ld CIT(E).
On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR for the revenue submits that there was a mismatch in various documents. The assessee has given different name in Form- 10AB, which is not matching with the name mentioned in registration certificate as well as in trust deed. The ls CIT(A) while rejecting application due to mismatch of name in different evidences. The object and activities of the assessee was not verified by the ld. CIT(E). The ld. CIT-DR submits that in case, if the Bench of view that the assessee deserve any relief, the matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(E) to examine the object of assessee and