No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD & SHRI MANISH BORAD
PER MANISH BORAD, A.M.:
The above captioned appeals filed at the instance of the Assessee are directed against the order u/s 12AA of the Act of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) (in short ‘Ld. CIT] Bhopal
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
dated 20.03.2020 and out of the order u/s 80G of the Income Tax
Act 1961(In short the ‘Act’) dated 02.05.2017.
The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in
ITANo.287/Ind/2020:
On the facts and the circumstances of the case:- 1.The order appealed against is bad-in-Iaw, void-ab-initio, barred by limitation, against the principles of natural justice and fair play, illegal and therefore liable to be quashed. 2.The Id CIT(E) erred in applying section 12A(1)(ab), in the present case; moreover when the section was inserted from 01.04.2018 by the Finance Act, 2017, whereas the objects were amended in F.Y. 2016-17. 3. The Id CIT(E) erred in cancelling the registration u/s. 12AA(3). 4.The Id CIT(E) erred in holding that the amendment in the objects was not in conformity with the conditions of registration; whereas the amendment in objects was only to make the existing objects more precise; and there were no new objects added while amending the same. The appellant carves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in
ITANo.289/Ind/2020
On the facts and the circumstances of the case:- 1.The order appealed against is bad-in-Iaw, void-ab-initio, barred by limitation, against the principles of natural justice and fair play, illegal and therefore liable to be quashed. 2. Ld. CIT(E) erred in rejecting the registration u/s 80G(5) 3. Ld. CIT€ erred in not complying the direction of the Hon’ble ITAT in the set aside proceedings. The appellant carves leave to add, amend or modify any of the grounds of 2
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
appeal
From perusal of the grounds we note that the grievance of the
assessee is twofold firstly challenging the order of Ld. Pr. CIT(E)
firstly cancelling the registration u/s 12A of the Act and secondly
for not granting approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act.
Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the
assessee is a charitable and religious trust granted registration u/s
12A of the Act vide registration No.41/90-91 dated 13.12.1990. As
the 12A registration certificate was misplaced, the assessee applied for a
copy of the certificate through letter dated 21.04.2006. Then the office of
the ld CIT vide letter dated 25.04.2006, confirmed that the trust has
been granted registration u/s 12A. The application for registration u/s
80G in form no 10G was filed on 15.12.2016, but the application was
declined stating that the precondition for granting exemption u/s 80G is
registration certificate u/s 12AA and it was not furnished. The rejection
of the application was appealed before This Tribunal and vide order ITA
no. 495/Ind/2017 dated 25.09.2018, Tribunal restored the application
of the assessee to the file of the ld CIT(Exemption) to decide afresh after
verifying the contention and the contents of the letter dated 25.04.2006
issued by the Income Tax officer (Tech) for commissioner of Income Tax,
Bhopal. After receiving the order, the assessee trust vide letter dated
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
01.02.2019 and 10.09.2019 requested the CIT(Exemption) to grant the
registration u/s 80G and also annexed the letter dated 25.04.2006.
Various documents were submitted vide above letters and the assessee
trust through AR attended the hearing and case was discussed. It was
found that the objects of the society were changed during F.Y. 2016-17
and application for new registration u/s 12AA of the Act which
purportedly was required to be filed was not filed. The assessee trust
was granted opportunity to show cause that why registration u/s 12AA
should not be cancelled and accordingly registration u/s 80G(vi) of the
act should be refused as the objects of the society were changed during
FY 2016-17 and till date application for new registration u/s 12AA has
not been filed as per clause (ab) of section 12A(1) of income tax act read
with Rule 17A of the Act. As per the ld CIT(A), the assessee trust has
violated the conditions mentioned in section 12A(1)(ab) of the act and
rule 17A of Income Tax Rules, hence registration granted u/s 12A of the
Act vide registration No. 41/90-91 dated 31.12.90 was hereby cancelled
and withdrawn vide Order dated 20.03.2020. Similarly vide order dated
20.03.2020, the application u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act was rejected and
registration sought was refused as the registration no 41/90-91 dated
31.12.1990 was withdrawn vide order dated 20.03.2020.
Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal
challenging the cancellation of registration u/s 12A of the Act and 4
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
rejection of application of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act. Ld.
counsel for the assessee vehemently argued referring to the written
submission and paper book containing 70 pages and summarized
the fact stating that the activities of the trust are charitable in
nature. It enjoys registration 12A of the act since 13.12.1990.
There were some amendments in the clause but the provisions of
intimating such changes to the Income Tax Department came into
effect from F.Y. 2016-17. But same was not applicable on the
assessee as the changes were made prior to the amendment. He
also submitted that some of the original objects were not deleted
but were slightly modified to bring more clarity to the main objects.
Further it was also submitted that the objects of the assessee trust
are for the benefit of public at large.
Reliance was placed on following decisions:
1.Mehta Jiveraj Makandas & Parekh Trust, ITAT, Mumbai ITA No.2212/Mum/2010 2. CIT Vs Surat City Gymkhana(2008) 216 CTR 23(SC) 3. Income tax Officer, (E) 1 (1), Mumbai v. Bhansali Trust [2015] 63 taxmann.com 56 (Mumbai-Trib.) 4. Deccan Gymkhana (Oldesty Trust) v. CIT [2003] 262 ITR 459/131 Taxman 279 (Bom) 6. Per contra, ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld.
CIT(E).
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed
before us. Through these two appeals assessee has challenged the
finding of Ld. CIT(E) cancelling registration 12A of the Act and not
granting approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.
We note that the trust was registered under section 12A of the
Act since 13.12.1990 vide registration no.90-91. Till the insertion
of Sec 12A(1)(ab) by Finance Act 2017, there was no statutory
requirement of intimating the changes to the Income-tax
Department. The objects were amended in F.Y. 2016-17, when this
provision was not applicable. It was only after Finance Act, 2017
that if the trust has adopted or undertaken modifications of the
objects which do not conform to the conditions of registration; then
it has to apply in the prescribed form within a period of 30 days to
the Pr. CIT.
We notice that ld. CIT(E) has alleged that the assessee has deleted the original objects for which registration u/s 12A was granted and has added new objects for which no intimation was given. However on perusal of the old and new objects we find that object no.3.4 of the old object was regarding providing of services in the field of education and
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
medical for public at large. Further on perusal of para 3.5 of the new clause inserted in the Amended trust deed we find that the objects numerated in clause 3.4 of the old trust deed have been elaborated in new clause 3.5 by including libraries, hostel, clinics and providing various other facilities in the field of education and medicines by way of establishing engineering colleges, medical college, employment trading centers etc. We, are therefore satisfied that the main objects mentioned in the old trust deed for which assessee was granted registration u/s 12A of the Act are not deleted rather they have been expanded to include many more of such activities which are charitable in nature and available to public at large. We, thus, note that the
inserted amended objects are not detrimental to the old objects.
We observe that Mehta Jiveraj Makandas & Parekh Trust,
ITAT, Mumbai ITA No.2212/Mum/2010 (PB 65-70) wherein it
was held that “The requirement of intimation is mentioned only in the Form No. 10A and even in the Form No. 10A there is no time limit
prescribed. The assessee had already intimated the changes to the
department though later and, therefore, technically there was no
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
violation on the part of the assessee because of no time limit being
prescribed. Moreover, there being no statutory requirement of
intimating changes, registration could not be cancelled or the trust
could not be declared invalid only on the ground that changes were
not intimated.”. It is submitted that in this judgment it was stated
that at the time of registration, when Form 10A is filled, it is only at
that time we have to intimate the amendments in the objects taken
place till that time, from the date of original trust deed. There is no
requirement to intimate any subsequent change.
Further, the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT
Vs Surat City Gymkhana(2008) 216 CTR 23(SC) also supports
the case of the assessee in which it was held that “the registration
under section 12A was a fait accompli to hold back the AO from
further probe into the objects of the trust. The original objects
continue to exist and the amended objects remain charitable and the
trust continues to be eligible for registration under section 12A.
Principle of consistency is also in favour of the assessee as based on
the amended objects renewal of approval under section 80G has
already been granted and factual and legal position remaining the
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
same, we see no justification for rejecting the application for renewal
under section 80G”.
Further the Ld. CIT(A) cannot insist on a clause in the Trust
Deed which provides that any amendment in Trust Deed shall be
subject to prior approval of CIT. In the case Income tax Officer, (E) 1
(1), Mumbai v. Bhansali Trust [2015] 63 taxmann.com 56 (Mumbai-
Trib.) (PB58-64) it was held that mere non-intimation of
amendments in trust deed to department cannot ipso facto lead to
cancellation of registration under section 12AA(3) because the
statutory requirement of cancellation of registration contained in
section 12AA(3) prescribes that the cancellation of registration
cannot be effectuated unless a case is made out that the new
objects do not fit in with the existing objects, i.e., new objects are
‘non-charitable’ in nature or that the activities are not genuine. In
other words, any legitimate amendment in the Trust deed does not
result in any reason for cancellation on the part of the Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) unless such amendment
results in violation of the conditions of section 12AA read with
section 11. It is important to ensure that there is no change in the
tone and tenor of the objects pursued by the assessee in a real
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
sense. The amendments should not result in major changes in
objects. They can be enabling clauses which provide only 'means'
or 'power' to achieve objects in the Trust Deed. The Hon'ble Bombay
High Court in the case of Deccan Gymkhana (Oldesty Trust) v. CIT
[2003] 262 ITR 459/131 Taxman 279 (Bom) as well as the judgment
of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Federation of India
Chamber of Commerce & Industry [1981] 130 ITR 186/6 Taxman 7
has laid down that a distinction has to be made between the
'purpose' of a Trust and the 'powers' conferred upon the Trustees
as being incidental to accomplish the purpose of the Trust. The
amendments should only enable the Trustees to carry out activities
for accomplishing the purpose of the Trust, which is for a
'charitable purpose' as per original Trust deed. Such amendments
will not signify that the registration granted to the assessee under
section 12A of the Act is rendered nugatory.
We, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances of the care are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(E) erred in cancelling the registration u/s 12A of the Act granted to the assessee since 1990 and further erred in not granting approval u/s 80G(5) of the Act as nothing material has been
Digamber Jain ITA No.287 & 289/Ind/2020
found or noticed by the revenue authorities which could prove that the objects of assessee society are not charitable in nature or the activities undertaken are not charitable n nature or not in consonance to its main objects. We, therefore, allow grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and direct Ld. CIT(E) to restore the registration u/s 12A of the Act and also to grant approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.
In the result, Assessee’s appeal ITANo.287 & 289/Ind/2020 are allowed.
The order pronounced as per Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 17.01.2022.
Sd/- Sd/-
(MAHAVIR PRASAD) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
�दनांक /Dated :17.01.2022 Patel/PS Copy to: The Appellant/Respondent/CIT concerned/CIT(A) concerned/ DR, ITAT, Indore/Guard file. By Order, Asstt.Registrar, I.T.A.T., Indore