ICON FOUNDATION,JAIPUR V. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

ITA 158/JPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the Icon Foundation against the orders of the CIT (Exemption), Jaipur, which had rejected the Foundation's applications for permanent registration under section 12AB and approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT (Exemption) had initially granted provisional registrations but later cancelled them, citing issues such as benefit to interested persons and doubts about the genuineness of the Foundation's activities. The Tribunal found that the CIT (Exemption) had not adequately considered the Foundation's responses and evidence, leading to a decision to set aside the CIT's orders and remand the case for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315385 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Ananda Social & Educational Trust vs. Commissioner of Income tax, Chaudhary Bishambher Singh Education Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Noida, Modern Defence Shikshan Sansthan vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot -II vs. Leuva Patel Seva Samaj Trust, Malik Hasmullah Islamic Educational and Welfare Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faizabad, PIMS Medical & Education Charitable Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Chandigarh
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: TARUN MITTAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Charitable institution; Cancellation of registration
• Section: 11; 12AA; 12A; 139; 12; 10; 80G

Judgement Text

"vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj 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, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 158 & 159/JPR/2025 Icon Foundation 37-38, Shopping Centre, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACTI1395 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Tarun Mittal, C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by :Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 07/04/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 13/05/2025 vkns'k@ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. These are two appeals filed by the assessee against two separate orders of ld. CIT(E), Jaipur dated 30.12.2024 passed under section 12AB and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- ITA NO. 159/JPR/2025 : “1. On facts and in the circumstances of the matter Ld.CIT (Exemption) has grossly erred in rejecting the application for registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, filed in form 10AB merely on surmises and technical grounds, without appreciating the actual facts of the case. Appellant prays that such rejection being 2 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. absolutely unwarranted and unjustified deserves to be rolled back and the registration sought being most legal, deserves to be provided. 2. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has further erred in rejecting application for permanent registration sought in form 10AB, on the ground that the assessee trust was providing benefit to interested persons, without appreciating the submission filed by the assessee and facts and circumstances of the case thus, rejection of the application being most unjustified, the rejection deserves to be called back. 3. That on facts and in the circumstances ld. CIT (Exemption) has grossly erred in rejecting the application made under form 10AB, by holding that genuineness of activities of the trust for charitable purposes could not be established. Appellant prays that such observation is incorrect considering the facts of the case and therefore the approval deserves to be granted. 4. On facts and in the circumstances of the matter Ld. CIT (Exemption) has grossly erred in cancelling the provisional registration granted to appellant u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arbitrarily. 5. That the appellant reserves the right to add/alter/amend/delete/modify and grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal.” ITA NO. 158/JPR/2025 : “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law learned CIT (Exemptions) has grossly erred in denying the approval to the assessee under Section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The Ld. CIT (Exemption) has erred on facts and in law in rejecting the application on the ground that approval u/s 80G cannot be granted without registration u/s 12AB, without appreciating the fact that assessee was granted the provisional registration under section 12AB, hence the said denial being invalid in law deserves to be quashed. 3. On facts and in the circumstances of the matter ld. CIT (Exemption) has grossly erred in cancelling the provisional registration granted to appellant u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, arbitrarily.” Both these appeals are inter-related and inter-connected, therefore, first of all, we deal with the grounds of the assessee raised in ITA No.159/JP/2025 for the sake 3 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. of convenience. ITA No.159/JPR/2025: 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a public charitable trust incorporated on 17.01.2023 and registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust, 1959 on 06.05.2024. Assessee Trust is created for the purpose of providing essential healthcare and physiotherapy services to children suffering from various developmental disorders at large using the various scientific approaches without any discrimination of caste, creed or colour. The assessee trust is providing the treatment to children in relation to Child Neurology and Autism through various scientific approaches. Autism spectrum disorder (ASD), is a condition that affects how people interact, communicate, and learn, often leading to challenges in social situations and repetitive behaviors or interests. Some of the objects of the assessee trust are as under : “1. To undertake activities related to treatment and welfare of children with sensory or motor issue, infectious and not infectious neurological conditions, communication issues, behavior, personality and learning issues, learning disabilities, developmental and psychiatric and psychological disorders. 2. To establish promote, support, maintain, manage, held and run Dispensaries, Hospitals, Nursing Homes, Maternity, Children Welfare Centre, Medical Centre, Sanatoria’s Clinics, Laboratories, Mobile Medical Units, Ambulances, Research and Innovation Centre, Training Centre, Rehabilitation Centre, Medical and/or Surgical Camps, Blood Banks and other establishment for giving medical relief to children with disorders and disabilities.” 4 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. Assessee Trust applied for the provisional registration under section 12A(1)(ac) and 80G(5) of the Act on 21.03.2024 which were granted on 29.03.2024 and same is valid from AY 2024-25 to 2026-27 (APB 12-13). Thereafter assessee trust applied for the permanent registration under section 12AB of the Act in Form No. 10AB on 28.06.2024. While evaluating the assessee’s application of permanent registration, the ld. CIT (Exemptions) sought various details/explanation to which assessee trust has provided details/response from time to time. Thereafter, ld. CIT (Exemptions) without considering the replies filed by assessee trust, has erroneously rejected the application of the assessee on the following grounds :  Benefit to interested people,  Genuineness of Activities. ITA No.158/JPR/2025: 3. In regard to appeal in ITA No. 158/JPR/2025, we note that the assessee trust applied for the permanent registration under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in Form No. 10AB on 28.06.2024. While evaluating the assessee’s application of permanent registration, the ld. CIT (Exemption) sought various details/explanation vide letter/notice No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2024- 25/1066849030(1) dated 19.07.2024, to which assessee has provided details / response vide its letter dated 20.08.2024. However, the ld. CIT (E) after considering the submissions of the assessee rejected the application under section 5 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. 80G of the IT Act, 1961, on the sole ground that Approval under section 80G cannot be granted without registration under section 12AB.The ld. CIT (E) observed that as per rule 11AA of the IT Rules, 1962, the registration under section 12A/12AB or notification under section 10(23C) is a precondition for granting approval under section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. The ld. CIT (E) further cancelled the provisional approval granted earlier under clause (iv) of first proviso to sub- section (5) of section 80G of the IT Act, 1961 dated 29.03.3024 as the assessee has failed to give proper justification for regularization of provisional approval. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT (Exemption), the assessee preferred the present appeals before us on the grounds mentioned hereinabove. All the grounds raised by the assessee are inter-related and inter-connected and relates to challenging the order of ld. CIT (Exemption) in denying permanent registration under section 12AA and approval under section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, we dispose off all the grounds through a consolidated order. 5. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the arguments as were raised by him before the ld. CIT (Exemption) and also relied on the written submission submitted before us which are reproduced as under : “ Grounds of Appeal No. 1 to 4: 6 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. In all these grounds of appeal, assessee has challenged the action of ld. CIT(Exemption) in rejecting the application u/s 12AB of the Act, on the grounds that assessee trust is giving benefit to the specified persons and further doubting the genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust. As all the grounds of appeal are inter related and thus the same are canvassed together for the sake of convenience. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant had been granted provisional registration under section 12A vide order dated 29.03.2024. Upon application for regular registration under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac), the CIT(E) initiated verification proceedings. It is the case of the CIT(E) that certain transactions, such as rent paid to a related party (a company in which a trustee is a director) and travel expenses reflecting a trustee’s name, amounted to violation of section 13(1)(c) read with section 13(3), thereby disqualifying the trust from registration. The appellant submits that this reasoning is flawed and inconsistent with the scope and object of registration proceedings under the Act. In this regard, provisions of section 12AB of the Act is reproduced as under for ready reference— Procedure for fresh registration. 12AB. (1) The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, on receipt of an application made under clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, shall,— (a) where the application is made under sub-clause (i) of the said clause, pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution for a period of five years; (b) where the application is made under sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iii) or sub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) 2[or item (B) of sub-clause (vi)] of the said clause,— (i) call for such documents or information from the trust or institution or make such inquiries as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about— (A) the genuineness of activities of the trust or institution; and (B) the compliance of such requirements of any other law for the time being in force by the trust or institution as are material for the purpose of achieving its objects; 7 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. (ii) after satisfying himself about the objects of the trust or institution and the genuineness of its activities under item (A) and compliance of the requirements under item (B), of sub-clause (i),— (A) pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution for a period of five years; or (B) if he is not so satisfied, pass an order in writing,— (I) in a case referred to in sub-clause (ii) or sub-clause (iii) or sub- clause (v) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A rejecting such application and also cancelling its registration; (II) in a case referred to in sub-clause (iv) or in item (B) of sub- clause (vi) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, rejecting such application, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard; In the matter, it is submitted that from the plain reading the Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it is observed that Principal Commissioner or Commissioner is required to satisfy himself with regard to 2 major aspects i.e. (1) the objects of trust and (2) genuineness of the activities of the trust and if the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner are satisfied then he shall pass an order in writing otherwise reject the application for registration vide order in writing. It is further submitted that the genuineness of the activities are to be judged by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner that the activities conducted by trust or institution is towards the furtherance of the objects of the trust or institution and are in alignment with the objects of the trust or institution. In the case in hands, it is submitted that the objects of the assessee trust are not objected by ld. CIT(E). Now coming to the (2) aspects, ld. CIT(E) has doubted the genuineness of the activities of the assessee trust citing the applicability of Section 11 and 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and observing as “Thus, combined reading of section 13(1)(c) and section 13(3) of the Act clearly states that if a trust carries out any transaction directly or 8 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. indirectly for the benefit of the specified persons mentioned in Section 13(3), then the said trust will lose out on the exemption provided under Sections 11 and 12 of the IT Act. Here, Sh. Varnit Shanker is trustees of the society and is one of persons as specified in section 13(3)(a).”Thus, from the perusal of the above, it is evident that the ld. CIT(E) has commented on the application of the income which is assessed during the course of assessment proceedings not while proceedings for registration u/s 12A rather then the activities conducted by the assessee trust and its alignment with its objects. In this regard, reliance is placed on the order of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ananda Social & Educational Trust vs. Commissioner of Income tax[2020] 114 taxmann.com 693 (SC)/[2020] 272 Taxman 7 (SC)/[2020] 426 ITR 340 (SC)[19-02- 2020] wherein it was held as under: Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Registration procedure (Grant of registration) - Assessee trust was formed as a society and it applied for registration within a period of about two months, however, no activities had been undertaken by Trust before application was made - Commissioner rejected application on sole ground that since no activities had been undertaken by trust, it was not possible to register it, presumably because it was not possible to form satisfaction about whether activities of trust are genuine - Tribunal reversed orders of Commissioner- High Court upheld order of Tribunal and came to conclusion that even though there were no activities, it was possible to consider whether trust could be registered under section 12AA - On appeal, it was found that section 12AA provides for registration of a trust and such registration can be applied for by a trust which has been in existence for some time and also by a newly registered trust and there is no stipulation that trust should have already been in existence and should have undertaken any activities before making application for registration - Whether therefore, order of High Court was to be upheld - Held, yes [Paras 12 to 13][In favour of assessee] In the above case, the Trust was in existence for only 2 months when they applied for registration u/s 12A and no activity has been conducted till the time of making the application. Thus, the case in hands is on better footings as the assessee trust has started conducted the activities which were in furtherance of their objects and the same is not rebutted by ld. CIT(E). 9 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench in the case of Chaudhary Bishambher Singh Education Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Noida [2014] 48 taxmann.com 152 (Delhi - Trib.)/[2014] 150 ITD 607 (Delhi - Trib.)[13-06-2014] held as under: Section 12AA, read with section 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Registration procedure (Effect of section 13 violation) - Whether when there is an unverifiable donation or if there is violation of section 13(3), consequence will follow in assessment of relevant year but verification of donation or verification of violation of section 13(3) is not a relevant consideration for grant of registration of trust under section 12AA - Held, yes [Para 7] [In favour of assessee] Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench in the case of Modern DefenceShikshanSansthan vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [2008] 26 SOT 21 (Jodhpur) (URO)[12-02-2007] held as under: Section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Registration procedure - Whether at stage of consideration of issue of registration under section 12AA, it is not a sine qua non to examine aspect of application of income - Held, yes - Assessee applied for grant of registration under section 12AA - Commissioner refused to grant registration on reasoning that assessee had taken a building to run school owned by two persons, who were close relatives of one of trustees of assessee - Whether refusal to grant registration to assessee on this pretext was justified - Held, no - Whether since Commissioner had not doubted aims and objects at assessee-society, assessee was to be granted registration as sought - Held, yes Hon’bleHigh Court of Gujarat in thecase of Commissioner of Income-tax, Rajkot -II vs. Leuva Patel SevaSamaj Trust [2014] 42 taxmann.com 181 (Gujarat)/[2014] 221 Taxman 75 (Gujarat) (Mag.)[06-11-2012] held as under: Section 12AA, read with sections 11 and 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Registration procedure [Scope of power] - Assessee, a public charitable trust, applied for registration under section 12AA - Commissioner rejected said application holding that trust was for benefit of Leuva Patel Community and, therefore, it would be covered under section 13(1)(b) - Tribunal, however, allowed assessee's application - Whether question as to whether trust is created or established for benefit of any particular religious community or caste would be relevant when income of trust is being assessed in terms of section 11 - Held, yes - Whether insofar as section 12AA is 10 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. concerned, Commissioner has to merely decide if trust has fulfilled necessary requirements of registration as provided under section 12A - Held, yes - Whether in view of above, impugned order passed by Tribunal was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 4][In favour of assessee] Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench in the case of Malik Hasmullah Islamic Educational and Welfare Societyv. Commissioner of Income-tax, Faizabad [2012] 24 taxmann.com 93 (Luck.) held as under: Section 12AA, read with sections 11, 12 and 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Registration procedure - Assessment year 2012-13 - Whether since provisions of sections 11, 12 and 13 are intended for exercise of jurisdiction by an Assessing Officer in an assessment proceedings, Commissioner is not competent to invoke such provisions for purpose of declining registration under section 12AA - Held, yes [In favour of assessee] Section 13 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Denial of exemption - Assessee society was registered with principal object to establish schools and educational institutions for Muslim boys and girls for providing Islamic education - It applied for registration as charitable educational institution under section 12AA - Commissioner denied registration on ground that assessee-society was established for benefit of a particular religious community and, therefore, it could not be considered as a charitable institution under section 11 or 12 in view of provision of section 13(1)(d) - Whether since Commissioner did not show that objects of assessee were not charitable, order denying registration was not justified - Held, yes [In favour of assessee] Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench in the case of PIMS Medical & Education Charitable Society vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Chandigarh [2013] 31 taxmann.com 371 (Chandigarh - Trib.)/[2013] 56 SOT 522 (Chandigarh - Trib.)/[2013] 150 TTJ 891 (Chandigarh - Trib.)[30-10-2012] observed: Section 12A, read with section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Registration of [Conditions precedent] - Whether it is incumbent upon Commissioner to decide issue of granting or decline of registration only within statutory preconditions as laid down under section 12A, read with section 12AA; satisfaction of statutory conditions of sections 11, 12 and 13 is not relevant for purpose of grant of registration under section 12A read with section 12AA - Held, yes - Whether therefore, while considering granting of registration under section 12AA he should satisfy himself only about genuineness of activities of trust in accordance with its objects and not about 11 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. credential, capacity and qualification, etc., of trust - Held, yes - Whether change of address and different addresses for procuring loans from different banks at different places can be ground to construe society as non-genuine - Held, no [In favour of assessee] Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench in the case of Kurni Daivachara Sangham vs. Director of Income-tax, (Exemptions), Hyderabad [2014] 50 taxmann.com 53 (Hyderabad - Trib.)/[2015] 153 ITD 673 (Hyderabad - Trib.)[28-08-2014] held as under: Section 13, read with section 12AA, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Denial of exemption (Sub-section (1)(b)) - Whether assessee-society, created for benifit of kurni community which was classified as a backward class, would come within exception provided under Explanation 2 to section 13 and, thus it could not be denied registration under section 12AA by invoking restriction imposed under section 13(1)(b) - Held, yes [Para 5] [In favour of assessee] Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Pune Bench in the case of Ashoka Education Foundation vs. Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Nashik [2015] 53 taxmann.com 436 (Pune - Trib.)/[2015] 67 SOT 332 (Pune - Trib.) (URO)/[2015] 173 TTJ 54 (Pune - Trib.)[31-12-2014] held as under: Section 12A, read with sections 12AA and 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust (Grant of registration) - Whether at stage of registration under section 12A, only nature of activities of trust and its charitable purpose was to be looked into; registration to assessee trust under said section could not be disallowed only on basis that agreement entered into by assessee with its sister concern benefited said concern in violation of section 13(1) - Held, yes [Para 28] [In favour of assessee] The above order was challenged by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax before the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay [2019] 104 taxmann.com 167 (Bombay) where the hon’ble court the matter in favour of assessee and observed as under: Section 10(23C), read with section 13, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Educational institutions (Cancellation of registration) - Assessee was a public charitable trust engaged in activities which were educational in nature - Assessee entered into an agreement with one ABL and parted with possession of part of immovable property in favour of said ABL for manufacturing and supply ready mix concrete at concessional rate as such concrete mix was required for constructing assessee's school building unhindered 12 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. as there was no such plant in nearby area - Commissioner passed order of cancellation of Registration on ground that though said ABL would come under prohibited persons referred to in section 13(1)(c) and 13(2)(c), no permission was sought from charity Commissioner before entering into such agreement - Whether Tribunal was justified in reversing order of Commissioner on ground that if there was any breach of provision of section 13(1), Assessing Officer could examine its effect at time of passing of assessment order and that activities of assessee were genuine and carried out in accordance with its objects - Held, yes [Para 9] [In favour of assessee] The appellant had duly complied with all procedural requirements while filing the application for registration under section 12AB. The application was submitted in Form 10AB, along with all requisite documents, including the trust deed, financial statements, and a detailed description of the charitable activities undertaken by the trust. However, the rejection of the application by the ld. CIT (E) reflects an approach that is contrary to the well-settled principles of law. The ld. CIT (E) has failed to appreciate that the objects and activities of the appellant are wholly charitable and are in complete alignment with the provisions of section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, which defines \"charitable purpose\" to include relief of the poor, education, and medical relief. The appellant's activities fall squarely within this definition, and there is no reason to deny the benefit of registration under section 12AB. Therefore, the rejection order passed by ld. CIT(E) is not accordance in law and therefore deserves to be quashed. On the merits of the case, ld. CIT(E) has rejected the registration merely on the basis of two grounds i.e.:  Benefit to interested people.  Genuineness of Activities. 1) Benefit to interested people In this regard, ld. CIT(E) has observed on page 3 of his order that no justification towards the rent payment made to M/s Cardis Labs Pvt. Ltd was furnished by assessee trust. In this regard, it is submitted that assessee trust vide its reply dated 15.12.2024 (APB 144- 147) has furnished the details sought along with the rent agreement (APB 165-171). It is submitted that the premises has been taken on rent from the M/s Cardis Labs Pvt. Ltd., wherein the trustees of the assessee trust are director, for providing the services for which the trust has been formed and a photo of the premises furnished before the ld. CIT(E) where the name of the assessee trust is clearly mentioned. It is further submitted that given the prices of th rent charged is very nominal at Rs. 12,000/ CIT(E) that no justification was provided regarding the rent payment is baseless and arbitrary and therefore deserves to be Further, Ld. CIT(E), on the basis of below invoices along with some other invoices relating to foreign travel, observed that the invoices bears the name of the trustees of the assessee trust and not the name of assessee trust and further no justif that the foreign travels were related to the objects of the assessee trust. 13 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JP ICON Foundation, Jaipur the trust has been formed and a photo of the premises (APB 81) taken on rent was also furnished before the ld. CIT(E) where the name of the assessee trust is clearly mentioned. It is further submitted that given the prices of the area where the premises are located, the rent charged is very nominal at Rs. 12,000/- per month. Thus, the observation of the ld. CIT(E) that no justification was provided regarding the rent payment is baseless and arbitrary and therefore deserves to be ignored. Further, Ld. CIT(E), on the basis of below invoices along with some other invoices relating to foreign travel, observed that the invoices bears the name of the trustees of the assessee trust and not the name of assessee trust and further no justification was provided that the foreign travels were related to the objects of the assessee trust. ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. taken on rent was also furnished before the ld. CIT(E) where the name of the assessee trust is clearly mentioned. e area where the premises are located, the per month. Thus, the observation of the ld. CIT(E) that no justification was provided regarding the rent payment is baseless and Further, Ld. CIT(E), on the basis of below invoices along with some other invoices relating to foreign travel, observed that the invoices bears the name of the trustees of the ication was provided In the matter, at the outset, it is submitted that the query pertaining to the invoices were never raised before the assessee trust during the course of r ld. CIT(E) even though all the requisite details along with evidences were furnished before the ld. CIT(E) as and when required. Thereafter, while passing the order rejecting the registration of the assessee trust, ld. CIT(E) which the assessee trust were never given an opportunity to rebut the same.Therefore, the order is passed without affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee trust and therefore the order so passed quashed. It is submitted that the trustees of the assessee trust are doctors who are engaged in offering physiotherapy and allied services to underprivileged children with developmental challenges, and th demonstrates that the activities are neither commercial nor profit 14 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JP ICON Foundation, Jaipur In the matter, at the outset, it is submitted that the query pertaining to the invoices were never raised before the assessee trust during the course of registration proceedings by the ld. CIT(E) even though all the requisite details along with evidences were furnished before the ld. CIT(E) as and when required. Thereafter, while passing the order rejecting the registration of the assessee trust, ld. CIT(E) has made the following observations of which the assessee trust were never given an opportunity to rebut the same.Therefore, the order is passed without affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee trust and therefore the order so passed is not in accordance of law and thus deserves to be It is submitted that the trustees of the assessee trust are doctors who are engaged in offering physiotherapy and allied services to underprivileged children with developmental challenges, and the nominal fee charged, along with various free services, demonstrates that the activities are neither commercial nor profit-driven. It is further ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. In the matter, at the outset, it is submitted that the query pertaining to the invoices were egistration proceedings by the ld. CIT(E) even though all the requisite details along with evidences were furnished before the ld. CIT(E) as and when required. Thereafter, while passing the order rejecting has made the following observations of which the assessee trust were never given an opportunity to rebut the same.Therefore, the order is passed without affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee is not in accordance of law and thus deserves to be It is submitted that the trustees of the assessee trust are doctors who are engaged in offering physiotherapy and allied services to underprivileged children with e nominal fee charged, along with various free services, driven. It is further 15 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. submitted that the travel expenses incurred were towards attending medical awareness programs, visiting centers dealing with autism, and exploring collaborative projects, and though some invoices reflected the names of individual trustees (due to practical reasons in bookings) though the payments were made by the trust. These expenses were incurred in furtherance of the trust’s objectives and cannot be treated as personal benefits without direct evidence to that effect. Furthermore, with regard to the invoice pertaining to foreign travel to Osaka, Japan, it is submitted that the Chief of the assessee Trust Dr. Varnit Shanker was invited in a conference “Autism – Pediatric Neurology” for World Pediatrics Conference 2024 (WPC) which was held on 18-19 Oct, 2024, wherein the new ways of healing Autism are discussed at length and new research is also made public. The relevant details are as under: On the same line, with regard to invoice Washington and Boston, it is submitted that the travel to the United States of America was done by the Chief of the assessee trust Dr. Varnit School wherein Dr. Varnit Shanker had attended session in Child Neurology for better treatment of Patients in ICON Foundation and his initiatives has been acknowledged which are as under: 16 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JP ICON Foundation, Jaipur On the same line, with regard to invoice (APB 140) pertaining to foreign travel to Washington and Boston, it is submitted that the travel to the United States of America was done by the Chief of the assessee trust Dr. Varnit Shanker to the Harvard Extension School wherein Dr. Varnit Shanker had attended session in Child Neurology for better treatment of Patients in ICON Foundation and his initiatives has been acknowledged ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. pertaining to foreign travel to Washington and Boston, it is submitted that the travel to the United States of America Shanker to the Harvard Extension School wherein Dr. Varnit Shanker had attended session in Child Neurology for better treatment of Patients in ICON Foundation and his initiatives has been acknowledged Similarly, the other invoice pert Hotel made for Dr. Jaya Shankar Kaushik with check in date as 28.11.2024 and check out date as 30.11.2024, it is submitted that assessee trust was selected as centre for training in Autism at the Rajasthan Pediatric Conference (Annual state level conference of the Indian Academy of Pediatrics) and Dr. Jaya Shankar Kaushik (Child Neurologist, from AIIMS Guwahati) was invited as national faculty and his accommodation arrangements was done at the Nirbana P document of Rajasthan State Conference of Indian Academy of Pediatrics is as under: 17 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JP ICON Foundation, Jaipur Similarly, the other invoice pertaining to hotel booking at Nirbana Palace Hotel made for Dr. Jaya Shankar Kaushik with check in date as 28.11.2024 and check out date as 30.11.2024, it is submitted that assessee trust was selected as centre for training in than Pediatric Conference (Annual state level conference of the Indian Academy of Pediatrics) and Dr. Jaya Shankar Kaushik (Child Neurologist, from AIIMS Guwahati) was invited as national faculty and his accommodation arrangements was done at the Nirbana Palace, Jaipur (Near the ICON Foundation).The necessary document of Rajasthan State Conference of Indian Academy of Pediatrics is as under: ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. aining to hotel booking at Nirbana Palace – A Heritage Hotel made for Dr. Jaya Shankar Kaushik with check in date as 28.11.2024 and check out date as 30.11.2024, it is submitted that assessee trust was selected as centre for training in than Pediatric Conference (Annual state level conference of the Indian Academy of Pediatrics) and Dr. Jaya Shankar Kaushik (Child Neurologist, from AIIMS Guwahati) was invited as national faculty and his accommodation arrangements alace, Jaipur (Near the ICON Foundation).The necessary document of Rajasthan State Conference of Indian Academy of Pediatrics is as under: Since in the instant case all the expenditure incurred by the assessee trust is for the welfare for the public at there is no doubt on the genuineness of activities carried out by the assessee trust. Thus order passed by ld. CIT(E) rejecting registration u/s 12AB of the Act deserves to be reversed. 2) Genuineness of Activities Furthermore, the genuineness of activities of the assessee trust are further challenged by ld. CIT(E) on the basis of below grounds: 1. Receipt has received as “patient fees” in cash only i.e. other than banking channel. 2. Lower rates of services charged by assessee trust not verifiable 3. No details like date of providing charitable activities, place of activities etc. has been furnished 4. Details of beneficiaries, like name, address, mobile No. etc. not provided 5. Details of source of receipt of carried out, name and address of the persons/beneficiaries and details of physiotherapy machines/equipment/furniture 18 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JP ICON Foundation, Jaipur Since in the instant case all the expenditure incurred by the assessee trust is for the welfare for the public at large and in the furtherance of the object of the assessee trust, there is no doubt on the genuineness of activities carried out by the assessee trust. Thus order passed by ld. CIT(E) rejecting registration u/s 12AB of the Act deserves to be ineness of Activities Furthermore, the genuineness of activities of the assessee trust are further challenged by ld. CIT(E) on the basis of below grounds: Receipt has received as “patient fees” in cash only i.e. other than banking channel. ervices charged by assessee trust not verifiable No details like date of providing charitable activities, place of activities etc. has been Details of beneficiaries, like name, address, mobile No. etc. not provided Details of source of receipt of fees, place of clinic where physiotherapy activities are carried out, name and address of the persons/beneficiaries and details of physiotherapy machines/equipment/furniture ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. Since in the instant case all the expenditure incurred by the assessee trust is for the large and in the furtherance of the object of the assessee trust, there is no doubt on the genuineness of activities carried out by the assessee trust. Thus order passed by ld. CIT(E) rejecting registration u/s 12AB of the Act deserves to be Furthermore, the genuineness of activities of the assessee trust are further challenged by Receipt has received as “patient fees” in cash only i.e. other than banking channel. No details like date of providing charitable activities, place of activities etc. has been Details of beneficiaries, like name, address, mobile No. etc. not provided fees, place of clinic where physiotherapy activities are carried out, name and address of the persons/beneficiaries and details of 19 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. In the matter, it is submitted that all the details and evidences as sought by the ld. CIT(E) were furnished before him as and when required. Thus the observation of the ld. CIT(E) that no details pertaining to date and place from where the charitable activities are conducted were furnished before ld. CIT(E) vide its reply dated 04.10.2024 (APB 80) wherein the newspaper clipping along with photos of charitable activities conducted (APB 83-105) and the photo of building where the charitable activities (APB 81) are conducted were also furnished before the ld. CIT(E). Furthermore, from the perusal of the newspaper clipping also, it is evident that the date is also mentioned on which date the news about the assessee trust was printed in that newspaper. Thus the observation of the ld. CIT(E) that no details were provided to him are baseless and contrary to the facts and therefore deserves to be ignored. Further with regard to the receipts of patient fees in cash, it is submitted that the majority of the service recipient of the assessee trust are individuals who prefer to make payment in cash. Further, the amount is also received by conducting the workshops, seminars and treatments to children which is according to the object and towards the furtherance of the object of the assesseetrust.Therefore, the receipts even though received in cash are duly incorporated in the Audited financial statements of the assessee trust. Ld. CIT(E) has further observed that he is not able to verify whether the rates charged by the assessee trust is on the lower side as compared to other similar institutions. In this regard, it is submitted that assessee trust vide its reply dated 04.10.2024 (APB 80)and later on again vide reply dated 15.12.2024 (APB 144-147) along with a comparison chart of price charged by assessee trust and other similar institution (APB 82)was furnished before ld. CIT(E). It is further submitted that the comparison chart prepared by the assessee trust was made after visiting other similar various institutions. Thus, had the ld. CIT(E) had doubts about the prices charged by the assessee trust, ld. CIT(E) could have tried to ascertain the prices charged by other institutions before rejecting the application for registration of the assessee trust. Therefore, as the ld. CIT(E) has not performed any such course of action and proceeded to arbitrarily rejecting the application of assessee is 20 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. not in accordance of law and thus the order so passed being in casual manner deserves to be reversed. In light of the foregoing legal and factual submissions, it is humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly consider the genuine nature of the appellant’s activities and the undue hardship caused by the rejection of registration. The impugned order passed by the CIT (Exemption) is erroneous, arbitrary, and liable to be set aside. It is therefore most respectfully submitted that the Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly direct the CIT (Exemption) to grant registration to the appellant under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act. Submission with regard to ITA No. 158/JPR/2025 (Rejection of Registration u/s 80G(5) of the Act) Brief facts of the case are that assessee trust applied for the permanent registration u/s 80G of the Act in form No. 10AB on 28.06.2024. While evaluating the assessee application of permanent registration ld. CIT(E) sought various details/explanation to which assessee has provided details / response from time to time. However, Ld. CIT(E) without considering the replies filed by the assessee, rejected the assessee application u/s 80G of the Act solely on the ground that Approval u/s 80G cannot be granted without registration u/s 12AB. In this regard, it is again reiterated, as submitted above, that ld. CIT(E) with the preconceived notion to reject the application u/s 12AB of the Act has held the activities of assessee trust as non-genuine. Thus the action of ld. CIT(E) in rejecting the registration under section 12AB of the Act is against the law and order so passed deserved to be reverse and therefore consequently order for rejecting approval u/s 80G of the Act is invalid and registration should be granted u/s 12AB and 80G of the Act.” 5.1 The assessee has also submitted compilation of papers in respect of 12A /80G approval proceedings as under :- COMPILATION OF PAPERS 21 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. S. No. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS. 1. Copy of Acknowledgement of return of Income filed under section 139 of the Act for A.Y. 2024-25. 1 2. Copy of notice dated 19.07.2024issued u/s 12A (1)(ac)(iii). 2-9 3. Copy of reply dated 20.08.2024 filed during assessment proceedings along with following enclosures: 10-11 a. Copy of Form 10AC filed on 29.03.2024 for provisional registration 12-13 b. Copy of Balance Sheet for F.Y.2022-23 and 2023-24 14-19 c. Copy of Registration Certificate for registration under Rajasthan Public Trust, 1959. 20 d. Copy of Trust Deed 21-35 4. Copy of reply dated 04.09.2024 filed during the assessment proceedings along with following enclosures: 36-37 a. Copy of Declaration filed by assessee trust stating no part of the income of the Trust, directly or indirectly, used for the benefit of any person specified in section 13(1)(c) 38 b. Copy of HDFC Bank Statement 39-47 c. Copy of Provisional Balance Sheet from period 01.04.2024 to 31.07.2024 48-49 d. Copy of YES Bank Statement 50-54 5. Copy of reply dated 19.09.2024 filed during the assessment proceedings along with following enclosures: 55 a. Copy of Expenses Ledger 56-78 b. Copy of Details of Salary and Rent 79 6. Copy of reply dated 04.10.2024filed during the assessment proceedings along with following enclosures: 80 a. Copy of Building Photo 81 22 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. S. No. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS. b. Copy of comparison chart between the fees charged by trust and others 82 c. Copy of Newspaper Cutting along with photos of charitable activities conducted by trust 83-105 d. Copy of NOC along with Electricity bill 106-107 e. Copy of Receipt ledger 108-124 f. Copy of invoices of major expenses incurred by assessee trust 125-140 7. Copy of notice dated 10.12.2024 issued u/s 12A (1)(ac)(iii). 141-143 8. Copy of reply dated 15.12.2024 filed during the assessment proceedings along with following enclosures: 144-147 a. Copy of photo of Doctors workshop 148-149 b. Copy of ITR Computation of Dr. MadanlalDogiwal of AY 2022-23 to 2024-25 150-160 c. Copy of photo of Parents workshop 161-164 d. Copy of Rent Agreement 165-171 COMPILATION OF PAPERS S. No. PARTICULARS PAGE NOS. 7. Copy of Form 10 AC for provisional approval order. 1-2 8. Copy of notice dated 19.07.2024 issued in case of proceedings u/s 80G(5)(iii) 3-4 9. Copy of reply dated 20.08.2024 in response to notice dated 19.07.2024 issued in case of proceedings u/s 80G(5)(iii) 5 23 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. 6. On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of the Revenue Authorities. 7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused material available on record. The Bench noted that the application of the assessee pertaining to registration application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been rejected by the ld. CIT(E)on the ground that the assessee provided (1) Benefit to interested person and (2)Genuineness of the activities is not established.The ld. CIT E also rejected the application of the appellant for permanent registration u/s 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the ground that in absence of registration u/s 12AB no registration can be granted u/s 80G. In regard to “Benefit to interested person”, the ld. CIT (E) observed at page 3 of his order that no justification of rent payment claim has been furnished by the assessee. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee has controverted this version of the ld. CIT (E) by stating that the assessee has vide its letter dated 15.12.2024 (APB 144-147) furnished relevant details sought along with Rent Agreement (APB 165-171). The assessee has submitted that the premises has been taken on rent from M/s. Cardis Labs Pvt. Ltd., wherein the trustees of the assessee trust are director, for providing the services for which the trust has been formed anda photo of 24 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. the premises (APB 81) taken on rent was also furnished before the ld. CIT (E) where the name of the assessee trust is clearly mentioned. In regard to ld. CIT (E) observation relating to foreign travel of Dr. Varnit Shanker,trustee of the assessee trust, the ld. A/R of the assessee submitted that the query pertaining to the invoices in connection with the foreign travel of the trustee, were never raised before the assessee trust during the course of registration proceedings by the ld. CIT (E) even though all the requisite details along with evidences were furnished before the ld. CIT (E) as and when required. The ld. A/R submitted that the ld. CIT (E) rejected the application for registration of the assessee trust without affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee to rebut the observations of the ld. CIT (E). Therefore, the order passed is not in accordance of law and thus deserves to be quashed. 7.1 On perusal of the record available in the case file, we find that the trustees of the assessee trust are doctors who are engaged in offering physiotherapy and allied services to underprivileged children with developmental challenges and nominal fee charged, along with various free services, demonstrates that the activities are neither commercial nor profit driven. The travel expenses incurred were towards attending medical 25 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. awareness programs, visiting centers dealing with autism and exploring collaborative projects and though some invoices reflected the names of individual trustees (due to practical reasons in bookings) though the payments were made by the trust. These expenses were incurred in furtherance of the trust’s objectives and cannot be treated as personal benefits without direct evidence to that effect. The assessee trust has furnished necessary evidences by way of Certificates that the Chief of the assessee trust Dr. Varnit Shanker was invited and attended in a Conference “Autism – Pediatric Neurology” for World Pediatrics Conference 2024 (WPC) which was held at Osaka, Japan on 18-19 October, 2024, wherein the new ways of healing Autism are discussed at length and new research is also made public. Dr. Varnit Shanker also travelled America and attended session in Child Neurology for better treatment of Patients in ICON Foundation on the invitation of Harvard University Extension School. The ld. A/R submitted that all these visits undertaken by the trustees of the assessee trust in furtherance of the trust’s objectives and cannot be treated as personal benefits. In the instant case all the expenditure incurred by the assessee trust is for the welfare of the public at large and furtherance of the object of the assessee trust. 26 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. 7.2 In regard to “Genuineness of Activities”, the ld. CIT (E) observed that ‘patient fees’ has been received in cash only other than banking channel, lower rates of services charged by assessee trust not verifiable, no details like date of providing charitable activities , place of activities etc. has been furnished, details of beneficiaries, like name, address, mobile No. etc. not provided, details of source of receipt of fees, place of clinic where physiotherapy activities are carried out, name and address of the persons/beneficiariesand details of physiotherapy machines/equipment/furniture.In this regard the ld. AR submitted that all details along with evidences as sought by the ld. CIT (E) were furnished before him pertaining to date and place from where the charitable activities are conducted vide assessee’s letter dated 04.10.2024 (APB 80) wherein newspaper clipping along with photos of charitable activities conducted (APB 83-105) and the photo of building where the charitable activities (APB 81) are conducted were also furnished. The ld. AR strongly submitted that the observations made by the ld. CIT(E) was wrong and contrary to the facts. In the light of the foregoing legal and factual submissions, the ld. A/R submitted all the activities carried out by the assessee trust are for providing essential healthcare to the children suffering from various developmental disorders and welfare of the public 27 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. at large for which trust is formed and the activities undertaken are genuine and beyond doubt. The ld. A/R further requested the Bench that the ld. CIT (E) be directed to allow registration to the assessee. 7.3 The assessee has placed reliance on various decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court, Hon’ble High Courts and Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal, which are relevant on the point. We find that as per ld. CIT (E)the appellant did not submit complete details about payments made relating to interested parties and even he doubted about genuineness of the same whereas on the other hand regarding queries about foreign travel bills, the appellant stated that no such query was raised and hence it was not granted proper opportunity to submit the explanation.Therefore,in view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the impugned order of ld. CIT (E) and remit the matter back to the record of the ld. CIT (E) for deciding the issue relating to granting permanent registration under section 12AB and 80G afresh after giving a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and in the light of the above observations of the Tribunal. 28 ITA Nos. 159 & 158/JPR/2025 ICON Foundation, Jaipur. 7.4 The order of the ld. CIT (E) about cancellation of provisional registration under section 12AB and u/s 80G is also quashed and the provisional registration shall be deemed to be in force till its validity. 8. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13/05/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼ jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ ½ ¼MkWa-,l-lhrky{eh½ (RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI) (Dr. S. Seethalakshmi) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 13 /05/2025 *Santosh vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Icon Foundation, Jaipur. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT(E), Jaipur. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File { ITA No. 158 & 159/JPR/2025} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar "