INDEPENDENT AND PUBLIC SPIRITED MEDIA FOUNDATION ,BENGALURU V. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CENTRAL), BENGALURU

ITA 625/BANG/2023

AI Insights

The case involves the Independent and Public Spirited Media Foundation (the appellant) appealing against the cancellation of its registration under section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru (the respondent). The cancellation was based on findings from a survey under section 133A of the Act, which revealed that the trust was not adhering to its stated objectives and was involved in activities such as promoting political articles and providing funds to profit-making entities without proper services rendered. The Tribunal examined the jurisdiction of the CIT, the retrospective effect of the cancellation, and the merits of the specified violations alleged against the trust.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 828885 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Bangalore
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2023
• Other Referred Cases: Zodiac Developers Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Amit Kumar Gupta vs. Income Tax Officer, Shri Mohammad Abdul Najib vs. DCIT Central Circle Bellari, Capstone Securities Analysis (P) Limited vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pacific Academy of Higher Education & Research Society vs. PCIT, Advantage India vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Commissioner of Customs vs. Toyo Engineering India Limited, Amala Jyothi Vidhya Kendra Trust vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Heart Foundation of India vs. CIT Central Pune, Young Indian vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Jagannath Gupta Family Trust vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, State of Rajasthan vs. Basant Agrotech India Ltd, Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation vs. Gwalior, Tamil Nadu Cricket Association vs. DIT, Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Maria Social Service Society vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIVANAND KALAKERI
• Assessee Lawyers: S. A. SHESHADRI
• Keywords: Set aside; Difference of opinion; Opportunity of being heard; Retrospective amendment; Principle of natural justice; Competent authority; Reason to believe; Charitable institution; Cancellation of registration; Application of stay; Bogus
• Section: 11; 12AA; 12; 133A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No . 625/Bang/2023 Assessment Year : NA M/s. Independent and Public Spirited Media Foundation, No. 4/6, 1st Floor, Miller Road, High Ground, Bengaluru –560052. PAN : AABTI413E Vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : S/Shri. A. Sheshadri, CA and Bhardwaj Sheshadri, Advocate Respondent by : Shri. Shivanand Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 17.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2026 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President : 1. ITA No.625/Bang/2023 is filed by Independent and Public Spirited Media Foundation (the assessee/appellant) against the order passed by the Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore (the learned CIT) under section 12 AB (4) (ii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 26 June 2023 wherein the registration granted to the assessee under section 12 AA/12 AB of the Act is cancelled with Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 2 of 102 effect from previous year 2016 – 17 and for all subsequent previous years as per provisions of section 12 AB (4) of the Act as he found specified violation in case of the trust. 2. Assessee trust is aggrieved and has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central) (hereafter, \"the Pr. CIT (Central)\") erred in cancelling the registration of the Appellant under section 12AB (4). 2. The impugned order has been made without requisite jurisdiction or power, and in violation of the principles of natural justice, and therefore deserves to be quashed. 3. The Pr. CIT (Central) lacked the jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. 4. The proceedings leading to the impugned order, being admittedly initiated on the basis of a survey under section 133A, are void ab initio considering that the survey itself was illegal and without jurisdiction. 5. The Pr. CIT (Central) could not have relied on evidence collected in the course of the survey under section 133A as that survey was itself illegal. 6. The impugned order deserves to be quashed as it improves upon and goes well beyond the scope of the show cause notice dated December 15, 2022, by which the proceedings before the learned Pr. CIT (Central) were initiated. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 3 of 102 7. The impugned order was passed in proceedings initiated without requisite satisfaction, and without application of mind and in violation of the principles of natural justice considering, inter alia, that the submissions of the Appellant were not fully and properly considered and that the show cause notice was vague and initiated a roving enquiry. 8. Without prejudice, the Pr. CIT (Central) erred in cancelling registration retrospectively and, if at all, could only have cancelled registration with effect from the Assessment Year 2023-24. 9. The Pr. CIT (Central) erred in holding that the Appellant exerted influence for the promotion of political articles and that this alleged influence and promotion constituted a specified violation within the meaning of the explanation to section 12AB. 10. The Pr. CIT (Central) erred in holding that the Appellant caused the biased promotion of selected articles or issues and that this allegedly biased promotion constituted a specified violation within the meaning of the explanation to section 12AB. 11. The Pr. CIT (Central) erred in holding that the Appellant supported the publication of polarized content and that this alleged support constituted a specified violation within the meaning of the explanation to section 12AB. 12. The Pr. CIT (Central) erred in holding that the Appellant extended grants to profit-making entities in the garb of professional fees and that these alleged transactions constituted specified violations within the meaning of the explanation to section 12AB. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 4 of 102 13. The Pr. CIT (Central) erred in holding that the Appellant engaged in targeted coverage in the garb of fact checking and that this allegedly targeted covered constituted specified violations within the meaning of the explanation to section 12AB. 14. The Pr. CIT (Central) erred in reaching findings considering whether or not sums expended by the Appellant constituted application of income within the meaning of section 11. 15. The cancellation of registration is bad in law, inter alia, as it is a disproportionate action even considering the findings arrived at in the impugned order. 16. For these and other grounds that may be urged either as additional grounds or otherwise and at the time of hearing, in the facts and circumstances of the case, and considering the evidence on the record and the law on the subject, it is most humbly prayed that this appeal be allowed and that this Honourable Tribunal pass such other orders including orders as to costs as it thinks fit in the interests of justice. 3. Brief facts of the case shows that assessee is a trust incorporated on 1 July 2015 with following objects: - i. to provide scholarships, fellowships and awards for writers, authors and journalists involved in public interest or any other form of journalism that spreads information and awareness and benefits Indian citizens and India is a country. ii. to provide financial and other assistance to organisations and individuals creating and distributing public interest information to the public at large using digital media, social media, mass media or any other media thereby bringing about proper awareness and improving public understanding of issues Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 5 of 102 iii. to promote excellence in education in the field of journalism by providing financial and other assistance to journalism schools and other educational institutes in the country iv. to create public interest content, achieve wider distribution and consumption of public interest content, provide services to support content creation and distribution, create an umbrella brand that will provide a sense of common identity to the beneficiaries of the trust while allowing order preserving their respective identity and independence. v. to undertake actions and initiatives (including but not limited to providing financial assistance by way of grants all through other means) to create an ecosystem that sets trends, fosters, and accelerates excellence in public interest journalism and thereby improve public understanding of issues. vi. to seed/support: – (A) digital media that has an identity for addressing public interest issues, (B) digital media ventures that spotlight public interest issues. vii. to catalyse: – (a) the wider distribution of public interest content, particularly through the mainstream media, (B) the curation of public interest content and its wider distribution digitally. viii. to grow in India as editorial leadership on public interest issues by supporting the work of journalists in the digital or mainstream media, through scholarships, fellowships, awards, direct support, or any other support that the trustees may deem fit from time to time. ix. to organise functions that allow journalists to work to the best capacities, spatially addressing (a) legal, (B) training, (C) research and (B) technology requirements or any other functions that the trustees may deem fit from time to time. x. to undertake any other initiatives or activities of any charitable nature that the trustees in fact, xi. to accept donations, whether in cash or in-kind, with or without specific directions from the donor on the manner in which the said funds or income therefrom is to be utilised for specified/1 specified the charitable purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 6 of 102 xii. to contribute or donate funds to educational institutions, charitable organisations or any other institutions engaged in journalism, media, or any other field that the trustees may deem fact from time to time, xiii. to accept donations from companies and undertake qualifying activities as specified in schedule VII of the companies act, 2013 as amended or substituted from time to time and the rules, notifications are circular issued in relation thereto. xiv. To organise, conduct, sponsor, participate, and supervise any activity to raise funds for and in furtherance of the objects of the trust. xv. to publish books, periodicals, journals, bulletins, and newsletters for propagating all or any of the above-mentioned activities, without violating the provisions of section 11 (4A) read with section 80 G (5) of the income tax act, 1961 for such other similar provisions under any other law for the time being in force. xvi. to donate, assist and support persons or institution having similar objectives as this trust. 4. Thus, based on the above objects the assessee trust has been registered under section 12 A of the Income Tax Act by the CIT (Exemption), Bangalore's as per certificate dated 8th of January 2016 with effect from assessment year 2016 – 17. This certificate of registration was subject to certain conditions that if the activities of the trust or institutions are found to be non-genuine or are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust, its registration granted can become liable for revocation. 5. A survey under section 133 (A) of the Act was conducted at the office of the assessee on 7 September 2022 by The Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Delhi based on authorisation issued by The Principal Director of Income Tax (Investigation) – 1, Delhi. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 7 of 102 During survey, various evidence was gathered which showed that the assessee trust has been involved in activities which were not in sync with the stated objectives at the time of incorporation. During survey certain digital information was found in laptop data, tally server data, MacBook air Pro, iPhones, Galaxy android mobile phones and emails. Based on this evidence gathered, a show cause notice on 15/12/ 2022 was issued on the following 5 allegations as under: - i. That assessee trust was involved in promoting political articles by paying more premiums for such articles then other articles and exerting control on the category of content being published. ii. That assessee trust had influenced entities for publication of particular kind of stories/articles which are chosen by the assessee trust and of interest to assessee trust thus it engaged in biased promotion of selected articles/issues. iii. assessee trust is involved in lending monetary support to entities involved in publication of polarised content against a section of society thus supporting publicization of polarised contents. iv. assessee trust had been providing grants to organisations which are engaged in the business for profit in the garb of professional fees without receiving any professional services rendered by them and further the service agreements entered by the assessee trust with such entities shows that those agreement does not contain the nature of services to be rendered and thus, the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 8 of 102 payments do not qualify to be 'application of income' towards the objectives of the trust v. assessee trust had focused on coverage of certain select/target issues by paying to entities to cover such issues to give the colour of fact checking thus assessee is focusing on targeted covering in the garb of fact checking. 6. Thus, the learned CIT noted that the activities carried out by the trust is in contrast to the stated objectives. He noted that the activities of the trust had been run in violation of the stated objectives for which it was incorporated. In the notice he tabulated what are the stated objectives of the trust and how they contrast with the activities carried on by the trust. Based on these findings during survey, the learned CIT referred to the provisions of the Act and issued notice for cancellation of the registration already granted to the assessee. 7. In response to the show cause notice, assessee asked for the material impounded during the survey which was provided to the assessee and further the assessee along with its representative and chief executive officer, senior program manager finance was intimated the information available. In paragraphs No. 1.6 of the order the learned CIT noted that during hearing, the assessee was made aware of the complete details of the evidence available on record which was relied upon for issuing show cause notice and the copies of which had already been made available to it. This included the addendum to the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 9 of 102 agreement with the Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Private Limited, chat of Shri Sunil Raj Shekhar (CEO) with various persons namely Mr Mohammad Sohail Mabarak (key person of Dool 360 private limited, Mr Vignesh Vellore (key person of Spunklane Media Private Limited), Mr Shekhar Gupta (one of the key person is of Print Line Media Private Limited) and Ms Barkha Dutt (a well-known journalist) along with details of the payments made to these persons and entities over the financial year 2017-18 to 2021-22, information regarding articles published by Saamarasya Media LLP and Janjwar ] foundation and the details of the payments made to these entities, details of payment made to various profit-making entities as professional fees between financial year 2016 – 17 to financial year 21 – 22, service agreements relating to content commissioning, email correspondence between CEO and Mr Avinash and statement recorded during the survey. During hearing, many opportunities were granted; assessee submitted several written submissions and based on that the hearing finally concluded on 7 June 2023. 8. The main contention of the assessee before the ld. CIT was that new digital media entities do not have the backing of big businesses and they cater to both broad spectrum readers as well as those interested in specific or niche areas. The assessee trust was set up as a charitable entity to offer non-commercial funding that would support such independent, public interest media, and thereby create a greater media diversity as well as enable viability in challenging financial and management to strengthen Indian democracy, in which the media Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 10 of 102 plays a vital role. It was also the claim that as a part of its due diligence, it has always ensured that entity that has political affiliation is not supported. Assessee also stated that media entities receiving it support have repeatedly won recognitions and awards within the country and internationally for the quality of their journalism, as and when the content they produce has noticeable impact. Thus, assessee has taken a broad and independent endorsement of the funding decisions taken by it. Assessee also claims that its eminent trustees have worked pro bono, with no personal interest and for the above very reasons, it had been receiving generous donations from public spirited donors with impeccable credentials. Assessee also submitted various details to show that the work done by it complied with the objects of the trust. Assessee has also tried to emphasise on the testimonials from some well-known personalities to say that the assessee is carrying on the activities of the trust in consonance with its objects. The assessee also submitted that 'specified violation' in some instances cannot be used to cancel registration as it would be disproportionate act. 9. After considering the above general reply of the assessee, in paragraph No. 3 the learned CIT exemption analysed the reply of the assessee against each of the allegations in the show cause notice and gave finding vide page No. 15 of 73 to 63 of 73 of his order as under: -- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 11 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 12 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 13 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 14 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 15 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 16 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 17 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 18 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 19 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 20 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 21 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 22 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 23 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 24 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 25 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 26 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 27 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 28 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 29 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 30 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 31 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 32 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 33 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 34 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 35 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 36 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 37 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 38 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 39 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 40 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 41 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 42 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 43 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 44 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 45 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 46 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 47 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 48 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 49 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 50 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 51 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 52 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 53 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 54 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 55 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 56 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 57 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 58 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 59 of 102 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 60 of 102 10. Assessee also objected before the ld CIT on the issue of the cancellation of registration retrospectively from assessment year 2016 – 17, the assessee submitted that (1) the proceedings have been initiated without jurisdiction, (2) in any event, the cancellation cannot operate with effect from any previous year earlier than the previous year ending on 31st of March 2022, (3) the proposal to cancel registration violates the doctrine of proportionality. 11. The learned CIT stated that as specified violations have been found during the previous year in which it occurred, therefore the cancellation cannot be stated to be retrospective and the same is in accordance with the law. He submitted that the CIT has power to cancel the registration and the doctrine of proportionality does not apply to the facts of the case. He held that law provides that where there is a specific violation, registration is to be cancelled. 12. The assessee further challenged the contents of the notice, the learned CIT rejected the same stating that specific instances of specified violations were brought to the notice of the assessee from time to time and therefore, the notice is wrongly alleged to be vague but is specific and facts based on the evidence found. 13. Accordingly, the learned CIT was satisfied that there were specified violation in case of the assessee trust for the previous year 2016 – 17 to 2021 – 22 relevant to assessment year 2017 – 18 to 2022 – 23. So, the registration of the assessee trust granted under section 12 AA/12 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 61 of 102 AB of the Act, is cancelled with effect from previous year 2016 – 17 and for all subsequent previous years as per provisions of section 12 AB (4) of the Act. Accordingly, the impugned order was passed on 26th of June 2023. Submission on behalf of appellant 14. The assessee is aggrieved with that order and is in appeal before us. Shri A Sheshadri, Chartered Accountant and Shree Bharadwaj Sheshadri, Advocate, the learned authorised representatives, appeared and submitted the detailed argument. The assessee filed two volumes of the paper book containing 929 pages. The assessee in the paper book has also placed six videos (not shown to us). Assessee also submitted the list of donors [General Donors and corpus donors] from AY 2016-17 to 2025-26 to show that most illustrious donors have donated the funds for the object of the trust. Assessee also submitted a supplementary paper book containing 166 pages to support which shows methodology and the process by which the funds of the trusts are utilised. It contains some report, management Information systems report, email correspondence, agenda for board meetings., legal due diligence reports etc. On completion of hearing, assessee also submitted details by email dated 25-12-2025 where in email correspondence with respect to Delhi Press Patrika Limited [caravan] was to show that chairman of Trust Indicated that now it is not appropriate to pay the higher amount to caravan, executive summary of legal Due diligence review report in respect of Caravan Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 62 of 102 and emails dated July 2018 showing how funding for a particular month to caravan and relevant approval process, takes place. 15. On ground no. [3] Of the appeal LD. AR submitted that The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax lacks the jurisdiction to cancel the registration of the trust. He submitted that on 15/11/2022 the CIT (Exemption) Bangalore passed an order under section 127 of the Act pursuant to the survey under section 133A of the Act on 7 September 2022 wherein in order to have a 'coordinated investigation and to complete the assessment', The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central), Bangalore who has requested that the following cases be transferred to DCIT/ACIT, Central Circle – 1 (2) Bangalore. Thus, the case of the assessee was listed there and was transferred to ACIT/DCIT, Central Circle – (1) (2), Bengaluru from The Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward – 1, Bangalore. He submitted that this order is placed at page No. 52 – 53 of the paper books. He submitted that first no valid transfer takes place as it is not in accordance with the law and further, even if it is valid, no powers are vested with The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) for cancellation of the registration. 16. He submitted that the phrase \"coordinated investigation\" is not sufficient for transfer of jurisdiction. He relied upon the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of ZODIAC DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (2016) 387 ITR 223 wherein it is held that if the show cause notice passed such order for merely Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 63 of 102 coordinated investigation and administrative convenience, it makes it impossible to effectively respond to and therefore such a notice and consequent transfer is invalid. 17. He further referred to the decision of AMIT KUMAR GUPTA VERSUS INCOME TAX OFFICER (2025) 171 TAXMANN.COM 16 [Raipur] wherein it has been held that failure to provide a hearing before transfer of case under section 127 of the income tax act renders the jurisdiction of the assessing officer invalid. 18. He further referred to the decision of the coordinate bench in SHRI MOHAMMAD ABDUL NAJIB V THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE BELLARI [ITA NO. 1175/BANGALORE/2024 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 – 13] wherein it has been mentioned that the transfer orders if made without jurisdiction, can be quashed and further the consequent orders are also quashed. He also referred to the decision of the coordinate bench in case of CAPSTONE SECURITIES ANALYSIS ( P ) LIMITED V DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE 1 (1), PUNE [ 2017] 85 TAXMANN.COM 270 [ PUNE] wherein it is held that when the case was transferred from Mumbai to Pune but PAN of the assessee was still lying with the ITO Mumbai , is held to be unjustified. 19. He further stated that CIT Central could not have jurisdiction to cancel the registration already granted to the assessee. He placed reliance on PACIFIC ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION & RESEARCH SOCIETY V PCIT [ ITA NO 4 & 5/JODH /2020 DATED 25/01/2023. He submits that such power only vests with the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 64 of 102 CIT [Exemptions] who granted it. The power of cancellation did not transfer to PCIT [Central] by passing order u/s 127 which also does not contain any reference to transfer of powers of cancellation. 20. He further referred to the definition of \"case” for any assessment year stating that as the power of the cancellation provides to more than one assessment year and it is not related to any assessment year and therefore the provisions of section 127 of the act cannot be used to cancel the registration already granted to the assessee. For this proposition the ld AR vehemently relied up on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of AGARWAL VIDHYA PRACHARNI SABHA V PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [ ITA NO 1308/ DEL/2023 DATED 8, JANUARY 2024] [ 2024] SCC ONLINE ITAT 7. 21. He further fairly referred to the decision of ITAT Delhi in ADVANTAGE INDIA V PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [2025] 178 TAXMANN.COM 605 (DELHI) where in relying on the decision of Honourable Delhi High court in CIT V SAHARA INDIA FINANCIAL CORPORATION LIMITED [ 2007] 162 TAXMAN 357/ 294 ITR 363 it is held that case includes all proceedings. He submits that Honourable Supreme court in PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V ABC PAPERS LIMITED [2022] 141 TAXMANN.COM 332 [SC} the word ' case' has been decided, ld AR referred to para no 22 onwards and submits that now the decision of ITAT in Advantage India [ supra] does not have any precedence value. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 65 of 102 22. Coming to the ground No. 8 of the grounds of appeal it was stated that that the power of cancellation has been exercised by the learned principal Commissioner of income tax with retrospective effect. The Ld AR relied on: - a. AMALA JYOTHI VIDHYA KENDRA TRUST V PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [2024] 162 TAXMANN.COM 41 [ BANG] b. HEART FOUNDATION OF INDIA V CIT CENTRAL PUNE [ITA NO 1524 / MUM/2023] DATED 27.07.2023. c. PACIFIC ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION & RESEARCH SOCIETY V PCIT [ ITA NO 4 & 5/JODH /2020 DATED 25/01/2023. 23. He further referred to the provision of 'specified violation' which has come into effect with effect from 1 April 2024 and therefore, such specified violation could not be invoked for assessment year 2017 – 18 onwards till it was enacted. 24. The learned authorised representative further referred to the ground No. 9 – 13 and submitted that that assessee's objects are placed at page No. 7 of the paper book. Those objects are stated to be charitable and further there is no allegation that those objects are not falling within the purview of provisions of section 2 (15) of the Act. 25. Further coming to the various observation made by the learned CIT in his order, He referred to the various answers given by the assessee and relied upon them. Regarding the issue of payment of Higher charges to some articles as per rates card, the Ld AR referred to the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 66 of 102 page no 192 of the paper book where in assessee has placed Master Content Commissioning Agreement dated 15/6/2018 between assessee and Delhi Press Prakashan Private Limited. He referred to page no 195 of the of the paper book referring to para no 2.1 & 2.2 of the agreement. He also referred to the addendum to this agreement placed at page no 220-221 which is an addendum to that agreement dated 15/6/2018 and page no 226 where the rates were similar. He submitted that allegation of the ld. CIT that assessee is paying higher for some articles than other is incorrect. 26. It was also the argument that the learned CIT at the time of issue of the show cause notice, the ld PCIT did not reach at the specific finding that what are the 'specified violations' conducted by the assessee and therefore his notice was so routine in general, thus, he did not invoke jurisdiction correctly by issuing the show cause notice. The assessee further relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS V TOYO ENGINEERING INDIA LIMITED OF 201 EXCISE LAW TIMES 513 (SC) [2006] 2006 taxmann.com 1488 [ SC) stating that allegation in the show cause notice should be very definite and then the adjudicating authority cannot go out of that show cause notice. Thus, his argument was that the allegation cannot be enlarged after the issue of the show cause notice while adjudicating the issue. 27. The learned authorised representative also submitted a note on the funding process carried on by the assessee. He submitted that there Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 67 of 102 are two kinds of application and content commissioning arrangements with entities for profits. 28. The assessee also submitted a supplementary paper book containing 166 pages to show that that assessee carries on due diligence report before granting the funds to the various journalists or other entities. The assessee also submitted the list of donors starting from financial year 2015 – 16 onwards wherein he submitted that the donations are provided to the assessee by the reputed entities. 29. The ld AR further submitted that it seems that some of the expenditure of the assessee is stated to be Non genuine, it is not the case that whole of the funding as well as utilisation of the funds is stated to be non-genuine. In such cases it would not make the whole Trust Non genuine. For This proposition, the ld AR relied up on the decision of the Honourable Supreme court in case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [EXEMPTION] V MANEKJI MOTA CHARITABLE TRUST [2020] 120 TAXMANN.COM 58 (SC) where in the decision of the Honourable Bombay High court in CIT V MANEKJI MOTA CHARITABLE TRUST [2019] 109 TAXMANN.COM 258 / 267 TAXMAN 16 ( BOM) was upheld. Thus, he held that whole the trust cannot be held to be non-genuine, and the registration cannot be cancelled. 30. Thus, he submitted that the order passed by the learned CIT is not sustainable cancelling the registration granted to the assessee trust under section 12 AB of the act as there is no specific violation found, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 68 of 102 the assessee's objects and the assessee's activities are in consonance with each other. Even otherwise the order passed by the learned CIT is without jurisdiction. Submission on Behalf of the CIT 31. The learned that CIT DR strongly relied upon the findings of the CIT for cancellation order passed under section 12 AB of the Act. He submitted that that the findings given therein clearly shows that the assessee's objects and activities are different and therefore the cancellation order passed by the learned CIT is sustainable, valid in law, with jurisdiction. The learned departmental representative further relied upon the written submission made during the hearing earlier carried out on 10 January 2024 containing the arguments of the revenue on the jurisdiction of the learned PCIT in passing the order and further the evidence collected during the course of survey. He further referred to notification dated 22/10/2014 as well as the record of survey proceedings. Decision & Reasons 32. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the learned lower authorities. We have also carefully perused paper books filed, judicial decisions relied upon. 33. No arguments were advanced on Ground no 1 and 2 of the Appeals, stated that these are general, Hence, dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 69 of 102 34. Ground No.3 of the appeal is that the Principal CIT lacked Jurisdiction to pass the impugned order. The Assessee challenges that order passed u/s 127 (2) of the Act placed at page no 52 and 53 of the paper books is invalid and does not give any Jurisdiction to the CIT. Indeed, the Order dated 15/11/2022 was passed by the CIT [Exemptions] Bangalore where in it recorded the facts that there is survey conducted u/s 133A of the Act by the DDIT (Investigation) Delhi on 7/9/2022 and therefore in order to have coordinated investigation and to complete the assessment , the Principal Commissioner (Central) Bangalore has requested to transfer jurisdiction to DDIT Central Circle 1 (2) Bangalore. Accordingly, it was transferred from ITO [Exemption] Ward -1 Bangalore to DCIT / ACIT, central Circle -1 (2) Bangalore. 35. Thus, case of the assessee is in the same city Bangalore. It was transferred ' to facilitate effective and coordinated investigation.\". 36. Provisions of section 127 provides as under: - [Power to transfer cases.69 70 127. (1) The 71[Principal Director General or] Director General or 71[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or 71[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner may 72, after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so, transfer any case 72 from one or more Assessing Officers subordinate to him (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) also subordinate to him. (2) Where the Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers from whom the case is to be transferred and the Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers to whom the case is to be transferred are not subordinate to the same 71[Principal Director General or] Director General Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 70 of 102 or 71[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or 71[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner,- (a) where the 71[Principal Directors General or] Directors General or 71[Principal Chief Commissioners or] Chief Commissioners or 71[Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners to whom such Assessing Officers are subordinate are in agreement, then the 71[Principal Director General or] Director General or 71[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or 71[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner from whose jurisdiction the case is to be transferred may 73, after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard in the matter, 73wherever it is possible to do so, and after recording his reasons for doing so, pass the order; (b) where the 74[Principal Directors General or] Directors General or 74[Principal Chief Commissioners or] Chief Commissioners or 74[Principal Commissioners or] Commissioners aforesaid are not in agreement, the order transferring the case may, similarly, be passed by the Board or any such 74[Principal Director General or] Director General or 74[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or 74[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner as the Board may, by notification in the Official Gazette, authorise in this behalf. (3) Nothing in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be deemed to require any such opportunity to be given where the transfer is from any Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) to any other Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers (whether with or without concurrent jurisdiction) and the offices of all such officers are situated in the same city, locality or place. (4) The transfer of a case under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) may be made at any stage 75 of the proceedings and shall not render necessary the re-issue of any notice already issued by the Assessing Officer or Assessing Officers from whom the case is transferred. Explanation.-In section 120 and this section, the word “case” 75, in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued thereunder, means all proceedings under this Act 75 in respect of any year which may be pending on the date of such order or direction or which may have been completed on or Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 71 of 102 before such date, and includes also all proceedings under this Act which may be commenced after the date of such order or direction in respect of any year.] 37. The ld AR relying on the decision of Honourable Bombay High Court in Zodiac Developers (P.) Ltd. vs. Principal Commissioner of Income- tax-8, Mumbai [2016] 72 taxmann.com 39 (Bombay)/[2016] 241 Taxman 230 (Bombay)/[2016] 387 ITR 223 (Bombay)/[2017] 295 CTR 104 (Bombay)[18-04-2016] where in writ petition filed by the assessee where the case of the assessee was transferred from Mumbai To Aurangabad. Honourable High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed order passed u/s 127 (2) of the Act. Facts shows that the impugned order does not deal with the petitioner's submissions as contained in its letter dated 14-7-2015 inter alia pointing out that only 3 flats out of 78 flats in the building being constructed in Vile Parle had been sold by the petitioner to the members of the Jhaveri Group. In case, the petitioner's assessments are to be transferred to the places where its customers (purchaser of its flats) are being assessed, then, the petitioner's cases would have to be transferred to at various places where its customers reside. This is impossibility. Further, where transaction take place in the course of its business and a search takes place on such other persons at the place where such person is assessed, it would not necessarily result in the transfer of petitioner's case to the place where the person it is dealing with in the normal course is being assessed. The aforesaid submission as contained in letter dated 14-7-2015 has not even been adverted to in the impugned Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 72 of 102 order dated 21-12-2015. Nor was the fact that there would be inconvenience to the petitioner as emphasized in its subsequent letter dated 24-11-2015 even adverted to in the impugned order much less dealt with. Thus, the order itself is a non-speaking order. The basic and minimal requirement of the petitioner being given a personal hearing and the opportunity to respond to the proposed transfer is to enable the authority to consider whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the transfer of the case from Mumbai to Aurangabad is warranted. Particularly, bearing in mind that the petitioner has otherwise no connection with Aurangabad except for having sold 3 out of 78 flats in the building being constructed to the persons who are being assessed at Aurangabad. Thus, we do not find any similarity in those cases where the case of the assessee is in the same city i.e., Bangalore. Thus, there is no inconvenience faced by the assessee shown to us. It is also not the case that case of the assessee is tagged with another assessee. Case of the assessee is transferred independently and not connected with any other assessee and also transferred in the same city. Thus, reliance on the decision of Honourable Bombay High Court does not help the case of the assessee. 38. The second issue raised by the ld AR is that transfer of case u/s 127 of the Act is only with regard to assessment and not for the purposes of cancellation of registration relying up on the decision of the Coordinate bench in case of Agarwal Vidhya Pracharni Sabha V Pcit Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 73 of 102 [2024] Scc Online Itat 7. The Ld AR relied up on para no 37 to 39 of that judgement. 39. We find that in Advantage India vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [2025] 178 taxmann.com 605 (Delhi - Trib.) [18-09-2025] above Decision was considered at para no 8 as under: - 8. The ld counsel of the assessee heavily relied on the Delhi ITAT decision in the case of Aggarwal Vidya Pracharni Sabha v. Pr. CIT, Central [IT Appeal No. 1308 (DELHI) of 2023, dated 8-1-2024] where the ITAT held as under: 15. Thus, at one end, in the absence of any specific reference of section 12AB in the Notification dated 22.10.2014 or there being subsequent authorisation by any Circular or Notification of the Board, we conclude that at the time of passing the order u/s 127 of the Act on 26.10.2020, CIT(E), Chandigarh did not have powers to as such transfer his jurisdiction u/s 127(2)(a) of the Act, for the purpose of Section 12AB has come into effect from 01.04.2021. Accordingly, under no circumstance while passing order u/s 127 of the Act on 26.10.2020, CIT(E), Chandigarh could have transferred his powers u/s 12AB of the Act to any other authority. 15.1 On the other hand, ld. PCIT, Gurgaon by virtue of the Explanation defining the scope of 'case' for the purpose of section 127, did not have power vested in him to cancel registration u/s 12AB(4). The 'case' refers to assessment initiated as a consequence of search or consequential proceedings to such assessments only and cannot be extended to special powers of ld. CIT(E), Chandigarh. Thus, the assumption of jurisdiction on the basis of the order dated 26.10.2020 of CIT(E), Chandigarh is completely illegal and that makes the whole exercise of Id. PCIT passing the impugned order liable to be quashed. In effect the ITAT in the above case, held on the basis of Notification no. 52 of 2014 dated 15.11.2014 and Notification no. 53 of 2014 dated 15.11.2014, that the PCIT(C), Gurgaon had passed order without jurisdiction in context to territorial powers and subject matter as well which is not in accordance with law and same is liable to be quashed. The ld AR further relied on the Jaipur bench of ITAT in the case of M/s Wholesale Cloth Merchant Association in Wholesales Cloths Merchants Association v. Pr. CIT [IT Appeal No.688 (JP) of 2019, dated 6-1-2021]; Jhodpur ITAT Bench order Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 74 of 102 in the case of Pacific Academy of Higher Education and Research Society v. Pr. CIT (Central) [IT Appeal No. 04(JODH) of 2020, dated 25-1- 2023] and Gyan Sagar Education & Charitable Trust v. Asstt. CIT [IT Appeal No. 6054 (Delhi) of 2018, dated 3-9-2020].The ld AR emphasized that transfer of jurisdiction u/s 127 is made for granting rights to the AO to assess the income of the Trust and it does not grant power to grant/cancel registration to the PCIT(Central). The ld. counsel for the assessee prayed that the order of the PCIT(C) cancelling registration u/s 12A, devoid of valid jurisdiction, needs to be set aside. 40. That decision further held in para no 33 as under: - 33. A reading of clause(b) of the Notification 70/2014(supra) conjointly with the Explanation of section 127 leaves no room for doubt as to the intention of the Legislature as to the jurisdiction to be exercised by the authorities concerned over a class of case once order u/s 127 is issued. In the instant case, once the order u/s 127(2) dated 01.12.2016 was issued by the CIT(Exemptions), Delhi transferring the case of the assessee from ACIT(E), Delhi to Central Cir-16, Delhi under the charge of Pr.CIT(Central), Delhi, by virtue of Explanation to section 127 and Notification no 70/2014, the Pr.CIT(Central), Delhi assumes the jurisdiction over the assessee for all purposes and proceedings whether pending or completed or to be commenced, in respect of any year. In the instant case, the CIT(Exemptions), Delhi has specifically transferred the jurisdiction over the case to the Pr.CIT(Central)-2, Delhi, unlike the jurisdiction order passed u/s 127 in the case of Aggarwal Vidya Pracharni Sabha (supra) where the transfer order did not specifically mentioned the transfer of jurisdiction to PCIT, Gurgaon. The explanation to section 127 of the Income Tax Act is reproduced again for abundance clarity: \"Explanation in section 120 and this section, the word \"case \", in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued there under, means all proceedings under this Act in respect of any year which may be pending on the date of such order or direction or which may have been completed on or before such date, and also includes also all proceedings under this Act which may be commenced after the date of such order or direction in respect of any year.\" 34. We find that the CBDT had further issued a directive vide letter dated 19.01.2024 on the issue of cancellation of registration u/s 12AA/10(23C) Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 75 of 102 of the Income Tax Act in Trust cases by Pr.CIT other than CIT(Exemptions). The letter, referring to the Notification nos. 50/2014 and 52/2014 dated 22.10.2014 and 70/2014 dated 13.11.2014, further explains as under: \"2.3 A conjoint reading of the above mentioned Notifications and provisions of the Act makes it clear that the CIT (Exemption) does not exercise any jurisdiction in respect of persons claiming exemption under section 11, section 12 of the Act which have been assigned to the Assessing Officers subordinate to Principal Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), under section 127 of the Act. 3. Therefore, by virtue of provisions of clause (b) of the notification no. 70/2014, S.O. 2915(E) dated 13.11.2014, the PCIT(C) has been empowered to perform/exercise powers and functions stipulated in the Act in respect of such cases or classes of cases or such persons or classes of persons, which were assigned to AO subordinate to him, under section 127 of the Act. We are thus of the considered and firm view that a harmonious and constructive interpretation of Notification no. 70/2014 and the CBDT directive dated 19.01.2024 would show that the Pr.CIT(Central) assumes the power and indeed obligated to perform all the functions as stipulated in the Act, over the assessee once an order u/s 127 is issued transferring the jurisdiction to AOs subordinate to him. 41. Thus, it is evident that decision cited by the ld AR Agarwal Vidhya Pracharani Sabha V PCIT is distinguishable, and the facts stated in the paragraph 33 of this Advantage decision is identical. 42. Further on careful reading of section 127 of the Act and explanation there to that the word ' case' does not restrict it to any \"Assessment year\" but uses the phrase ' Year'. Had it been the intention of the legislature to restrict it to any \" assessment Year' it would not have used the word 'year'. Principles of Interpretation provides that an unambiguous and plain statute must be given its full interpretation. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 76 of 102 43. Even otherwise the order of the ld PCIT is cancellation of the registration of the assessee for Ay 2017-18 to 2022-23. So, it also relates to respective assessment years. 44. Therefore, we reject this contention of the ld AR that the PCIT Central lacks Jurisdiction as powers of cancellation are not transferred to him and further the ' case\" does not include power of cancellation as it does not refer to any assessment year. 45. Further with respect to the argument that only the assessment rights are transferred but not the power of cancellation has also been dealt with the decision of Advantage India vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [2025] 178 taxmann.com 605 (Delhi - Trib.) [18-09-2025] in para no 26 to 29 of that judgement as under: - \"26. At this juncture, we note that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sahara India Financial Corporation Ltd. , [2007] 162 Taxman 357/294 ITR 363 (Delhi) has explained what the Explanation to section 127 says and what the term 'case' means in relation to any person whose name is specified in any order or direction issued under section 127. In the said Explanation, 'case' means all proceedings under the Act in respect of any year: (a) which may be pending on the date of the order or direction; (b) which may have been completed on or before the date of the order or direction; (c) including all proceedings which may be commenced after the date of the order or direction in respect of any year. It was similarly held in the case of CIT v. AAR BEE Industries, [2013] 36 taxmann.com 308/357 ITR 542 (Delhi). The word \"case\" is thus used in a more comprehensive sense of including (i) pending proceedings as well as (ii) proceedings to be initiated in future as Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 77 of 102 held in CIT v. Bidhu Bhusan Sarkar [1967] 63 ITR 278, 287 (SC)]. The Kerala High Court also held in P. A. Ahammed v. Chief CIT [2006]282 ITR 334/151 Taxman 223 (Kerala) that the Explanation to section 127 clarifies that the term 'case' means the entire proceedings under the Act. 27. The 'case' referred in the Explanation to section 127, therefore, has to be read conjointly with 'all proceedings under this Act' to arrive at a harmonious and workable interpretation of the statute. The 'case' and 'all proceedings under the Act' can not be restricted to only 'assessment' proceedings. Jurisdiction over a case entail not only 'assessment' process but there are several functions and powers assigned to the jurisdictional hierarchy over that case. For example, the assessment is made by the ACIT/ITO, but when coercive action for recovery of demand is to made, the ACIT/ITO has to take approval from the Pr.CIT(Central). Similarly, where the AO denies stay of demand in a case, the Pr.CIT(Central) can review the decision of the ACIT/ITO. There are numerous such examples where the powers and functions over a 'case' has to be exercised in a chain of command in the hierarchy of Pr.CIT(Central).Similarly, a CIT(Exemptions) has powers/functions over Ranges which are manned by the Additional CIT/Joint CITs. There are four/five assessing officers in rank of ACITs/ITOs in a Range and all of them exercise their powers/functions under the CIT(Exemptions). Any jurisdiction over a 'case' cannot be segregated between two different PCIT/CIT that is to say that PCIT(C) will conduct 'assessment' proceedings and the PCIT(E) will conduct registration/cancellation. Such an interpretation will make the exercise of transfer of jurisdiction over a 'case' unworkable. 28. Further, under the income tax system, jurisdiction over a 'case' is recognized by the PAN assigned to each person/ assessee as defined in section 2(7) of the Act. The jurisdiction of each PAN is assigned to a particular CIT/Assessing Officer according to alphabetical or territorial basis. The CIT/AO exercises all the powers and functions under the Act over a PAN. Once a PAN is transferred from one AO/CIT to another AO/CIT u/s 127 of the Act, the entire proceedings under the Act related to that assessee/pAN is transferred to that other AO/CIT. There is no situation envisaged in the System that one PAN will have two different jurisdictional authorities at the same time. In such a scheme of things, the PAN of an assessee can not lie with one CIT for some proceedings under the Act and the same PAN will simultaneously lie with another CIT for some other proceedings under the Act. The system does not allow the AO under the PCIT(C) to make only the assessment of the Trust and at the same time allow the CIT(E) to carry out functions of granting/cancelling registration of the same Trust. When the PAN is transferred from CIT(Exemptions) charge to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 78 of 102 the Pr.CIT(Central) charge, the entire 'case' and the associated 'proceedings' will be transferred to the PrCIT(Central). In such a situation, the CIT(Exemptions) can not 'see' the case/assessee in his jurisdiction to take action for registration/cancellation u/s 12AA. The CIT(Exemptions) will be incapacitated to issues any communications to the assessee nor will he be able to generate any DIN in respect to the said assessee. We are therefore of the considered view that once the PAN of the assessee was transferred from the ACIT(E), Cir 1(1), Delhi to Central Cir-16, Delhi, all the functionality and proceedings, pending or completed or to be taken in future, is also transferred from CIT(E) and his AO to PCIT(C) and his Assessing Officer. 29. The above conclusion is fortified by the CBDT's Notification no 70/2014 dated 13.11.2014 which is as under: SECTION 120(1) AND (2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - INCOME- TAX AUTHORITIES - JURISDICTION OF - SUPERSESSION OF NOTIFICATION NO. SO 822(E), DATED 23-8-2001 NOTIFICATION NO. 70/2014 [F. NO. 187/37/2014 (ITA-I)]/SO 2915(E), DATED 13-11-2014 In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 120 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961) and in supersession of the notification of the Government of India, Central Board of Direct Taxes number S.O.822(E), dated the 23rd August, 2001 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, section 3, sub-section (ii), dated the 23rd August, 2001, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession, the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby,— (a) directs that the Director General of Income-tax or the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax specified in column (2) of the Schedule -1 or II annexed to this notification, as the case may be (hereinafter referred to as the \"said Schedules\") or the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Income-tax specified in column (4) of the said Schedules or Joint Commissioners of Income-tax or Assessing Officers, shall continue to exercise powers and perform the functions as stipulated in the said Act, in respect of such persons or classes of persons or such incomes or classes of incomes or such cases or classes of cases in which the said Income-tax authorities have been exercising powers and performing the functions on the basis of jurisdiction assigned by any order passed under the said Act on the date of publication of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 79 of 102 this notification, till such jurisdiction is revoked; (b) directs that the Director General of Income-tax or the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax specified in column (2) of the said Schedules or the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Income-tax specified in column (4) of the said Schedules or Joint Commissioners of Income-tax subordinate to them, shall exercise powers and perform the functions as stipulated in the said Act in respect of such cases or classes of cases or such persons or classes of persons, assigned to Assessing Officers subordinate to them, under section 127 of the said Act, from the date of publication of this notification; (c) authorises the Director General of Income-tax or the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax specified in the said Schedules, or the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Income-tax specified in column (4) of the said Schedules, to issue orders in writing, vesting jurisdiction to exercise powers and perform functions of an Assessing Officer as defined under clause (7A) of section 2 of the said Act, to the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax or Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax or Income-tax Officer who are subordinate to them. 2. This notification shall come into force with effect from the 15th day of November, 2014 SCHEDULE - II Chief Commissi oner of Income- tax (Central) Headqu arters Principal Commissioner/Co mmissioner of Income-tax (Central) Headq uarters (2) (3) (4) (5) Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 80 of 102 Chief Commissi oner of Income- tax (Central), Delhi Delhi (i) Principal Commissioner /Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Delhi -1 Delhi (ii) Principal Commissioner/ Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Delhi - 2 Delhi (iii) Principal Commissioner /Commissioner of Income-tax (Central), Delhi - 3 Delhi 30. In the light of the above provisions of law and the Notifications, we now proceed to adjudicate the issue at hand. It is true that the Notification no. 52 dated 22.10.2014 grants the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Delhi-2 to have territorial and subject jurisdiction on \"All cases of persons in the territorial area specified in column (4) (i.e.,Delhi) claiming exemption under clauses (21), (22), (22A), (22B), (23), (23A), (23AAA), (23B), (23C), (23F), (23FA), (24), (46) and (47) of section 10, section 11, section 12, section 13A and section 13B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and assessed or assessable by an Income-tax authority at serial numbers 88 to 111 specified in the notification of Government of India bearing number S.O. 2752 dated the 22nd October, 2014\". 46. On the issue of the decision of Honourable Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. ABC Papers Ltd. [2022] 141 taxmann.com 332 (SC)/[2022] 289 Taxman 150 (SC)/[2022] 447 ITR 1 (SC)[18-08-2022] we find that the question before the honourable court was the jurisdiction of the High Court consequent Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 81 of 102 upon administrative order of transfer of a 'case' under section 127 of the Act from one Assessing Authority to another Assessing Officer located in a different State. Honourable Punjab & Haryana High Court took the view that such a transfer would not change the principle laid down in Seth Banarasi Dass Gupta. However, the Honourable Delhi High Court in CIT v. Sahara India Financial Corpn. Ltd. [2007] 162 Taxman 357/294 ITR 363 and CIT v. Aar Bee Industries [2013] 36 taxmann.com 308/357 ITR 542 has taken a different view. The Honourable Delhi High Court held that an administrative order of transfer of cases will also have the consequence of transferring even the jurisdiction of the honourable High Court. As there is a difference of opinion between the honourable High Court of Punjab & Haryana on the one hand and the Honourable High Court of Delhi on the other, the Honourable supreme court was to determine and declare the appropriate High Court for filing an appeal in such cases. 47. It is argued that decision of Advantage India on this aspect is no longer valid as it relied on up decision of Punjab & Haryana High court which is reversed by the Honourable Supreme court in ABC papers Limited. On careful consideration of the decision of the Honourable Punjab & Haryana High court in CIT V Sahara India Financial corporation Limited which was followed and relied by Advantage India to hold that case also includes the power to cancel the registration also in para no 26 to 30 is valid as the Honourable Supreme court in ABC papers Limited has not overruled the decision Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 82 of 102 of Punjab & Haryana High court in CIT V Sahara Indi Financial Corporation Limited. Further the decision of Honourable Supreme court was altogether on the jurisdiction of Honourable high court and did not have any occasion to consider the situation as before us which is also there in case of Advantage India. Hence, we hold that The Ld CIT has validly assumed jurisdiction for cancellation of registration u/s 12 AB of the Act. 48. Therefore, we reject this contention of the LD AR that the PCIT Central lacks Jurisdiction as powers of cancellation are not transferred to him and further the ' case\" does not include power of cancellation as it does not refer to any assessment year. 49. It is never in question that if the ITAT finds the noncompliance or violation of any provisions of section 127 of the Act, consequent orders can be quashed. This is also supported by the decision cited by the ld AR. But those are not relevant here unless we find that there is a violation of section 127 of the Act. 50. Accordingly Ground no 3 of the appeal is dismissed. 51. Now coming to ground no 8 of The Appeal that without prejudice, the Pr. CIT (Central) erred in cancelling registration retrospectively and, if at all, could only have cancelled registration with effect from the Assessment Year 2023-24. The Ld AR has heavily relied on the decision of the Amla Jyothi [ supra]. We find that decision of Delhi ITAT in Advantage India [ Supra] has considered this aspect in para no. 48 onwards as under:- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 83 of 102 \"48. On the issue of the jurisdiction of the Pr. CIT(Central-2), Delhi to cancel the registration with retrospective effect, we find that the express power of cancellation were duly incorporated by the Parliament into the Income Tax Act, 1961 by way of Finance Act, 2004 vide which a specific section 12AA (3) was incorporated in the statute. Further, vide Finance Act, 2010, Section 12AA(3) was amended to include cancellation of registration granted u/s 12A. The legal dictum is that the retrospective applicability can either be expressly provided for or can be inferred by necessary implication from the language employed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Zile Singh v. State of Haryana (2004) 8 SCC 1 at Para 15, held as follows: \"It is not necessary that an express provision be made to make a statute retrospective and the presumption against retrospectivity may be rebutted by necessary implication especially in a case where the new law is made to cure an acknowledged evil for the benefit of the community as a whole (ibid., p. 440). This can be achieved by express enactment or by necessary implication from the language employed. If it is a necessary implication from the language employed that the legislature intended a particular section to have a retrospective operation, the courts will give it such an operation. In the absence of a retrospective operation having been expressly given, the courts may be called upon to construe the provisions and answer the question whether the legislature had sufficiently expressed that intention giving the statute retrospectivity. Four factors are suggested as relevant: (1) general scope and purview of the statute; (in) the remedy sought to be applied; (i) the former state of the law, and (iv) what it was the legislature contemplated. (p. 388).\" 49 . It is also legally provided that the presumption against retrospective applicability only arises when a vested right is sought to be impaired. As explained above, the authority to cancel registration was expressly provided in the statute since Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 84 of 102 2004. Therefore, it cannot be disputed that no trust/institution can claim to have a vested right to registration, which was in violation of the terms and conditions provided under a different statutory provision in force during the relevant time. The provisions of registration of trusts/institutions under Section 12A/12AA/12AB being a regulatory provision made in the interest of the general public, deserves to be interpreted in a manner which would further the larger public interest in case any violation of the provisions is noticed. 50. Our view is reinforced from the decision of the Delhi ITAT in the case of Young Indian (supra), that there is no bar in the statute to cancel the registration of an institution with retrospective effect. In paras 49, 88 and 121, the Delhi Bench held in the aforesaid case that the Pr CIT has the power to cancel the registration with retrospective effect as under: '' 49. Without prejudice, the Ld. Counsel submitted that registration cannot be cancelled retrospectively without giving specific opportunity to the assessee and further, registration cannot be cancelled with retrospective date. Reliance in this regard was placed on the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Agra Development Authority (2018) 90 taxmann.com 282 and of Madras High Court in the case of Auro Lab v. ITO (2019) 102 taxmann.com 225 (Madras). **** 88. As regards reliance placed on the judgment of Madras High Court in the case of Prathyusha Educational Trust (supra) on retrospective cancellation of registration u/s. 12A/12AA, the ld. counsel submitted Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Agra Development Authority (supra) has clearly held that CIT Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 85 of 102 (Exemption) is not empowered to cancel registration with retrospective effect, i.e., prior to the date of issuance of order/notice. To the same effect, there is another judgment of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Indian Medical Trust v. PCIT, 414 ITR 296. **** 121. One of the key contentions raised by the ld. counsel before us is that the ld. CIT(E) does not have the power to cancel the registration from retrospective date and any such cancellation can only be prospective, i.e., from the date of passing of the order and in support of which certain decisions have also been relied upon. From a bare reading of Section 12AA (3) it is seen that, section provides that where a trust or an institution has been granted registration and if subsequently, Pr. CIT or CIT is satisfied that the activities of the trust are not genuine or are not carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust, he may cancel the registration by way of an order in writing. Consequently, if there is violation of any such conditions, then the registration so granted can be cancelled by the CIT. Nowhere, the Statute envisages that the cancellation cannot be retrospective or it has to be necessarily prospective. What it provides that the Commissioner has statutory powers to cancel the registration u/s. 12A/12AA if he finds reason to believe that the activities of the assessee are not in line with its objects or the activities carried out by the assessee are not genuine in nature. If from the date when registration has been granted, the assessee has not carried out any activity in line with its objects or the activities carried out are not genuine, then from that date itself, the registration can be cancelled because it is only when the knowledge of such breach come to the notice of the Commissioner, then he has the power to cancel the registration from the date he notices the infringement. The cancellation of registration, whether with retrospective effect or prospective, depends upon the facts and circumstances of the case and the Commissioner has power to cancel the registration from the time when such breach has occurred. Suppose, if the assessee after grant of registration carries out its activities in accordance with Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 86 of 102 its objects and the activities are also genuine then the assessee is entitled for benefits of section 12AA; and if from a particular period or year, the activities are found to be either non-genuine or not carried out in accordance with its stated objects, then the Commissioner can cancel the registration from the date or period when such non genuineness is found. Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Prathyusha Educational Trust (supra) have clearly reiterated this proposition, relevant text of which has been already incorporated above, wherein their Lordships have held that it a misnomer to state that the order is retrospective or retroactive and the order of the cancellation of registration even passed on subsequent date would take effect from the year when cause of action arose.\" 51. The Delhi ITAT in the case of Young Indian (supra) drew its strength from the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court Pratushyusha Educational Trust v. Pr. CIT [2019] 108 taxmann.com 385/266 Taxman 105/416 ITR 129 (Madras) which observed as follows: \"At the first blush, the Court assumed that the argument of Mr. Anirudh Krishnan is to the effect that the cancellation/withdrawal was with effect from the date of grant of exemption/registration. However, on a perusal of the order dated 18.11.2014 withdrawing the approval granted under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act, it is seen that it has been given effect to from the assessment year 2010-2011. Likewise the order cancelling the assessee's registration under Section 12AA of the Act is from the assessment year 20102011. Can it be said that these orders of cancellation are with retrospective effect. The definite answer for this question is an emphatic 'No'. Admittedly, the business premises of the assessee was subjected to search during the assessment year 2010-2011. The Assessing Officer while completing the assessment found large scale diversion of funds and several improper actions on the part of the assessee in Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 87 of 102 direct conflict to the terms of the Deed of Trust and conditions of registration/exemption. Therefore, it was recommended to the competent authority to initiate proceedings for cancellation of the exemption/registration. The matter was decided after due opportunity to the assessee and speaking orders have been passed and obviously these orders will take effect from the assessment year 20102011 and it is a misnomer to state that the orders are retrospective or retroactive. The lis which was the subject matter is for the assessment year 2010-2011 and though the orders of cancellation of the exemption/registration was passed on 18.11.2014 and 07.12.2016 they would take effect from the assessment year 2010-2011 during which year the cause of action arose. This being the factual position, the decision in the case of Aura Development Authority is not applicable to the facts of the present case. 52. In Mumbai Cricket Association v. DIT, Mumbai Cricket Association v. DIT (Exemption) [2012] 24 taxmann.com 99/138 ITD 338 (Mumbai), the Tribunal held that registration of a charitable institution could be cancelled u/s. 12AA(3) with retrospective effect. In such a scenario, we are of the considered view that the PrCIT(Central) had the necessary authority to cancel the registration with retrospective effect, since the activities of the trust are not found to be genuine or in accordance with the objects of the trust. 53. The reliance of the assessee on the decision of State of Rajasthan v. Basant Agrotech India Ltd 388 ITR 81 (Punjab & Haryana) and Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation(Gwalior) MP Ltd (supra) with respect to bar in cancelling the registration with retrospective effect on the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 88 of 102 ground that there is no express provision in the section is misplaced. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation(Gwalior) MP Ltd (supra) has held that the prior to the year 2004, there was no express provision to cancel the registration and hence there was no authority with the CIT to cancel the Registration. However, with the insertion of section 12AA(3) in the Act with effect from 01.10.2004, the CIT was empowered to cancel the registration, on meeting the conditions prescribed. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation (Gwalior) M.P. Ltd. (supra) Income-tax, Gwalior has held as under: \"27. It is not in dispute that an express power was conferred on the CIT to cancel the registration for the first time by enacting sub-Section (3) in Section 12AA only with effect from 01.10.2004 by the Finance (No.2) Act 2004 (23 of 2004) and hence such power could be exercised by the CIT only on and after 01.10.2004, i.e., (assessment year 2004-2005) because the amendment in question was not retrospective but was prospective in nature . ' 54. The reliance on the CBDT Circular No. 21/2016 dated 27.05.2016 and Sarvodya Pannan 348 ITR 300 (Mad HC); Khar Gymkhana(supra) and Maria Social Service Society (supra)) does not come to the rescue of the assessee. The CBDT's circular only clarifies that it shall not be mandatory to cancel the registration already granted u/s 11 to a charitable institution merely on the ground that the cut-off specified in the proviso to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 89 of 102 section 2(15) of the Act is exceeded in a particular year without there being any change in the nature of activities of the institution. The case laws relied only prescribes that order for cancellation cannot be de-hors the satisfaction of twin conditions. In the instant case, the registration is cancelled strictly on the grounds of non-genuine activities and activities not in accordance with objectives of the Trust which are the prerequisite conditions. 55. The reliance on Tamil Nadu Cricket Association (supra); Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust(supra) and Welham Boys School (supra) are distinguishable on facts. The proposition advanced in the above decisions do not apply in the facts of the instant case. In the instant case, there is no onetime violation due to ignorance and that too for a very short duration which has considered as ground for cancellation of Registration. In any case, a one time violation is also sufficient to lead to cancellation of registration as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Jagannath Gupta Family Trust (supra). The evidences found during the search/survey show that the assessee's indulgence in non-genuine activities commenced from June 2012 and continued till 2016. The fact of violation of conditions under section 11 and 13 of the Act are not the sole ground by itself which has led the PCIT(C) to the conclude that the activities are not in accordance with the objects the trust. At this juncture it would be apt to recall the 5 judge bench decision of the hon'ble Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 90 of 102 Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v. Dilip Kumar and Company [2018] 95 taxmann.com 327/ dated 30 July, 2018 AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 3606, reversing the decision of 3 judge bench of Supreme Court in the case of Sun Export Corporation v. Collector of Customs 1997 taxmann.com 696 (SC)/(1997) 6 SCC 564 and held that an ambiguity in a tax exemption provision or notification must be interpreted so as to favour the Revenue claiming the benefit of such exemption, had laid down the law as follows: 18. It is well accepted that a statute must be construed according to the intention of the Legislature and the Courts should act upon the true intention of the legislation while applying law and while interpreting law. If a statutory provision is open to more than one meaning, the Court has to choose the interpretation which represents the intention of the Legislature. 48.......Exemptions from taxation have tendency to increase the burden on the other unexempted class of tax payers. A person claiming exemption, therefore, has to establish that his case squarely falls within the exemption notification, and while doing so, a notification should be construed against the subject in case of ambiguity. 56 To sum up, we answer the reference holding as under - (1) Exemption notification should be interpreted strictly; the burden of proving applicability would be on the assessee to show that his case comes within the parameters of the exemption clause or exemption notification. (2) When there is ambiguity in exemption notification which is subject to strict interpretation, the benefit of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 91 of 102 such ambiguity cannot be claimed by the subject/assessee and it must be interpreted in favour of the revenue. 57.In conclusion, we hold that the Society was in cohorts with its ex-president in acting as a conduit for bringing commission/liasoning fees and converting them into cash by taking bogus bills/entries since June 2012. The assessee Society has failed to discharge its onus to strictly demonstrate that its activities were genuine and it was conducting its activities to further its objectives. Since the evidence show that the Society commenced its non-genuine activities that do not align with its objectives, from the year June 2012, the PCIT(C)'s cancellation of Registration order retrospectively w.e.f 27.09.1999, needs some modification as the registration cannot be cancelled from a period prior to 01.10.2004 when the express power to cancel was granted to the competent authority. We therefore, modify the PCIT(C) order withdrawing the registration granted to the extent that it be effective from the June 2012 in FY 2012-13, instead of 27.09.1999, till the date of order of cancellation. The ground No 4 of appeal is partly allowed.\" 52. We do not rest our finding on the decision of the Delhi bench in Advantage India {supra} only that the Ld PCIT is correct in invoking his jurisdiction for cancellation of the registration u/s 12 AB of the Act with effect from Ay 2016-17 to 2022 -23. We are also supported by the decision of the Delhi ITAT in Young Indian [ Supra} where in it is held that power of cancellation of registration is Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 92 of 102 available with the PCIT since 2004. It also gets support from MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVISION OF THE FINANCE ACT (2) OF 2004 which provides as under :- Memorandum explaining the Finance Bill No 2 of 2004 Power to the Commissioner for cancelling registration under section 12AA Under the existing provisions of section 12AA the procedure for registration of a trust or institution by the Commissioner of Income-tax is provided. Although the power of cancellation of registration flows from the power to register, the same has not been specifically provided in the Income-tax Act thereby leading to unnecessary litigation. It is proposed to provide that if the Commissioner of Income-tax is satisfied that the activities of any trust or institution are not genuine or are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or institution, he shall, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the concerned trust or institution, pass an order in writing cancelling the registration granted under the said section. The proposed amendment will take effect from 1st October 2004. [Clause 6] 53. Thus, it is clear from the above that power of cancellation was available with the ld PCIT since 1st October 2004. Later on there is Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 93 of 102 some amendment in the provisions of cancellation by THE FINANCE ACT 2022 wherein over and above genuineness of the trust criteria of ' Specified Violations\" were also enacted. 54. If for a moment, we agree with the arguments of the ld AR that the power could be exercised only from 1/4/2022 i.e. from A Y 2022-23 only, it would lead to anomalous situation. Suppose, if the Income tax Department comes to know about the non genuineness of the trust activities after 1/4/2022 prior to that date , it would be helpless prior to this period as those trust despite engaging in non genuine activities would be enjoying benefit of section 11 to 13 of the act and avoiding taxes u/s 115 TD of The Act up to Ay 2022-23. This is neither the intention of the law nor the law can be interpreted in such manner. 55. Further, circular No. 23/2022 dated 3 November 2022 in paragraph No. 9.5.4 has clearly stated that these powers are available from 1 April 2022 and are not at all restricted to any assessment year. Therefore it is clear that after 1 April 2022, the learned principal Commissioner of income tax is empowered to cancel the registration if specified violations or non-genuineness of the trust is found for any assessment year which can be reopened/reassessed and after 1/4/2004 it is empowered to cancel the registration for that period if the activities of trust are found to be non-genuine. 56. It is also the fact that powers were given to the PCIT for cancellation of registration with effect from 1st October 2004. Further such powers were amended from 1/4/2022. It is not the case that the authority has Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 94 of 102 assumed powers to exercise such jurisdiction prior to the date on which they are authorised to do so. Therefore, it cannot at all be considered a retrospective application of law. 57. Accordingly, we dismiss Ground no 8 of the appeal. 58. Coming to ground No. 9 to 13 on the merits, we have carefully considered the rival contentions and also perused the material placed before us. We find that the first specified violation was stated by the learned PCIT is with respect to 'exerting influence for promotion of political articles by paying more money compared to the other articles'. We find that the submission of the assessee was that the covering politics is left to the journalist and further the assessee does not review articles, stories published and does not have any directorial oversight. Further assessee when confronted with the agreements and various rate cards, it was explained and narrated that 'caravan' is a very renowned and awarded magazine. The learned PCIT rejected the same stating that claims are very generic, and no reasons are specifically provided that why the political articles are paid higher. Further the claim of the assessee that there is huge cost involved in publishing the political articles compared to the other articles and therefore there is a change in rate is also not substantiated. We find that the rates paid by the assessee for politics governance, policy, corruption as per the payment terms as per schedule No. 2 of the addendum agreement is ₹ 1 lakh compared to the other topics articles which are even half of the rate. Therefore, it is apparent that if the articles are published on specified subject of politics, governance, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 95 of 102 policy, corruption, economic, business, free press, law and society, the amount of remuneration to be paid to the content provider for a story is ₹ 1 lakh whereas for others it is only 50,000/–. But this remains only a fact that when the political articles are published, the assessee is paying more to the content provider. This also remains a fact that if the higher sum is paid by the assessee to the content provider, it is in a position to influence those content providers to give more political contents. Thus, the allegation of the learned PCIT was that assessee was trying to control the category of the content by paying them the higher sum is correct. The explanation of the assessee was only with respect to that all these content providers are very renowned, have earned testimony to the quality of journalism produced on a consistent basis. However, there was no reply that when the assessee pays higher sum for a particular topic to the content providers, why the content providers will produce the material or content which is earning them less revenue. Thus, it is true that by paying the higher sum, or creating a rate structure in a manner, the assessee is promoting them to produce more articles on politics etc. a. This fact was not denied by the assessee that when a higher sum is paid, whether the content providers will produce the articles which are earning less. Naturally, the allegation of the learned PCIT was not on the quality of the content of the magazine but the fact that assessee is promoting printing of political articles and trying to control the category of content published by paying higher sum. This is not stated in the object of the trust. Thus, it shows that activity of the assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 96 of 102 is promoting the articles on political agenda by paying the higher rates to different media. 59. With reference to the 'biased promotion of selected articles and issues', the learned and PCIT has referred to the WhatsApp chat between the CEO of the assessee as well as the key person of Dool 360 private limited, to whom assessee has provided the total grant of ₹ 20,947,894/– in four financial years. The communication with the key person of spunkline media private limited to whom the assessee has provided total grant of ₹ 21,008,900 in five financial years, further with the key person of print line media private limited, whom assessee has provided grant of ₹ 58,095,003/– for four years and the chat with Miss Barkha Dutt to whom the grants of ₹ 9,910,000 were provided in two years. The WhatsApp chat clearly shows that t from the side of the assessee a definite hint for publication of specific stories/ article, in different languages are conveyed. It may be an altogether different things that whether those entities publish those articles or not, but it is a fact that the chat of the assessee with those persons clearly shows an inclination for promotion of select articles by those entities. Thus, when the assessee has given huge sums to these entities, naturally, if the hint is provided by the assessee to carry on a particular story, at least, the chat shows that those content providers have given attention to it. It is immaterial that those parties did not print such articles in their won wisdom. We are not here to test their wisdom of those parties but to examine the activities of the assessee that whether it is charitable or not. We do not find that this is Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 97 of 102 part of the any of the object of the assessee to give a lead for publication of a particular kind of articles. There is also definitive hint to carry on the articles by translating it into a different language which were already taken by the other content providers. A specific communication is with the print line media wherein the assessee has communicated that in 'the recent CLAT exam there has been widespread discontent amongst students due to glitches on how the papers were evaluated. SC did not stay the result today and it was stated that could he go through the mail after which shall brief you on the source of the info'. This was the message by the CEO of the assessee. Therefore, not only the lead and the content but source of such information was also fed by the assessee to the content providers, we do not find that that is the object of the trust or even if it is object of the trust same is for charitable purpose. 60. The third objection is that assessee is supporting publicization of polarised content. This fact is considered at paragraph No. 5 of the order of the learned principal Commissioner of income tax. The assessee was specifically shown the several articles published by Samarasya Media LLP as well as Janjhwar foundation. The headlines for \"harassed for being Muslims\", 'Sedition cases in Modi era', \"as BJP talks of law against conversion, attacks against Christians rise in Karnataka\", \"Modi government keeps financial deal with Bharat Biotech secret\" and further certain ground reports on issues which are mentioned at page No. 51 – 52 of the order. On looking at the themes of the articles placed at page No. 53 and 54 of the order it clearly Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 98 of 102 shows that these are polarised contents, and which is not the object of the assessee. Further even otherwise, publishing polarised content which may create any disturbance in the society or are of a political nature, cannot be held to be a charitable activity at all. 61. With the fourth objection that the assessee is granting huge sums of money to the several entities under the garb of content commissioning charges as professional fees but there is no details of any services rendered by them to the assessee, therefore, such grant cannot be considered as an application of fund. We find that the paragraph No. 6.1 of the order list 21 entities wherein last six years the assessee has given almost ₹ 420,000,00/- these entities in the form of grant or content commissioning charges. The contention of the assessee is that such grant is within the objects of the assessee. And therefore, it cannot be stated that the assessee has granted funds to these entities beyond its object. Carefully considering once again the objects, clearly provides that had it been provided to educational institution or certain charitable organisation, or other institutions engaged in journalism, it would have definitely served the object of the assessee. However, contributing the funds to the profit making entities without giving any evidence of any services rendered to the assessee, defies the common sense that it can be considered as an application of the income of the assessee. 62. The further objection was with respect to the analysis of the annexure A – 4 of the statement of the senior program manager of the assessee trust which shows that the assessee trust and granted funds to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 99 of 102 PRAVADA media foundation (Alt News) to the tune of Rs. 2.25 crores in three years. It was further stated by the learned PCIT in paragraph No. 7 that the co-founder of that entity is under investigation by multiple agencies for hurting the religious sentiments through his Twitter post. This entity was also involved in reporting of matters relating to farmers protest, Covid 19, Delhi riots, CAA – NRC protest, Jamia Millia incidents and other. The impounded documents as alleged by the learned PCIT shows that organisation was being supportive to that organisation based on availability of funds and cash reserve with the Alt news. The email dated 25 April 2022 reproduced at paragraph No. 7.1 of the order shows these facts. The explanation of the assessee is that it is providing the funds for 'fact checking of the news' and which is one of the objects of the assessee trust. The learned PCIT has categorically stated that issue of pending investigation against that entity as well as exception in funding to that entity clearly shows that it is promoting the targeted news which the assessee trust wanted to support. Naturally this is not the object of the trust. 63. In view of the above facts, we find that the assessee has carried out the activities which are listed in the order of the learned PCIT which are not in consonance with the object of the assessee. We find that the object of the assessee are promoting excellence in education in the field of journalism but the facts recorded by the learned PCIT shows that it is 'exerting influence for promotion of political articles by paying the content provider more money', it is also 'promoting biased Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 100 of 102 and select articles', 'polarised contents ' and 'grants funds to the profit making entities in the form of professional fees without any evidence of receiving services' from them. 64. Charitable purpose specifically deals with the benefit to the public or a section of public. In this case when the assessee is providing funds to the profitable entities without any stated rendition of services by them in the garb of either professional fees or grant, does not satisfy the provisions of the law that it is an application of the income for the purposes of the object of the trust which are charitable in nature. 65. Further the trust being an entity which is receiving the donations from the most illustrious companies, entities, persons from the country as well as the most decorated board of Trustees, does not make the case of the assessee stronger that despite collecting donations from them, the assessee can carry out objects which are not the objects of the trust. Further the various certificates of the personalities that 'those are not influenced' is also of no use. There is no evidence produced before us by the assessee except the reports etc. which are merely documents without substance, to show that the assessee is carrying on the activities of the trust in consonance with the objects and deserves registration u/s 12 AB of the Act. Therefore, we have no hesitation in dismissing ground 9 – 14 of the appeal of the assessee. 66. Ground No. 15 of the appeal is with respect to the disproportionate action of the learned PCIT in cancelling the registration of the trust. We find that provisions of section 12 AA (4) (a) are clear that if whole or any part of the income of the trust is utilised for other than Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 101 of 102 the object of the trust, the trust loses the exemption entity as a whole and therefore there is nothing like disproportionate action. Further the reliance by the assessee on the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Manekji Mota charitable trust (supra) is not correct as that was the case for granting of the registration to the trust where the trust has spent 29% of its income to the religious objects but 71% of its income to the objects of the trust, where the honourable High Court held that at the time of registration of the trust it may not be seen. Here in the case before us there is evidence found that the fund have been used for altogether different purposes and therefore the registration granted to the trust after a survey under section 133A of the act, was cancelled. Therefore, we dismiss ground No. 15 of the appeal. 67. Ground No. 16 is general in nature and hence, dismissed. 68. In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Pronounced in the open court on this 16th day of January 2026. Sd/- Sd/- ( KESHAV DUBEY ) ( PRASHANT MAHARISHI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT Bangalore, Dated, the 16th January 2026. /Desai S Murthy / Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 625/Bang/2023 Page 102 of 102 Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore. Sd/- Printed from counselvise.com "