M/s. Divine Shiksha Samiti, Sehore V. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), Bhopal

ITA 1034/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0812 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LALCHAND
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Question of law; Benefit of exemption
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 12

Judgement Text

[ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1034/IND/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: NA / VS. DIVINE SHIK SHA SAMITI 69, NEAR MANDI POST OFFICE SEHORE (M.P.) (APPELLANT) CIT (EXEMPTION) BHOPAL (REVENUE ) P.A. NO. AABAD4890M APPELLANT BY SHRI GAGAN TIWARI, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI LAL CHAND, DR DATE OF HEARING: 03.10.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEM ENT: 05.10.2018 / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER O F THE CIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL DATED 5.8.2016. THE ASSESS EE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 2 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) ERRED AND WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE SOCIETY IS EXISTING FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF OFFICE BEARER S AND NOT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION) ERRED AND WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST REJECTION OF APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE ACT ). 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT IN FORM NO.10A DULY RECEIVED IN THE OFFICE OF CIT ON 8.2.2016. LD . CIT GAVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON 18.7.2016 AND AFTER CONSIDERING MATERIAL ON RECORD, REFUSED TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN PRESENT APPE AL. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT MISDIRECTED HIMSELF AND EXCEEDED THE MANDATE OF LAW. HE SUBMITTED THAT AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION OF APPLICATI ON, THE LD. CIT IS REQUIRED TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS TAK EN US THROUGH THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY ENCLOSED IN THE PAPER BOOK AT PAGE NO.16. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 3 SQUARELY COVERED BY THE JUDGEMENT OF THE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. D.P.R. CHARITABLE TRUST (2011) 16 DTR 410. THE RELIANCE IS AL SO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF VIDYADAYANI SHIKSHA SAMITI VS. CIT (EXEMPTION) IN I TA NO.309/DEL/2016. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTH ER REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE IN THE WRITTEN SYNOPS IS, WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 1. THE APPELLANT SOCIETY IS REGISTERED WITH THE R EGISTRAR FIRMS & SOCIETIES MADHYA PRADESH VIDE REGISTRATION NO. 7840 /2000 DT. 11.04.2000. COPY OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ALONGW ITH BY- LAWS IS ENCLOSED AS PER PB PAGE NO. 15 TO 25 2. THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE SOCIETY IS TO SPREAD E DUCATION. FOR FULFILLING THE OBJECTIVES SOCIETY IS RUNNING A SENIOR SECONDAR Y SCHOOL AFFILIATED TO M.P. BOARD, UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF ST MARY' S HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AT SEHORE. 3. THE APPELLANT SOCIETY FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ON 8.2.2016 BEFORE THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MPCG, BHOPAL. THE LEARNED CIT (EX EMPTION) HAS REJECTED THE APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 1 2AA AND THE REGISTRATION SOUGHT U/S 12AA WAS REFUSED MAINLY ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- A. THERE ARE 4 PREMISES ON RENT, ONE WITH UNRELATED PARTY AND THREE WITH RELATED PARTY COVERED BY SECTION 13[ 1) [C). B. THAT THE RENT TO RELATED PARTIES IS NOT ON PRO R ATA BASIS THOUGH THE PREMISES ARE ADJOINING. C. C. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT RENT AGREEMENTS W ITH OFFICE BEARERS OF THE SOCIETY [WHO ARE RELATED PARTIES) DO NOT PRO VIDE FOR EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE AND TAXES TO BE BORNE BY AS SESSEE BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED AND BORNE THESE EXPEN SES [RS. 789850/- FOR THE YEAR 2014-15) AND FUNDS ARE BEING DIVERTED FOR PERSONAL PURPOSE OF OFFICE BEARERS/ FAMILIES AND TH EREFORE, IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE SOCIETY EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF THE [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 4 OFFICE BEARERS. IT WAS THEREFORE HELD THAT IT IS CLEARLY SEEN THAT THE SOCIETY IS EXISTING FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF OFFICE BEARER S AND NOT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND THE REGISTRATION SORT U/S 1 2AA WAS REFUSED. HENCE THIS APPEAL INTER ALIA. GROUNDWISE SUBMISSION ARE AS UNDER: GROUND NO 1 & 2 GROUND NO.1 THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION) ERRED AND WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE SOCIETY I S EXISTING FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF OFFICE BEARERS AND NOT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. GROUND NO 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, TH E, LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION) ERRED AND WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. YOUR HONORS, IT IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED AS UNDER :- A. THE MAIN OBJECTIVE OF THE SOCIETY IS TO SPRE AD EDUCATION. FOR FULFILLING THE OBJECTIVES SOCIETY IS RUNNING A SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL AFFILI ATED TO M.P. BOARD, UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF ST MARY'S HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AT SEHORE. B. REGARDING THE OBSERVATION OF LEARNED CIT (EX EMPTION) ABOUT THE PAYMENT OF RENT TO RELATED PARTIES IS NOT ON PRO RATA BASIS THOUGH THE PREMISES ARE ADJOINING IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE OBSERVATION IS NOT CORRECT. IT I S SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO SUCH IRREGULARITY AND THE RENT PAID IS MOST REASONABLE. IT IS ALSO WELL WITHIN THE FAIR RENTAL VALUE AS ASSESSED BY THE OFFICE OF PWD SEHORE.COPY ENCLOSED AT P.B. PAGE NO. 58 TO 63 TO FURTHER EXPLAIN WE HAVE COMPILED ALL TH E DETAILS IN A TABULAR FORMAT WHICH EXPLAINS THE TOTAL AREA OF LAND, BUILT UP ARE A, OPEN LAND, RENT AS PER AGREEMENT AND FAIR RENTAL VALUE AS PER PWD NORMS AS UNDER :- [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 5 SNO NAME OF LAND LORD LAND AREA PLOT AREA AND CONSTRUCTION THEREON (SQ.FT.) (AS MENTIONED IN THE PLOT AREA AND CONSTRUCTION THEREON (SQ.FT.) (ACTUAL ALSO CERTIFIED NO. OF ROOMS OPEN LAND (AS MENTIONED IN THE ORDER OPEN LAND/PLAY GROUND (ACTUAL AS PER REGISTRY) MONTHLY RENT AS PER AGREEMENT MONTHLY RENT AS PER PWD GUIDELINES REMARKS 1. LISSY BABU 25000 (0.57 ACRE) 12000 BUILT UP AREA 13467 (4489 PER FLOOR *3 IN 3 FLOORS) 15 - 20511 (25000-4489) 30000/- 73845/- IN RENT AGREEMENT IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THERE IS AN OPEN LAND & ALSO A PLAY GROUND 2 BABU ANTONY 35000 (0.75 ACRE) - BUILT UP AREA 3000 IN GROUND FLOOR 7 - 32000 (35000-3000) 15000/- 19800/- IN RENT AGREEMENT IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THERE IS N OPEN LAND. 3 MANISH TIWARI 27010 (0.62 ACRE) 3500 BUILT UP ARE 10500 (3500 PER FLOOR *3 IN 3 FLOORS) 30 23510 23510 (27010-3500) 31500/- 56500/- IN RENT AGREEMENT, IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THERE IS AN OPEN LAND & ALSO A PLAY GROUND. [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 6 YOUR HONORS, AS SEEN FROM ABOVE THERE IS NO DISPROP ORTIONATE RENT. IT APPEARS THAT THE LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION) HAS TAKEN CRITERIA OF NUMBE RS OF ROOMS ONLY DISREGARDING BUILT UP AREA AND OPEN LAND. IN ANY CASE THE RENT PAID IS WELL WITHIN THE FAIR RENTAL VALUE AS ASSESSED BY THE OFFICE OF PWD.COPY ENCLOSED AT PB P AGE NO.58 TO 63 SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS ON THE RENT PAID ARE AS UNDER :- I. LISSY BABU :- IN THE PREMISES OF LISSY BABU, THERE WAS OPEN LAND FOR PLAYGROUND WHICH HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED IN RENT AGREEMENT. THE LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION) TOTALLY IGNORED THE AREA OF OPEN LAND. THE OPEN LAND AREA W AS 20511 SQFT. COPY OF RENT AGREEMENT AND SALE DEED ARE ENCLOSED AS PER PB PAGE NO. 31 TO 42 II. BABU ANTONY :- IN THE PREMISES OF BABU ANTONY, THERE WAS OPEN LAND FOR PLAYGROUND. THE LEARNED CIT (EXEMPTION) TOTALLY IGNORED THE AREA OF OPEN LAND. THE OPEN LAND AREA WAS 32000 SQFT. FURTHER NO BUILT UP AREA HAS B EEN MENTIONED WHEREAS BUILT UP AREA IS 3000 SQ. FT ON GROUND FLOOR. COPY OF REN T AGREEMENT AND SALE DEED ARE ENCLOSED AS PER PB PAGE NO. 43 TO 49 III. MANISH TIWARI :- IN THE PREMISES OF MANISH TIWARI IT WAS MENTIONED I N RENT AGREEMENT THAT 3 FLOORS HAS BEEN CONSTRUCTED ON PLOT OF 3500 SQFT. T HE TOTAL BUILT UP AREA FOR ALL THE 3 FLOORS COMES TO 10500 SQFT. THE LEARNED CIT ( EXEMPTION) HAS TAKEN BUILT UP AREA AS 3500 SQFT INSTEAD OF 10500 SQFT. COPY OF RE NT AGREEMENT AND SALE DEED ARE ENCLOSED AS PER PB PAGE NO. 50 TO 57 C. REGARDING THE OBSERVATION OF LEARNED CIT (EXEMP TION) ABOUT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED AND BORNE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES (RS. 789850/- FOR THE YEAR 2014- 15) AND FUNDS ARE BEING DIVERTED FOR PERSONAL PURPO SE OF OFFICE BEARERS/ FAMILIES AND THEREFORE, IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE SOCIETY EXISTS F OR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF THE OFFICE BEARERS, IT IS SUBMITTED AS UNDER :- IN RENT AGREEMENT IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT T HE PREMISES SHALL BE KEPT CLEAN AND WHITE WASH OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE DONE BY THE TEN ANT. HENCE AT THE OUSTED, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE OBSERVATION OF THE LEARNED CIT ( EXEMPTION) THAT THE EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE AND TAXES ARE NOT TO BE BORNE BY THE AS SESSEE IS TOTALLY FACTUALLY INCORRECT. RELEVANT CLAUSE NO. ARE SUMMARIZED AS UN DER :- [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 7 S. LANDLORD NAME CLAUSE NO OF PB PAGE NO. NO RELEVANT RENT AGREEMENT 1. LISSI BABU ANTONY ( 7) 31 TO 36 2. BABU ANTONY (6 ) 43 TO 44 3. MANISH TIWARI ( 6) 50 TO 52 HENCE, AS SEEN FROM THE CLAUSE OF RENT AGREEMENT , IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE TENANT WILL KEEP THE PREMISES NEAT AND CLEAN AND EX PENSES FOR WHITE WASH AND REPAIRS SHALL ALSO BE INCURRED BY THE TENANT. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO TAXES HAVE BEEN PAID BY THE ASSESSEE BUT THE SAME HAVE ON LY BEEN PAID BY THE LANDLORD. IN VIEW OF ABOVE , IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE OBSE RVATION THAT ASSESSEE INCURRED RS. 7,89,850/- IN FY 2014-15 FOR THESE EXPENSES AND DIV ERTED FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES OF OFFICE BEARERS AND FAMILIES IS FACTUALLY INCORRECT. FURTHER AMOUNT OF RS. 7,89,850/- HAS NOT BEEN FU LLY INCURRED FOR BUILDING REPAIRS BUT IT IS INCURRED ON CLEANING CHARGES, SANITATION CHAR GES, WHITE WASH CHARGES, REPAIR TO FURNITURE AND FIXTURES, REPAIR OF LAB EQUIPMENTS, P ROJECTORS, SPORTS EQUIPMENTS, OFFICE EQUIPMENTS AND COMPUTERS. COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT TO EXPLAIN, IS ENCLOSED AS PER P.B. PAGE NO.64 TO 74 SUMMARY OF REPAIR AND MAINTEN ANCE EXPENSES OF RS. 7,89,850/- IS OS UNDER :- [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 8 HEADS AMOUNT REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE FOR RS. 79,133/- FURNITURE REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE FOR RS 44,743/- COMPUTER REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE FOR LAB RS. 24,800/ - EQUIPMENT REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE FOR RS 98,320/ - ELECTRICITY REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE FOR RS 41,600/ - SANITATION (PLUMBING ETC) EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE OF GARDEN RS 61,200/- EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE OF RS. 1 ,31 ,699/ - CLEANLINESS EXPENSES ON WHITEWASH OF BUILDING RS. 1,75,780 /- ABOUT 26700 SQ. FT. BUILT UP AREA EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE OF RS 18,800/ - PLAYGROUND EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE OF SPORTS RS 12,200/ - EQUIPMENTS EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE OF OFFICE RS 15,300/- EQUIPMENTS EXPENSES FOR WATER TANKER RS 53,760/- GENERAL REPAIR & MAINTENANCE. RS. 32,515/ TOTAL RS.7,89,850/- D. NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABOVE SUBMISSION MOST RESPE CTFULLY WE ALSO PLACE RELIANCE ON HE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN WHICH IT IS HELD THAT THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA SHOULD BE GRANTED BY VERIFYING THE OBJECTS OF THE S OCIETY :- O) THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH IN THE CASE OF CIT VS DPR CHARITABLE TRUST REPORTED IN (2011) 79 CCH 0594 [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 9 ' WHILE DEALING WITH THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATI ON THE CIT HAS TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 12 A RWR 17 A R SECTION 12 AA NOWHERE PROVIDES THAT THE CIT WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICA TION HAS TO VERIFY WHETHER THE INCOME DERIVED BY THE TRUST IS BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR THE TRUST IS EARNING PROFIT . COPY ENCLOSED AT PB PAGE NO. 75 TO 80 B) DIT VS VENKATESH EDUCATION SOCIETY, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (2012) 82 CCH 309 'IF THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST FITS INTO ONE OF THE OB JECT AS MENTIONED IN SECTION 2(15}, THE APPLICANT CAN BE GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12 AA' . C) FIFTH GENERATION EDUCATION SOCIETY VS CIT, HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD REPORTED IN 87 CIR (ALL) 169 BESIDES OTHER ISSUES COVERED ABOVE IT WAS HELD THAT OBSERVATION THAT NO ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE SOCIETY IS NOT PROPER AS TH AT IS NOT THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 12 A. D) IN DIT (EXEMPTION) VS. PANNA LALBHAI FOUNDATION, HIGH COURT OF GUJRAT REPORTED IN (2013) 216TAXMAN 148 IT WAS HELD THAT STATUE ITSELF PROVIDES FOR CANCELL ATION OF SUCH REGISTRATION IN CASE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST ARE FOUND TO BE DUBIOUS OR NON GENUINE . E) IN CIT VS VIJAY VARGIYA VANI CHARITABLE TRUST, HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN REPORTED IN (2014) 369 ITR 0360 ( RAJ) IT WAS HELD THAT ONLY THING TO BE LOOKED INTO AT TH E TIME OF GRANTING REGISTRATION WAS OBJECT OF TRUST FOR WHICH IT WAS FORMED . COPY ENCL OSED AT PB PAGE NO.81 TO 93 YOUR HONOR, MOST HUMBLY IT IS THEREFORE REQUESTED T HAT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND IN LIGHT OF AFORESAID JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT AND AS PE R PROVISIONS OF LAW THE SOCIETY BE GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12 AA AS THE OBJECTS OF TH E SOCIETY ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 2( 15) OF THE ACT. 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT AND SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT WOULD BE WITHIN TH E POWER TO MAKE SUCH ENQUIRY IN ORDER TO FIND OUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. HE SUBM ITTED [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 10 THAT LD. CIT AT PARA 2.2 OF HIS ORDER HAS CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT THE BUILDING TAKEN ON RENT IS OWNED BY THE MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY AND BY THIS THE FUNDS ARE BEING DIVERTED FOR PERSONAL PURPOSE OF OFFICE BEARER/FAMILIE S. HE THEREFORE, SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. CIT REJECTED THE APPLICATI ON OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: LN RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED NOTICE, SHRI PR AMOD SHARMA, CA ATTENDED AND FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE FOLLOWING IRREGULARITIES ARE NOTICED:- THERE ARE 4 PREMISES ON RENT, ONE WITH UNRELATED PA RTY AND 3 WITH RELATED PARTIES COVERED BY SECTION 13(1)(C). THE PREMISES ARE ADJOI NING. THEREFORE, RENT SHOULD BE NEARLY SAME ON PRO-RATA BASIS. THE SAME IS NOT APPA RENTLY SO. THEREFORE, ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THE REGISTRATION NOT BE ALLOWED. 2.2 IN VIEW OF ABOVE, THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED FOR HE ARING ON 25-07-2016. ON 25-07- 2016, THE AR OF THE SOCIETY, SHRI PRAMOD SHARMA ATT ENDED AND SUBMITTED LETTER DATED 25-07-2016. THE SAME IS PLACED ON RECORD. THE JUSTI FICATION OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT TENABLE IN THE LIGHT OF THE FOLLOWING CHART:- [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 11 S.NO. NAME OF BUILDING OWNER LAND AREA BUILT UP AREA OPEN AREA NO. OF ROOMS VALIDITY OF RENT AGREEMENT ANNUAL RENT COVERED BY SECTION 13(1)(C) REMARK 1 KAPOORI DEVI 8255 3575 4680 - 2004-2011 - NO 2 LISI BABU ANTONY - 12000 - 15* 2015-2020 3,60,000 (30,000X12) YES *1 ST 2 ND AND 3 RD FLOOR 3 BABU ANTONY 3000 7 01-04- 2012 TO 30.6.2017 1,80000 (15000X12) YES 4 MANISH TIWARI 27010 3500 23510 30* 01.07.2011 TO 30.6.16 378000 (31500X12) YES *1 ST 2 ND AND 3 RD FLOOR 2.3. IN VIEW OF ABOVE CHART, IT IS SEEN THAT RENT T O RELATED PARTIES IS NOT ON PRO RATA BASIS THOUGH THE PREMISES ARE ADJOINING. SHRI MANISH TIWA RI (SR.4) IS BEING PAID ALMOST SAME RENT AS LISI BABU ANTONY (SR.2) EVEN THOUGH NUMBER OF ROOMS PROVIDED BY FORMER ARE DOUBLE IN ADJOINING PLOTS (30 VS 15). THIS IS SERIO US IRREGULARITY ESPECIALLY WHEN SEEN IN THE CONTEXT THAT RENT IS BEING PAID TO OFFICE BEARE RS ONLY, WHO ARE COVERED BY SECTION 13(1)(C). 4 RENT AGREEMENTS WITH OFFICE BEARERS OF THE SOCIET Y, (WHO ARE RELATED PARTIES) DO OT PROVIDE FOR EXPENSES ON MAINTENANCE AND TAXES TO BE BORNE BY THE ASSESSEE. BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED AND BORNE THESE EXPENSES (RS. 7,89,850/- FOR YEAR 2014-15) AND FUNDS ARE BEING DIVERTED FOR PERSONAL PURPOSE OF OF FICE BEARERS/FAMILIES AND THEREFORE, IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE SOCIETY EXISTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF THE OFFICE BEARERS. ON THE FOREGOING DISCUSSION IT IS CLEARLY SEEN THAT THE SO CIETY IS EXISTING FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROFIT OF OFFICE BEARERS AND NOT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. 2.5 IT IS SEEN FROM THE ABOVE MENTIONED UNDUE FAVOU RS EXTENDED TO OFFICER BEARERS THAT THE SOCIETY IS NOT DOING ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AND THEREFORE THE SOCIETY DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE LT. ACT,19 61. ACCORDINGLY THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A, RECEIVED IN THIS OFFICE ON 08/02/2016 SEEKI NG REGISTRATION U/S 12AA IS HEREBY REJECTED AND REGISTRATION SOUGHT U/S 12AAIS REFUSED . 4. THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE FACT THAT TH E LD. CIT IS WITHIN HIS POWER TO MAKE SUCH ENQUIRY TO FIND OUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE SOCIETY. IN THE [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 12 PRESENT CASE, THE ONLY GROUND FOR NOT ALLOWING REGIST RATION BY THE LD. CIT IS THAT THE FUND OF THE SOCIETY IS DI VERTED FOR THE PERSONAL GAIN OF THE OFFICE BEARER OF THE SOCIETY. THE BASIS OF THIS SUSPICION IS THAT THE SOCIETY HAS TAKEN O N RENT BUILDING FROM THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY, WHEREIN T HE EXCESSIVE RENT IS BEING PAID. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THIS ISSUE IS REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE. HE SUBMITTED THAT AT THE STAGE OF REGISTRATION OF APPLICATION, THE LD. CIT HAS TO CONFINE TO THE EXTENT OF VERIFICATION OF THE GENUINE NESS OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE L D. CIT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY ADVERSE MATERIAL WITH REGARD TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. THE SOC IETY IS RUNNING SCHOOL, WHICH IS A CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. LD. CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON THE JUDGEMENT OF HON 'BLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. D.P.R. CHARITAB LE TRUST (SUPRA). HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER: [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 13 8. SEC. 12A OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES CONDITIONS FOR R EGISTRATION OF THE TRUST WHEREAS S. 12AA OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES THE PROCEDURE FOR REGIST RATION. A CAREFUL READING OF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS WOULD REVEAL THAT APPLICATION F OR REGISTRATION UNDER S. 12A HAS TO BE MADE IN FORM NO. LOA PRESCRIBED BY R. 17 A BEFORE T HE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST OR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE IN STITUTION WHICHEVER IS LATER. THE APPLICATION HAS TO BE MADE BY A PERSON IN RECEIPT O F INCOME OF THE TRUST. THUS WHILE DEALING WITH THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION THE C IT HAS TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH S. 12A RWR. 17A AND WHETHER FORM NO. LOA HAS BEEN PROPERLY FILLED UP. HE MAY ALSO EXAMINE WHETHE R OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE OR NOT. SEC. 12AA NOWHERE PROVIDES THAT CIT WHILE C ONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IS ALSO REQUIRED TO EXAMINE WHETHER TH E INCOME DERIVED BY THE TRUST IS BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR THE TRUST IS EARNI NG PROFIT. THE LANGUAGE EMPLOYED BY THE LEGISLATURE IN S. 12AA ONLY REQUIRES THAT ACTIV ITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION MUST BE GENUINE WHICH SHOULD BE IN CONSONANCE WITH THE OBJE CT OF THE TRUST. AT THIS STAGE, THE CIT IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE EXAMINE THE APPLICATION O F INCOME. ALL THAT HE MAY EXAMINE IS WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF S. 12A R/W R. WHETHER FROM NO.10A HAS BEEN PROPERLY FILLED UP. HE HAS ALSO TO SEE WHETHER OBJECTS. OF THE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE OR NOT. OUR VIEW FINDS SUPPORT FROM THE DIVISION DECISION OF THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF RED RO SE SCHOOL ?F3) AND THE DECISIONS IN THE CASES OF NEW LIFE IN CHRIST EVANGELISTIC ASS OCIATION (SUPRA), FIFTH GENERATION EDUCATION SOCIETY (SUPRA) AND SHANTAGAURI RAMNIKLAL TRUST (SUPRA). 9. IN THE BACKDROP OF AFORESAID LEGAL POSITION FACT S OF THE CASE MAY BE SEEN. ADMITTEDLY THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE RESPOND ENT WAS IN CONSONANCE WITH THE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT PRESCRIBED IN THIS REGARD. F ROM THE TRUST DEED WHICH WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST COULD BE AS CERTAINED. FROM PERUSAL OF CL. (3) OF THE TRUST DEED WE FIND THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUS T ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND ARE IN TUNE WITH S. 2(15) OF THE ACT AND, THEREFORE, THE T RIBUNAL RIGHTLY OPINED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT REJECTING THE APPLICATION UNDER S. 12A WAS UNJUSTIFIED. 10. FOR THE AFOREMENTIONED REASONS, THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF THE LAW FRAMED BY THIS COURT VIDE ORDER DT. 10TH AUG., 2006 HAS TO BE ANSW ERED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE I.E. IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. IN THE RES ULT THE APPEAL FAILS AND IS HEREBY DISMISSED. 4. FURTHER, RELIANCE IS PLACED UPON THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF VIDYADAYANI SHIKSHA SAMITI VS. CIT (EXEMPTION) (SUPRA) THE COORDINATE BEN CH HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER: [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 14 16. NOW, COMING TO THE POWERS OF THE COMMISSIONER A S TO WHETHER WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A HE IS REQUIRED TO EXA MINE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ETC. OR HE IS ONLY TO SATISFY HIMSELF REGAR DING THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUS T, WE FIND VARIOUS COURTS HAVE HELD THAT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A THE ID. CIT IS REQUIRED TO SEE ONLY THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST/SOCIETY AND NOT TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION OF INCOME. HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO EXAMIN E WHETHER THE INCOME DERIVED BY THE TRUST IS BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR THE TRUST IS EARNING PROFIT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION. HE IS O NLY REQUIRED TO EXAMINE THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. WE FIND IDENTICAL ISSUE H AD COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF BHARTIYA KISAN SANGH SEWA N IKETAN (SUPRA). IN THE SAID CASE ALSO THE ASSESSEE TRUST DID NOT PRODUCE T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, BILLS AND VOUCHERS ETC. FOR VERIFICATION OF THE LD. CIT FOR WHICH THE LD. CIT HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. DUE TO NON-COMPLIANCE OF ASSESSEE SOCIETY, THE GENU INENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES COULD NOT BE VERIFIED. THE LD. CIT, THER EFORE, RELYING ON VARIOUS DECISIONS INCLUDING THE DECISIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN R ELIED ON BY THE LD. CIT IN THE PRESENT CASE, REJECTED THE CLAIM OF REGISTRA TION ULS 12A(1) OF THE L.T. ACT. WHEN THE MATTER TRAVELLED TO THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION BY HOLDING THAT AT THIS STAGE ON GRANTING REGISTRATION ULS 12A THE LD. CIT IS REQUIRED TO SEE THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AND NOT REQUIRED TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION OF INCOME WHICH WILL HAVE TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON A YEAR TO YE AR BASIS AFTER THE ASSESSEE FILES THE RETURN OF INCOME CLAIMING EXEMPT ION U/S 11 OF THE 1. T. ACT. L7. WE FIND THE HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT III TH E CASE OF FIFTH GENERATION EDUCATION SOCIETY (SUPRA) HAS OBSERVED A S UNDER :- '2. A READING OF THE SECTION SHOWS THAT THE REGIST RATION UNDER SECTION 12A IS A PRE-CONDITION FOR AVAILING OF THE BENEFIT UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12. SECTION 11 PROVIDES FOR EXEMPTION OF INCOME WHICH I S APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. SECTION 12 IS IN THE NATURE OF AN EXPLANATION TO SECTION 11. BEFORE A PERSON CAN CLAIM THE BENEFIT O F SECTION 11, OR SECTION 12, AS THE CASE MAY BE, HE MUST OBTAIN REGI STRATION UNDER SECTION 12A. THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A HAS TO BE MADE IN FORM NO. LOA PRESCRIBED BY RULE 17A BEFORE THE EXPI RY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHM ENT OF THE INSTITUTION, WHICHEVER IS LATER. IT HAS TO BE MADE BY THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME OF THE TRUST. 3. IT IS EVIDENT THAT, AT THIS STAGE, THE COMMISSI ONER IS NOT TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION OF INCOME. ALL THAT HE MAY EXAMINE IS WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREM ENTS OF SECTION 12A READ WITH RULE 17 A AND WHETHER FORM NO. 10A HAS BE EN PROPERLY FILLED [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 15 UP. HE MAY ALSO SEE WHETHER THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUS T ARE CHARITABLE OR NOT. AT THIS STAGE, IT IS NOT PROPER TO EXAMINE THE APPL ICATION OF INCOME. 4. THE ORDER IMPUGNED DOES NOT SAY THAT THE OBJECT S OF THE SOCIETY ARE NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE; IT MERELY SAYS THAT THEY ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE GENERAL, THEY DO NOT CEASE TO BE C HARITABLE. THE COMMISSIONER HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT NO ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED ON BY THE SOCIETY. IT IS ALSO NOT THE REQUIREMENT OF SECT ION 12A OF THE ACT. NOR HAS SECTION 80GANY RELEVANCE AT THIS STAGE. THE IMP UGNED ORDER CANNOT, THEREFORE, BE SUSTAINED AND IT IS QUASHED.' 18. WE FIND THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF A.S. KUPPARAJI BROTHERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST (SUP RA) HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER:- 'THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION IS ONLY AN ENABLIN G PROVISION TO CLAIM EXEMPTION. BY MERELY GRANTING A CERTIFICATE INCOME IS NOT EXEMPTED. THAT IS ONLY A FIRST STAGE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION. THE COMMI SSIONER OF APPEALS SHOULD NOT HAVE CONFUSED THESE TWO ASPECTS AND SEEM S TO THINK AS THE TRUSTEES AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS ARE TREATING THE PR OPERTY AS THEIR OWN AND MISUTILISING THE PROPERTY IT IS NOT A GENUINE TRUST . WHEN ONCE IT IS ADMITTED THAT IN PURSUANCE OF THE TRUST DEED AND IN TERMS OF THE OBJECTS SET OUT THEREIN, SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES ARE BEING RUN AND EDU CATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ARE BEING RUN AS RIGHTLY HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL, NOTH ING MORE REQUIRES TO BE ESTABLISHED TO SHOW THAT THE TRUST IN QUESTION IS A GENUINE TRUST AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE REGISTRA TION UNDER SECTION 12M OF THE ACT. AS SET OUT ABOVE, EVEN IF THE REGISTRATION IS GRANTED, THE EXEMPTION FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT IN PARTICULAR SECTIONS 11 AND 12 IS NOT AUTOMATIC. IT IS ONLY WHEN THE ASS ESSEE SATISFIES THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 13, HE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION. THAT IS A MATTER TO BE GONE INTO BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY I N RESPECT OF THE RETURNS FILED EVERY YEAR AND IF ACCORDING TO THEM THERE IS MISAPPROPRIATION OFFUNDS AND IT IS HIT BY SECTION 13 OF THE ACT, CERTAINLY, THEY CAN DENY THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION. BUT THAT IS NOT A GROUND TO DENY THE REG ISTRATION IN THE INSTANT CASE UNDER SECTION 12M, WHEN ADMITTEDLY THE TRUST H AS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO RUN SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES FOR IMPARTING EDUCATION , WHICH IS A CHARITABLE PURPOSE. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE DO NOT SEE ANY MERIT IN THIS APPEAL. THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW FRAMED IN THIS APPE AL IS ANSWERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. ACC ORDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ' 19. WE FIND THE HON'BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF D.P.R. CHARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA) HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER :- [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 16 '8. SEC. 12A OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES CONDITIONS FOR R EGISTRATION OF THE TRUST WHEREAS S. 12AA OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES THE PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION. A CAREFUL READING OF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS WOULD RE VEAL THAT APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER S. J2A HAS TO BE MADE IN FORM NO . IDA PRESCRIBED BY R. 17A BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST OR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INSTITUTION WHICHEVER IS LATER . THE APPLICATION HAS TO BE MADE BY A PERSON IN RECEIPT OF INCOME OF THE TRU ST. THUS WHILE DEALING WITH THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION THE CIT HAS T O EXAMINE WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH S. 12A RW R. 17A AND WHETHER FORM NO. IDA HAS BEEN PROPERLY FILLED UP. HE MAY ALSO EX AMINE WHETHER OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE OR NOT. SEC. 12AA NOWHE RE PROVIDES THAT CIT WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IS ALSO REQUIRED TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE INCOME DERIVED BY THE TRUST IS BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR THE TRUST IS EARNING PROFIT. THE LANGUAGE EMPLOYED BY THE LEGISLATURE IN S. 12M ONLY REQUIRES THAT ACT IVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION MUST BE GENUINE WHICH SHOULD BE IN CONS ONANCE WITH THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST. AT THIS STAGE, THE CIT IS NOT REQUIRE D TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION OF INCOME. ALL THAT HE MAY EXAMINE IS W HETHER THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF S. 1 2A R/W R. 17A AND WHETHER FORM NO. IDA HAS BEEN PROPERLY FILLED UP. H E HAS ALSO TO SEE WHETHER THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE OR NOT. OUR VIEW FUNDS SUPPORT FROM THE DIVISION BENCH DECISION OF THE ALL AHABAD HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF RED ROSE SCHOOL (SUPRA) AND THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF NEW LIFE IN CHRIST EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION (SUPRA), FIFTH GENERATION EDUCATION SOCIETY (SUPRA) AND SHANTAGAUR I RAMNIKLAL TRUST (SUPRA). 9. IN THE BACKDROP OF AFORESAID LEGAL POSITION FACT S OF THE CASE MAY BE SEEN. ADMITTEDLY THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE R ESPONDENT WAS IN CONSONANCE WITH THE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENT PRESCRIB ED IN ,HIS REGARD. FROM THE TRUST DEED WHICH WAO FILED BEFORE THE CIT THE OBJECTS OF ,HE (RUST COALD BE ASCERTAINED. FROM PERUSAL OF CL. (3) OF TH E TRUST DEED WE FIND THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE A ND ARE IN TUNE WITH S. 2 (15) OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE, THE TRIBUNAL RIGHT LY OPINED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT REJECTING THE APPLICATION UNDER S.12A WAS U NJUSTIFIED. 20. THE VARIOUS OTHER DECISIONS RELIED ON BY THE L D. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAPER BOOK ALSO SUPPORT HIS CASE. IN VIEW OF TH E ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE HOLD THAT THE ID. CIT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION U/S L2A. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE ID. CIT AND D IRECT HIM TO ALLOW REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE I.T. ACT. 21. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS ALLOWED. [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 17 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DECISION COUPLED WITH THE F ACT THAT THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJEC TS, WE DIRECT THE LD. CIT TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. FURTHER, IT IS CLARIFIED TH AT REVENUE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE OF RENT PAID TO THE MEMBERS THAT WHETHER IT IS REASONABLE OR NOT, DURING T HE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IF ANY. GROUNDS RAISED BY TH E ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05 . 10.2018. SD/- (MANISH BORAD) SD/- (KUL BHARAT) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER INDORE; DATED : 05/10/2018 VG/SPS [ITA 1034/IND/2016] [DIVINE SHIKSHA SAMITI] 18 COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/GUAR D FILE. BY ORDER SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY, INDORE