SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI, BHILWARA V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 1062/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6950 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B K GUPTA CIT DR DHK
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Question of law; Competent authority
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 13; 12

Judgement Text

1 VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,B JAIPUR JH JESK LH-'KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,O LAANHI XKSLKBZ] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOS AIN, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NOS.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 UNDER SECTION 12AA & 80G(5)(VI)OF THE I.T. AC T, 1961 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI BHILWADA CUKE VS. THE CIT(EXEMPTION ) JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AACAS 1839 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MAHENDRA GARGIEYA, ADVOCATE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY: SHRI B.K. GUPTA , CIT- DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 24/08/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 03 /09/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M. BOTH THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TWO DIFFERENT ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTIONS) BOTH D ATED 31-07-2019 PASSED IN THE MATTER OF U/S 12AA(1)(B) AND U/S 80G( 5)(VI) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED RESPECTIVE APPEALS. ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 2 ITA NO.1062/JP/2019 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER U/S 12AA PASSED BY THE CIT (EXEMPTONS) IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD IN FACTS. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) ERRED IN REJECTING GRANT OF RE GISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) OUGHT TO HAVE GRANT THE REGIS TRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT AS THE APPLICANT SAMITI HAD FU LFILLED ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THE ACT. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS) ERRED IN REJECTING EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ARBITRARY MANNER. ITA NO.1063/JP/2019 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE ORDER U/S 80G PASSED BY LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) IS BAD IN LAW AND BAD IN FACTS. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) ERRED IN REJECTING GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE ACT. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) OUGHT TO HAVE GRANT THE REG ISTRATION U/S 80G OF THE ACT AS THE APPLICANT SAMITI HAD FUL FILLED ALL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN THE ACT. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) ERRED IN REJECTING EXPLANAT ION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ARBITRARY MANNER. ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 3 2.1 SINCE BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE INTE RRELATED AND INTERCONNECTED , THEREFORE, FIRST OF ALL, WE DEAL W ITH THE GROUNDS OF ASSESSEE RAISED BY THE ITA NO. 1062/JP/2019. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, SAID APPLICATION OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED BY THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) VIDE ORDER DATE D 31-07-2019 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT SUBMITTED ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TRUST/SOCIETY AS WELL AS EVIDE NCES IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM. 2.2 AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTIO N), THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE GROUN DS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE. ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE INTERRELATED AND INTERCONNECTED AND RELATES TO CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASS ESSEE TRUST/ SOCIETY FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THEREFORE , WE THOUGHT IT FIT TO DISPOSE OFF ALL THE GROUNDS THROUGH A CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2.3 THE LD.AR APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE R EITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS AS WERE RAISED BY HIM BEFORE THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) AND ALSO RELIED ON THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION SUBMITTED BEFORE U S WHICH ARE REPRODUCED BELOW. ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 4 BRIEF FACTS: THE APPELLANT (HEREINAFTER ALSO REFE RRED TO AS SAMITI/SOCIETY) IS A CHARITABLE SOCIETY, ESTABLISHED LONG BACK AND ENGAGED IN PROMOTING NATIONALITY, EDUCATION, PERSONALITY DEVELOPMENT OF THE STUDENTS WITHOUT ANY DISCRIMINATION OF CASTE, CREED AND SEX. KINDLY REFER AMENDED OBJECTS (PB 6). THE FACTS AS NOTED BY THE LD. CIT (E) THE APPELLANT FILED AN ONLINE APPLICATION ON 12- 01-2019 IN FORM NO. 10A FOR SEEKING REGISTRA TION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE APPELLANT WAS ISSUED A LETTER/NOTICE NO. ITBA/EXM/F/41/2019- 20/1015639105(1) DATED 01.04.2019 REQUESTING TO SUB MIT CERTAIN DOCUMENTS/ EXPLANATIONS AND ALSO TO PRODUCE ORIGINAL RC/MOA FO R VERIFICATION. IN COMPLIANCE THERETO, SHRI G.P. SINGHAL, CA/AR ATTENDED AND FURN ISHED DETAILS ON VARIOUS DATES. THE APPELLANT SOCIETY THROUGH ITS A/R WAS REQUESTED VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 27/05/2019 AND LETTER/ NOTICE DATED 01/02-07-2019 T O PRODUCE CERTIFIED COPY OF MOA BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY (I.E. THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES) FOR VERIFICATION. HE ALLEGED AND FURTHER OBSERVED THAT: THE APPELLANT THROUGH ITS A/R I.E. SHRI G.P. SINGH AL FURNISHED ONLY A COPY OF MOA NOTARIZED BY NOTARY OFFICER, BHILWARA. IT IS PE RTINENT TO MENTION THAT RULE 17A OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES PRESCRIBE CERTAIN CONDITION S WHICH COMPRISES FURNISHING OF ORIGINAL DEED/ CERTIFIED COPY OF DEED FOR VERIFICAT ION. 04. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE SECTION OF THE ACT A ND RULES, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX HAS BEEN EMPOWERED TO CALL FOR SUCH DO CUMENTS OR INFORMATION FROM THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTI ON AND MAY ALSO MAKE SUCH INQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN THIS BEHALF. UNDER SUCH POWERS VESTED IN CIT (E), THE APPELLANT WAS ASKED TO FILE DETAILS VIDE LETTER DAT ED 01/02-07-2019 AS MENTIONED ABOVE. 05. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THE APPELLANT DID NOT SUBMI T ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRUST/SOCIETY AS WEL L AS EVIDENCES IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM. UNDER 2 RULE 17A OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 T HE APPELLANT IS REQUIRED, TO PRODUCE ORIGINAL/ CERTIFIED INSTRUMENT REGARDING ES TABLISHING OF THE TRUST/SOCIETY FOR VERIFICATION BUT THE SAME HAS NOT BE DONE BY THE AP PELLANT. 06. SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE APPELLANT TO PRODUCE DETAILS AND DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CLAIM FOR R EGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BUT APPELLANT HAVE FAILED TO D O SO. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE FACTS, THE APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S 12A A IS HEREBY REJECTED AND FILED. THUS, THE CRUX OF THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(E) IS THAT AS PER RULE 17 A R/W S.12AA(1)(B) OF THE ACT CERTIFIED COPY OF INSTRUMEN T ESTABLISHING THE TRUST FILED NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED WITH ORIGINAL. THE CIT IS EMPOWERED TO CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENT/ INFORMATION TO SATISFY HIMSELF OF THE GENUINENESS O F THE ACTIVITIES OR TO MAKE NECESSARY ENQUIRES. U/R 17A APPELLANT IS REQUIRED T O PRODUCE ORIGINAL/ CERTIFIED INSTRUMENT ESTABLISHING THE INSTITUTION FOR VERIFIC ATION AND ALLEGING FAILURE TO COMPLY THIS PART, HE DENIED THE REGISTRATION. HENCE THIS A PPEAL. ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 5 1. MISREADING OF THE PROVISIONS/ RULES: - NO VALID BASIS: AT THE OUTSET, IT IS EVIDENTLY CLEAR THAT THE LD. C IT (E) HAS REFERRED TO THE PREAMENDED RULES 17A WHICH STOOD PRIOR TO THE NEWLY SUBSTITUTED RULE 17A BY THE INCOME TAX (FIRST AMENDMENT) RULES, 2018 MADE EFFEC TIVE FROM 19.02.2018. THE PREAMENDED RULE READ AS UNDER RULE 17A SUBSTITUTED BY THE INCOME-TAX (FIRST AMEND MENT) RULES, 2018, W.E.F. 19-2- 2018. PRIOR TO ITS SUBSTITUTION, SAID RULE, AS INSERTED BY THE INCOME-TAX (SECOND AMENDMENT) RULES, 1973, W.E.F. 1-4-1973 AND AS AMENDED BY THE INCOME- TAX (FIFTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 1989, W.E.F. 1-4-1988 AND THE INCOME-TAX (SEVENTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 2007, W.E.F. 1-6-2007, READ AS UN DER: '17A. APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUSTS, ETC. AN APPLICATION UNDER CLAUSE (AA) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 12A FOR REGISTRATION OF A CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST OR INSTITUTION SHALL BE MADE IN DUPLICATE IN FORM NO.10A AND SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS , NAMELY: (A) WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, THE INSTRUMENT IN ORIGINAL, TOGETHER WI TH ONE COPY THEREOF; AND WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLI SHED, OTHERWISE THAN UNDER IN INSTRUMENT, THE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INSTITUTION, TOGETHER WITH ONE COPY THEREOF: PROVIDED THAT IF THE INSTRUMENT OR DOCUMENT IN ORIG INAL CANNOT CONVENIENTLY BE PRODUCED, IT SHALL BE OPEN TO THE COMMISSIONER T O ACCEPT A CERTIFIED COPY IN LIEU OF THE ORIGINAL. (B) XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.' HOWEVER, THE AMENDED RULES, WHICH ARE RELEVANT FOR THE PRESENT PURPOSE, READS AS UNDER: [APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF CHARITABLE OR REL IGIOUS TRUSTS, ETC. 17A (1). AN APPLICATION UNDER CLAUSE (AA) OR CLAUS E (AB) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 12A FOR REGISTRATION OF A CHARITABLE OR REL IGIOUS TRUST OR INSTITUTION SHALL BE MADE IN FORM NO. 10A AND ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWI NG DOCUMENTS, NAMELY: (A) WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INSTRUMENT C REATING THE TRUST OR ESTABLISHING THE INSTITUTION; (B) WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, OTHERWISE THAN UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF TH E DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST, OR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INST ITUTION; (C) SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF REGISTRATION WITH REGIST RAR OF COMPANIES OR REGISTRAR OF FIRMS AND SOCIETIES OR REGISTRAR OF PUBLIC TRUST S, AS THE CASE MAY BE; ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 6 (D) SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS EVIDENCIN G ADOPTION OR MODIFICATION OF THE OBJECTS, IF ANY; X X X X IN THE PRESENT CASE, SINCE THE APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION WAS FILED ON 12.01.2019, THE AMENDED RULE 17A WAS APPLICABLE. A BARE PERUSAL OF THE AMENDED RULE NOWHERE REQUIRES THE APPELLANT TO FURNISH AN O RIGINAL COPY. ON THE CONTRARY, SELF-ATTESTED/ SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF EACH AND EVER Y DOCUMENT/ INSTRUMENT WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION. THEREFORE, INS ISTENCE OF THE LD. CIT IS BEYOND UNDERSTANDING, CONTRARY TO THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF RULES AND LAW, HENCE, WITHOUT JURISDICTION. THE IMPUGNED ORDER DESERVES TO THE DI SMISSED AT THIS STAGE ITSELF. 2. THE FACTS ARE NOT DENIED THAT A COPY OF THE AMEN DED MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION/ DEED (PB 6-10) DULY ATTESTED BY THE NO TARY PUBLIC WAS ALREADY FILED AND IS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AS ADMITTED BY THE LD. CIT ( E) ALSO IN PARA 2 PG 1OF IMPUGNED ORDER. PLEASE SEE PR. 5 OF LETTER 2.05.2019 (PB 14) . MOREOVER, THE ORIGINAL AMENDED DEED WAS ALSO PRODUCED/ VIDE PR. 6 OF LETTER DT. 25 .05.2019 (PB 19-20). 3. ALL OTHER CONDITIONS FULFILLED: PERTINENTLY, TH E LD. CIT(E) RAISED VOLUMINOUS QUERIES VIDE LETTER DATED 01.04.19 (PB 11-13) RAISI NG AS MANY AS 26 QUERIES/ ISSUES AND ALL OF THEM WERE DULY REPLIED TIME TO TIME, FIL ING EXPLANATION AND THE REQUIRED DETAILS WERE SUBMITTED BY VIDE VARIOUS LETTERS DATE D 25.05.19 (PB 19-20), DATED 10.06.19 (PB 21), DATED 11.07.19 (PB 22). THEREAPAR T, THE APPELLANT ALSO SUBMITTED A STATEMENT OF ACTIVITY DURING FY 2018-19) IN ACCORDA NCE WITH THE OBJECT WHICH ARE UNDOUBTEDLY CHARITABLE IN NATURE, THE AUDITED FINAN CIAL STATEMENTS OF ACCOUNTS SIGNED BY INDEPENDENT STATUTORY AUDITOR ALREADY SUB MITTED VIDE REPLY DATED 02.05.2019 AS ADMITTED BY THE LD. CIT (E) ALSO IN T HE IMPUGNED ORDER BY OBSERVING THAT, IN COMPLIANCE THERETO, SHRI GP SINGHAL, CA (A R) ATTENDED AND FURNISHED DETAILS. THE OBJECTS ARE UNDISPUTED CHARITABLE AS PER S. 2(1 5). T THE LD. CIT(E) COULD NOT RAISE ANY OTHER ADVERSE IS SUE AND FELT SATISFIED ON ALL OTHER ASPECTS I.E. THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIE S AND OBJECTS OF THE INSTITUTION BEING IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW BUT THE ONLY BASIS OF THE REJECTION REMAINED NON-FILING OF THE INITIAL DOCUMENT ESTABLISHING THE INSTITUTIO N, IN ORIGINAL, WHICH WAS A MISCONCEPTION ON HIS PART AS SUBMITTED ABOVE. 4. CERTIFIED COPY OF ORIGINAL NOW AVAILABLE - EXIS TENCE OF SAMITI PROVED: FURTHER, THE APPELLANT HAVING BEEN CREATED LONG BAC K IN THE YEAR 1985 WITH REGISTRATION NO. 230/85-86, THE APPELLANT EXPRESSED ITS INABILITY TO THE LD. CIT VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 25.05.19 (PB 19-20). AT THE SAME TIME THE APPELLANT ALSO MADE A REQUEST TO REGISTRAR SOCIETY BHILWARA UNDER RIGHT T O INFORMATION ACT, 2005 VIDE LETTER DATED 15.07.19 (PB 23-25), IN RESPONSE, THE REGISTRAR VIDE THEIR LETTER NO. 1484 DATED 13.08.19 (PB 26) SUPPLIED THE CERTIFICATE COP Y OF THE ORIGINAL CONSTITUTION DEED, REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE AND OF VARIOUS OTHER PAPERS PLACED (PB 31-38). ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 7 FIRSTLY, THUS WHEN THE CERTIFIED COPIES OF ORIGINAL PAPERS ITSELF HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE BY THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETY BHILWARA, THE RE CANT BE ANY DOUBT OR DISPUTE ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF THE APPELLANT SAMITI. SECOND LY, EVEN OTHERWISE THE APPELLANT HAD ALREADY SUBMITTED A SELF- ATTESTED/ SELF- CERTI FIED PHOTOCOPY OF THE AMENDED TRUST DEED/ CONSTITUTION (PB 6-10) AND ALSO PRODUCE D THE SAME IN ORIGINAL VIDE PR. 6 OF LETTER DATED 25.05.19 (PB 19-20). THERE APART, T HE APPELLANT ALSO SUBMITTED A STATEMENT OF ACTIVITY DURING FY 2018-19, THE AUDITE D FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ACCOUNTS SIGNED BY INDEPENDENT STATUTORY AUDITOR AN D THE PAN NUMBER BEING AACAS1839C VIDE REPLY DATED 02.05.2019 (PB 14-17). ALL THESE EVIDENCES FULLY PROVED THE EXISTENCE OF THE APPELLANT SAMITI. HENCE, THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IS COVERED BY THE AMENDED RULE 17 A WHICH REQUIRES ONLY SELF-CERTIFIED/ SELF-ATTESTED COPIES AND ALSO FULLY COVERED BY THE PRE- AMENDED RULE 17A(1)(B). YET, HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT ( E) ASSUMED THE PURPORTED MIS- CONCEPTION AND MIS-READING. 5. EVEN OTHERWISE NON PRODUCTION OF THE ORIGINALS OF THE INITIAL TRUST DEED, WAS A MERE TECHNICAL BREACH OF RULES AND BEING MERE PROCEDURAL, REGISTRATION CANNOT BE DENIED WHEN ADMITTEDLY SUBSTANTIVE COMPLIANCE HA S ALREADY BEEN MADE, MORE PARTICULARLY, WHEN THERE IS NO ADVERSE FINDING RECO RDED BY THE LD. CIT (E) ON THE OTHER MERITS OF THE CASE. 6. SUPPORTING CASE LAWS: THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS D IRECTLY SUPPORT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE: 6.1 CIT (E ) VS. M/S ARIHANTH CHARITABLE TRUST, PAL I DBIT A NO. 279/ 2017 VIDE ORDER DATED 14.11.2017 (DPB 1-3), BY THE HONBLE RA JASTHAN HIGH COURT FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT(E) VS. TSURPHU LABRANG IN ITA 484/2016 VIDE ORDER DATED 01.08.2016, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF ITAT HOLDING AS UNDER: 5. IT WAS SOUGHT TO BE URGED BEFORE THE ITAT BY TH E REVENUE THAT THERE IS A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT OF FILING DOCUMENTS FOR CREATION OF A TRUST ALONG WITH AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF EXEMPTION. I N THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ITAT REFERRED TO RULE 17A (A) OF THE INCOME TAX RUL ES, 1962 WHICH ITSELF ENVISAGES THE POSSIBILITY OF THE TRUST BEING CREATE D OTHERWISE THAN UNDER AN INSTRUMENT IN WHICH EVENT IT IS SUFFICIENT IF THE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE I NSTITUTION, TOGETHER WITH ONE COPY THEREOF IS PROVIDED. THE PROVISO TO RULE 17A(A) PERMITS THE COMMISSIONER TO ACCEPT EVEN A CERTIFIED COPY IN LIE U OF THE ORIGINAL IF THE 5 INSTRUMENT OR DOCUMENT IN ORIGINAL CANNOT CONVENIEN TLY BE PRODUCED. IT WAS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE ITAT THAT IT IS THEREFOR E NOT ESSENTIAL THAT THERE MUST BE AN INSTRUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF A TRUST. 6. THE FACT OF THE MATTER WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE CL AIMED THAT IT IS AN INSTITUTION/TRUST CREATED IN THE YEAR 1159AD AND NO FORMAL DEED OF TRUST WAS EXECUTED AT THAT TIME. THE 17TH KARMAPA, WHO IS THE SUPREME SPIRITUAL HEAD OF KARMA KAGYU LINEAGE, MADE A DECLARATION OF TRUST ON STAMP PAPER ON ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 8 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011 AT DELHI SETTING OUT THE EN TIRE HISTORY OF THE TRUST ALONG WITH AIMS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES. VARIOUS PROV ISIONS WITH REGARD TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE TRUST AND ITS PROPERTIES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF ACCOUNTS ETC. WERE ALSO SET OUT. IT WAS STATED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE WHOLLY CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. THE ITAT HAS IN ITS IMPUGNED ORDER SET OUT IN SOME DETAIL THE CONTENTS OF THE SA ID AFFIDAVIT REGARDING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST IN CENTRAL TIBET IN 1159 AD A ND ITS OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES OVER THE YEARS. THE COURT CONCURS WITH T HE ITAT THAT A FORMAL DEED OF TRUST WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE GRANT OF REGISTR ATION UNDER SECTION 12A/12AA OF THE ACT. 7. ON THE QUESTION WHETHER THE OBJECTS AND PURPOSE S OF THE TRUST WERE CHARITABLE THEREBY QUALIFYING FOR REGISTRATION , THE ITAT HAS SET OUT IN ITS IMPUGNED ORDER IN DETAIL, THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AS DECLARED IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 17TH KARMAPA. IT CONCLUDED FROM READIN G OF THE VARIOUS AIMS AND OBJECTS THAT THEY WERE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. IT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE ITAT THAT IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT PRESENT A IMS AND OBJECTS OF THE TRUST SHOULD BE THE SAME AT THE TIME OF ITS ESTABLISHMENT . AS FURTHER RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, THE STAGE FOR EXAMINING IF THE INCOME OF THE TRUST WAS BEING APPLIED FOR ITS OBJECTS WOULD ARISE ONLY WHEN A RET URN OF INCOME IS FILED BY THE TRUST. THE SAID ISSUE WOULD NOT AFFECT THE GRAN T OF REGISTRATION. 8. THE ITAT ALSO EXAMINED WHETHER THE FACT THAT THE TRUST WAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY WOULD DEBAR I T FROM EXEMPTION AND REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA/12A OF THE ACT. THE SAID QUESTION WAS, AND IN THE VIEW OF THIS COURT RIGHTLY, ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE. IN PARTICULAR, THE COURT CONCURS WITH THE CONCLUSION OF THE ITAT THAT IT IS NOW WELL-SETTLED THAT AN OBJECTS BENEFICIAL TO A SECTION OF THE PUBL IC IS AN OBJECTS OF GENERAL UTILITY. THE INTENTION OF THE INSTITUTION/TRUST SHO ULD BE IMPERSONAL IN NATURE AND FOR A SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED AND IDENTIFIABLE SEC TION OF THE PUBLIC. 6.2 B.S. PUBLIC EDUCATION SOCIETY VS. CIT (2014) 1 9 NYPTTJ 3708 (DEL) (DPB 5- 10) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD: THE INCOME AND EXPENDITUR E ACCOUNT AND THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11 WERE ALSO FURNI SHED. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND AL SO THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ENTERTAINED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LE ARNED COMMISSIONER DENIED REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT AS PER R.17A(A) OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962 THE ASSESSEE WAS TO SUBMIT THE ORIGINAL INSTRUMENT OF ITS ESTABLISHMENT TOGETHER WITH THE COPY THEREOF AND SINCE THE ASSESS EE HAS SUBMITTED ONLY THE PHOTO COPY/ CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INSTRUMENT THEREFORE TH E APPLICATION WAS NOT COMPLETE AND THUS THE APPLICATION ITSELF IS NOT WORTH CONSID ERATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER S. 12AA OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIO NER HAS GONE INTO TOO MUCH TECHNICALITIES MORE SPECIFICALLY WHEN CERTIFIED COP Y OF THE ORIGINAL INSTRUMENT WAS DULY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IF THIS WAS THE SOLE CR ITERIA THEN NOTHING PREVENTED THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER TO DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE ORIGINAL INSTRUMENT. THE SECOND GROUND ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS DENIED REGI STRATION, WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT DOING CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. ON PERUSAL OF REC ORD AND AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 9 SUBMISSIONS WE ARE 6 SATISFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING A SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL, DULY REGISTERED WITH CBSE AND BOARD OF SCHO OL EDUCATION, HARYANA. WE HAVE SPECIFICALLY PERUSED THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY, WH EREIN THE PREDOMINANT OBJECT IS IMPARTING EDUCATION. THEREFORE, WE ARE NOT SATISFIE D WITH THE OBSERVATION OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS N OT DOING ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. 6.3 PR CIT (E) VS. DAWOODI BOHRA MASJID (2018 402 ITR 29/ 301 CTR 268 (GUJ) (DPB 11-14) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT FROM THE MATE RIALS ON RECORD, IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD GONE THROUGH THE REGISTRATION DETAILS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST CONTAINED IN THE ORDER OF WAKF BOARD AND WAS SATISF IED THAT FULL DETAILS OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE TRUST WERE AVAILABLE WHICH WOULD E STABLISH THE EXISTENCE OF THE TRUST, ITS REGISTRATION BY THE GUJARAT STATE WAKF B OARD WHICH ALSO CONTAINED DETAILS OF OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, MANNER OF APPOINTMENT OF MUTA WALLI, ETC. CLAUSE (A) OF R. 17A REQUIRES THAT THE APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION UNDER S. 12A OF A CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST OR INSTITUTION WOULD BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE FO LLOWING DOCUMENTS NAMELY, WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED OR THE INSTITUTION IS ES TABLISHED, UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, THE INSTRUMENT IN ORIGINAL AND WHERE THE TRUST IS CREAT ED OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, OTHERWISE THAN UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, THE DOCUMENT EV IDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INSTITUTION. THUS , R. 17A NOWHERE ENVISAGES THE EXISTENCE OF A TRUST DEED OR ITS REGISTRATION. THE FACTUM OF EXISTENCE OF TRUST CAN ALSO BE ESTABLISHED BY PRODUCING DOCUMENTS EVIDENCING TH E CREATION OF THE TRUST. THIS IS PRECISELY WHAT HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PRESENT CASE. T HE ORDER PASSED BY WAKF BOARD DT. 20TH NOV., 1999 RECOGNISES VARIOUS DAUDI VORA T RUSTS AND IN CASE OF PRESENT ASSESSEE ALSO ENLISTED THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, WH O WOULD BE THE MANAGERS OF THE TRUST AND HOW SUCH MANAGERS WOULD BE APPOINTED OR R EMOVED. TRIBUNAL WAS THEREFORE JUSTIFIED IN DIRECTING REGISTRATION OF TR UST UNDER S. 12A.LAXMINARAYAN MAHARAJ & ANR. VS. CIT (1983) 37 CTR (MP) 240 : (19 84) 150 ITR 465 (MP) RELIED ON. (PARAS 6 & 7) 6.4 CIT (E) VS. SHRI MAHAVIR JAIN SOCIETY (REGD.) ( 2018 402 ITR 301/ 302 CTR 497) (PH) (DPB 15-21) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE CIT REFUSED TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY, INTER ALIA, ON THE GROUND OF NON-PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE SOCI ETY, ABSENCE OF AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NON-EXPLANATION REGARDING REGISTRATI ON OF THE SOCIETY TWICE WITH THE REGISTRAR OF FIRMS AND SOCIETIES. IT HAS BEEN CATEG ORICALLY RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT ONE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AS MENTIONED IN ITS BYE-LAWS WAS TO PROVIDE FREE MEDICAL AID BY OPENING HOSPITALS, DIAGNOSTIC C ENTERS, MATERNITY HOME AND BY ORGANIZING SPECIAL MEDICAL CAMPS. THESE ACTIVITIES HAD ALSO BEEN DEMONSTRATED IN THE PREVIOUS THREE YEARS BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BAL ANCE SHEET, INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT, RECEIPT AND PAYMENT ACCOUNT WH ICH WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE CIT. FURTHER, THE CIT HAD NOT COMMENTED ADVERSELY O N THE DOCUMENTS PLACED BEFORE IT. WITH REGARD TO THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, IT HAS BEEN RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL TH AT THE SAME WERE NOT RELEVANT FOR ESTABLISHING THE FACT WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST WERE GENUINE OR NOT. EVEN THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT DO NOT REQUIRE AUDITED FI NANCIAL STATEMENTS TO BE FURNISHED WHILE SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER S. 12AA. AS REGARD S THE PLEA THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OFFERED NO EXPLANATION ABOUT THE REGISTRATION OF TH E SOCIETY TWICE, IT WAS RECORDED ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 10 BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT REGISTRATION OF A SOCIETY WAS NOT A PRECONDITION FOR GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER S. 12AA. THUS, IT WAS RIGHTLY CO NCLUDED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE CIT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY BY INSISTING ON THE CONDITIONS NOT CONTEMPLATED BY THE STATUTE. COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SHOW THAT THE VIEW TAK EN BY THE TRIBUNAL IS ERRONEOUS. HE HAS ALSO NOT BEEN ABLE TO PRODUCE ANY MATERIAL O N RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE APPROACH ADOPTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS LEGALLY UNSUSTA INABLE. THUS, NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES. (PARAS 6 & 7) 7 7. THE DENIAL TO APPROVAL U/S 80 G BY THE CIT (E ) IS CONSEQUENTIAL TO HIS DENIAL TO REGISTRATION U/S 12 AA. OUR SUBMISSIONS T HEREIN ARE RELIED UPON. THUS, THERE REMAINING NO VALID GROUND BEHIND DENYING THE REGISTRATION, THE LD. CIT (E) BE DIRECTED TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12 AA AS ALSO U/ S 80 G OF THE ACT. 2.4 ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORD ER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION). 2.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. COUNSEL FOR BOTH THE PART IES AND WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIALS PLACED ON RECORD, JUDGEMENTS CITED BY THE PARTIES AS WELL AS THE ORDER PASSED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITY. FROM THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, WE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILE D AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION U/ S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO FURNISHED THE COPY OF MOA NOTORIZ ED BY THE NOTARY OFFICER, BHILWARA. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) REJECTED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THA T AS PER RULE 17A READ WITH SECTION 12AA(1)(B) OF THE ACT , THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INSTRUMENT ESTABLISHING THE TRUST NEEDS TO BE VERIFIED WITH OR IGINALS. THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) ALSO HELD THAT HE IS EMPOWERED TO CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS/ ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 11 INFORMATION FROM THE TRUST TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABO UT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR TO MAKE NECESSARY E NQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM FIT IN THIS BEHALF. THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTION) FURTHER OBSERVED THE SINCE UNDER RULE 17A OF INCOME TAX RULES, 1962, THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY/TRUST IS REQUIRED TO PRODUCE ORIGINAL/ CERTIFIED INSTRUMENT REGARDING ESTABLISHING THE TRUST/SOCIETY FOR VERIFICATION BUT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY/ TRUST HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE SAID MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS UND ER RULE 17A OF INCOME TAX RULES. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY W AS NOT ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2.6 FOR METICULOUSLY GOING THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF PRE-AMENDED RULE 17A AS WELL AS AMENDED RULES 17A, IT IS PERTIN ENT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION BOTH THE RULES AS UNDER:- THE PREAMENDED RULE 17A SUBSTITUTED BY THE INCOME- TAX (FIRST AMENDMENT) RULES, 2018, W.E.F. 19-2- 2018. PRIOR TO ITS SUBSTITUTION, SAID RULE, AS INSERTED BY THE INCOME-TAX (SECOND AMENDMENT) RULES , 1973, W.E.F. 1-4-1973 AND AS AMENDED BY THE INCOME-TAX (FIFTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 1989, W.E.F. 1-4-1988 AND THE INCOME-TAX (SEVENTH AMENDMENT) RULES, 2007, W.E.F. 1-6-2007, READ AS UNDER: '17A. APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUSTS, ETC. AN APPLICATION UNDER CLAUSE (AA) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 12A FOR REGISTRATION OF A CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST OR INSTITUTION SHALL BE MADE IN DUPLICATE IN FORM NO.10A AND SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS , NAMELY: (A) WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, THE INSTRUMENT IN ORIGINAL, TOGETHER WI TH ONE COPY THEREOF; AND WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLI SHED, OTHERWISE THAN UNDER IN INSTRUMENT, THE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INSTITUTION, TOGETHER WITH ONE COPY THEREOF: ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 12 PROVIDED THAT IF THE INSTRUMENT OR DOCUMENT IN ORIG INAL CANNOT CONVENIENTLY BE PRODUCED, IT SHALL BE OPEN TO THE COMMISSIONER T O ACCEPT A CERTIFIED COPY IN LIEU OF THE ORIGINAL. (B) XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.' HOWEVER, THE AMENDED RULES, WHICH ARE RELEVANT FOR THE PRESENT PURPOSE, READS AS UNDER: [APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF CHARITABLE OR REL IGIOUS TRUSTS, ETC. 17A (1). AN APPLICATION UNDER CLAUSE (AA) OR CLAUS E (AB) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 12A FOR REGISTRATION OF A CHARITABLE OR REL IGIOUS TRUST OR INSTITUTION SHALL BE MADE IN FORM NO. 10A AND ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWI NG DOCUMENTS, NAMELY: (A) WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF THE INSTRUMENT C REATING THE TRUST OR ESTABLISHING THE INSTITUTION; (B) WHERE THE TRUST IS CREATED, OR THE INSTITUTION IS ESTABLISHED, OTHERWISE THAN UNDER AN INSTRUMENT, SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF TH E DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST, OR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INST ITUTION; (C) SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF REGISTRATION WITH REGIST RAR OF COMPANIES OR REGISTRAR OF FIRMS AND SOCIETIES OR REGISTRAR OF PUBLIC TRUST S, AS THE CASE MAY BE; (D) SELF-CERTIFIED COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS EVIDENCIN G ADOPTION OR MODIFICATION OF THE OBJECTS, IF ANY; X X X X 2.7 WE HAVE ANALYZED THE PREAMENDED RULES AS WELL AS AMENDED RULES 17A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES WHICH CAME INTO EFFECT FROM 19-02-2018. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE APPLICATION FOR SEEKING RE GISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY/ TRUST ON 12-01-2019. THEREFORE, IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, THE AMENDED RULE 17A WAS APP LICABLE AND ON BARE PERUSAL OF THE AMENDED RULE IT IS NOWHERE REQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS. ON THE CONTRARY SE LF-ATTESTED AS WELL AS SELF CERTIFIED COPY OF EACH AND EVERY DOCUMENTS/INS TRUMENTS WERE ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 13 SUFFICIENT FOR SEEKING REGISTRATION. THEREFORE, UND ER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE INSISTENCE BY THE LD. CIT(EXEMPTION) FOR ASKIN G ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS OF THE INSTRUMENTS IS BEYOND UNDERSTANDING AND CONT RARY TO THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF LAW AND RULES. 2.8 IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE COPY OF THE A MENDED MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION (MOA) DEED DULY ATTESTED BY NOTARY P UBLIC WAS ALREADY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY/ TRUST BEFORE THE LD. CIT (EXEMPTIONS) AND COPY OF THE SAID NOTORIZED DOCUMENTS HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED BEFORE US IN THE PAPER BOOK . THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PLACED ON RE CORD A LETTER DATED 25- 05-2019 WHEREIN THE ORIGINAL AMENDED DEED WAS ALSO PRODUCED. THE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER IS ALSO FILED AT PAGES 19 TO 20 OF THE PAPER BOOK. WE ALSO RELY ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE RAJASTHN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT(E) VS ARIHANT CHARITABLE TRUST, PALI , DBIT APP EAL NO.279/2017 ORDER DATED 14-11-2017 WHEREIN THE HON'BLE RAJASTHA N HIGH COURT FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT HELD AS UNDER:- 5. IT WAS SOUGHT TO BE URGED BEFORE THE ITAT BY TH E REVENUE THAT THERE IS A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT OF FILING DOCUMENTS FOR CREATION OF A TRUST ALONG WITH AN APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF EXEMPTION. I N THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ITAT REFERRED TO RULE 17A (A) OF THE INCOME TAX RUL ES, 1962 WHICH ITSELF ENVISAGES THE POSSIBILITY OF THE TRUST BEING CREATE D OTHERWISE THAN UNDER AN INSTRUMENT IN WHICH EVENT IT IS SUFFICIENT IF THE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE I NSTITUTION, TOGETHER WITH ONE COPY THEREOF IS PROVIDED. THE PROVISO TO RULE 17A(A) PERMITS THE ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 14 COMMISSIONER TO ACCEPT EVEN A CERTIFIED COPY IN LIE U OF THE ORIGINAL IF THE 5 INSTRUMENT OR DOCUMENT IN ORIGINAL CANNOT CONVENIEN TLY BE PRODUCED. IT WAS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE ITAT THAT IT IS THEREFOR E NOT ESSENTIAL THAT THERE MUST BE AN INSTRUMENT EVIDENCING THE CREATION OF A TRUST. 6. THE FACT OF THE MATTER WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE CL AIMED THAT IT IS AN INSTITUTION/TRUST CREATED IN THE YEAR 1159AD AND NO FORMAL DEED OF TRUST WAS EXECUTED AT THAT TIME. THE 17TH KARMAPA, WHO IS THE SUPREME SPIRITUAL HEAD OF KARMA KAGYU LINEAGE, MADE A DECLARATION OF TRUST ON STAMP PAPER ON 29TH DAY OF MARCH, 2011 AT DELHI SETTING OUT THE EN TIRE HISTORY OF THE TRUST ALONG WITH AIMS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES. VARIOUS PROV ISIONS WITH REGARD TO THE MANAGEMENT OF THE TRUST AND ITS PROPERTIES AND THE MAINTENANCE OF ACCOUNTS ETC. WERE ALSO SET OUT. IT WAS STATED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE WHOLLY CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. THE ITAT HAS IN ITS IMPUGNED ORDER SET OUT IN SOME DETAIL THE CONTENTS OF THE SA ID AFFIDAVIT REGARDING THE CREATION OF THE TRUST IN CENTRAL TIBET IN 1159 AD A ND ITS OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES OVER THE YEARS. THE COURT CONCURS WITH T HE ITAT THAT A FORMAL DEED OF TRUST WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE GRANT OF REGISTR ATION UNDER SECTION 12A/12AA OF THE ACT. 7. ON THE QUESTION WHETHER THE OBJECTS AND PURPOSE S OF THE TRUST WERE CHARITABLE THEREBY QUALIFYING FOR REGISTRATION , THE ITAT HAS SET OUT IN ITS IMPUGNED ORDER IN DETAIL, THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AS DECLARED IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 17TH KARMAPA. IT CONCLUDED FROM READIN G OF THE VARIOUS AIMS AND OBJECTS THAT THEY WERE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. IT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE ITAT THAT IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT PRESENT A IMS AND OBJECTS OF THE TRUST SHOULD BE THE SAME AT THE TIME OF ITS ESTABLISHMENT . AS FURTHER RIGHTLY POINTED OUT, THE STAGE FOR EXAMINING IF THE INCOME OF THE TRUST WAS BEING APPLIED FOR ITS OBJECTS WOULD ARISE ONLY WHEN A RET URN OF INCOME IS FILED BY THE TRUST. THE SAID ISSUE WOULD NOT AFFECT THE GRAN T OF REGISTRATION. 8. THE ITAT ALSO EXAMINED WHETHER THE FACT THAT THE TRUST WAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY WOULD DEBAR I T FROM EXEMPTION AND REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA/12A OF THE ACT. THE SAID QUESTION WAS, AND IN THE VIEW OF THIS COURT RIGHTLY, ANSWERED IN THE NEGATIVE. IN PARTICULAR, THE COURT CONCURS WITH THE CONCLUSION OF THE ITAT THAT IT IS NOW WELL-SETTLED THAT AN OBJECTS BENEFICIAL TO A SECTION OF THE PUBL IC IS AN OBJECTS OF GENERAL UTILITY. THE INTENTION OF THE INSTITUTION/TRUST SHO ULD BE IMPERSONAL IN NATURE AND FOR A SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED AND IDENTIFIABLE SEC TION OF THE PUBLIC. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, WE ARE OF THE CON SIDERED VIEW THAT AS PER AMENDED RULE 17A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, WHICH ARE APPLICABLE IN ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 15 THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT REQU IRED TO FURNISH THE ORIGINAL COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS RATHER SELF ATTESTED OR SELF CERTIFIED COPY OF EACH AND EVERY DOCUMENTS/ INSTRUMENTS WAS SUFFICIEN T FOR THE PURPOSE OF VERIFICATION BY THE LD. CIT (E). THEREFORE, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THIS APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) F OR AFRESH EXAMINATION OF THE ISSUE IN QUESTION AND ACT ACCORDINGLY. THUS TH E APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 1062/JP/2019 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 3.1 AS REGARDS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 80G( 5)(VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AGAINST THE ORDER 31-07-2019 OF THE LD. CI T(E), THE BENCH FINDS THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AS TO GRANT OF APPR OVAL U/S 80G IS INTERCONNECTED WITH THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE RELA TING TO REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE IS ALSO RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(E) FOR AFRESH CONSIDERATIO N AND ACT ACCORDINGLY. THUS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 1063/JP/ 2019 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ITA NO.1062 & 1063/JP/2019 SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI VS CIT(EXEMPTIONS) ,JAIPUR 16 4.0. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSE E ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES WITH NO ORDER AS TO COST. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03 /0 9/2020. SD/- SD/- JESK LH-'KEKZ LANHI XKSLKBZ (RAMESH C. SHARMA) (SANDEEP GOSAI N) YS[KKLNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 03 /09/2020. *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT - SHRIMAD DAYANAND SHIKSHA SAMITI, BHILWARA 2. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT (E) 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR . 5. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 1062/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSTT. REGISTRAR