Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh, Pune V. Commissioner of Income-tax - 1,

ITA 1353/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 135324514 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ADARSH KUMAR MODI
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DOSHI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 [ORDER UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT] SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH, PLOT NO.44, S.NO.585, SALISBURY PARK, PUNE - 411037 . APPELLANT PAN: AAGTS2632G VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, PUNE . RESPONDENT ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 [ORDER UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT] SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER RAJASTHAN SAMAJ SANGH, BHOPALE CHOWK, 417, KEDARI ROAD, PUNE 411001 . APPELLANT PAN: AAATS4765J VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III, PUNE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.N. DOSHI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ADARSH KUMAR MODI DATE OF HEARING : 19-01-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31-03-2015 ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE DIFFERENT ASSESSEES A RE AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT-I, PUNE DATED 22.05.2014 AND CIT-III, PUNE D ATED 29.09.2014 PASSED UNDER SECTIONS 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX, 1961 REA D WITH RULE 17A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 AND 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 RE AD WITH RULE 17A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962. 2. BOTH THE APPEALS RELATING TO THE DIFFERENT ASSES SEES ON SIMILAR ISSUE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CO NSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 2 3. THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 HAS RAISED T HE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THE TRUST WERE MEANT FOR MEMBERS OF THE JAIN COMMUNITY AND TH US IT IS ESTABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY ATTRACT ING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) AND THEREFORE NO PURPOSE WILL BE SERVED BY GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S.12A. 2. THE ABOVE GROUND OF APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED TO BE AMENDED, ALTERED, MODIFIED ETC., IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 4. THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINS T THE DENIAL OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 5. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT, THE ASSESS EE SOCIETY WAS SET UP VIDE TRUST DEED DATED 18.03.2005. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS REGISTERED UNDER THE BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUSTS ACT, 1950 VIDE NOTIFICATION DA TED 17.11.2005 ISSUED BY THE DY. CHARITY COMMISSIONER, PUNE REGION, PUNE. THE ASSES SEE, VIDE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A O F THE ACT. THE CIT-I, PUNE REQUISITIONED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH CERTAIN DETAI LS, INFORMATION AND EVIDENCES. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY REGIST RATION SHOULD BE GRANTED WHERE THE OBJECTS ARE PREDOMINANTLY RELIGIOUS. IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT JAINISM WAS A PHILOSOPHY AND THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC REGA RDLESS OF CASTE OR RELIGION WHO BELIEVE IN THE SAID PHILOSOPHY THEY FORM A JAIN COM MUNITY. APART FROM HAVING THE JAIN TEMPLE, THE OBJECTS INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF CO NFERENCE HALLS, DHARMASHALAS, LIBRARY WHEREIN THE BOOKS / NOVELS RELATING TO ALL RELIGION WERE MADE AVAILABLE TO PUBLIC AT LARGE. THE TRUST WAS ALSO INVITING PEOPLE FOR D ISCOURSES ON THE SOCIAL, EDUCATIONAL AND UPLIFTMENT OF PUBLIC. FURTHER, THE OBJECTS ALS O INCLUDED INCULCATING THE IMPORTANCE OF MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING, COOPERATION AND HEALTHY DI ALOGUES AND ALSO SETTING UP A MACHINERY TO SORT OUT ALL SOCIAL DISPUTES. THE COM MISSIONER NOTED THAT THE TRUST DEED CONTAINS OBJECTS WHICH WERE RELIGIOUS AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. THE OBJECTS ARE ENLISTED UNDER PARA 3.1 AT PAGE 2 OF THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER. THE COMMISSIONER WAS OF THE VIEW THA T THE PRIME THRUST OF THE TRUST WAS TO PROVIDE FOR THE BENEFIT OF JAIN RELIGIOUS CO MMUNITY, WHICH WAS ALSO EVIDENT FROM THE PAGE 2 OF THE TRUST DEED, UNDER WHICH ONE OF THE MOTIVES OF THE TRUST WAS ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 3 THAT NEW GENERATION OF JAIN SHWETAMBAR MURTIPUJAK S AMAJ SHOULD GET RELIGIOUS ENCOURAGEMENT AND LEARN GOOD MANNERS FOR CAMPAIGN A ND SPREAD OF RELIGIOUS WORKS. THE COMMISSIONER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE OBJECTS O F THE ASSESSEES TRUST WERE NOT CHARITABLE IN THE STRICT SENSE OF THE TERM AND, INS TEAD, WERE PREDOMINANTLY RELIGIOUS AND WERE MEANT FOR SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY I.E . THE COMMUNITY OF JAINS. FURTHER, THE COMMISSIONER TOOK NOTE OF THE RELIANCE PLACED U PON BY THE ASSESSEE ON VARIOUS DECISIONS AND THE COMMISSIONER DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH ANY OF THE SAID DECISIONS. BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED EVI DENCE OF HAVING ORGANIZED BLOOD DONATION CAMPAIGNS, MEDICAL CHECK-UP CAMPAIGN S, CAMPAIGNS FOR SWINE FLUE DOSE, OTHER SOCIAL & RELIGIOUS GET-TOGETHERS. THE COMMISSIONER OBSERVED THAT THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT THE ACTIVITIES WERE CONDUCTED BY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AT DHARMSHALA. ON THE PERUSAL OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR FINANCIAL YEARS 2009-10 TO 2011-12 REFL ECTS INCOME ONLY FROM BHAVAN BOOKING CHARGES AND FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2012-13 DONA TIONS AND BHAVAN BOOKING CHARGES. FURTHER, THE EXPENDITURE FOR THE SAID YEA RS BOOKED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE ON ACCOUNT OF ESTABLISHMENT I.E. ELECTRICITY, SECURITY , MAINTENANCE AND SALARY. THE COMMISSIONER IN VIEW THEREOF, OBSERVED THAT EVEN TH OUGH THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD VARIOUS OBJECTS, BUT IN THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTS, ONLY THE ACTIVITY OF LETTING BHAVAN TO OTHER ORGANIZATIONS WAS REFLECTED . THE USE OF BHAVAN / DHARMASHALA TO EARN INCOME, AS PER COMMISSIONER, WA S NOT AUTHORIZED AS PER THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES THEREFORE, WERE NOT AS PER T HE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. THE COMMISSIONER CONSIDERED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1 2A OF THE ACT AND OBSERVED THAT BEFORE GRANT OF REGISTRATION, HE HAD TO BE SATISFIE D ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AS WELL AS ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRUST ACTIVITI ES. THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT CONFERRED RECOGNITION OF ENTITLEMENT OF BENEFITS UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. THE COMMISSIONER WAS OF THE VIEW TH AT WHEN THE BENEFITS ENVISAGED IN SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT COULD NOT BE AVAILED BY THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION, IN VIEW OF APPLICATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)( B) OF THE ACT, NO PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A O F THE ACT TO SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE REQUEST FOR GRAN T OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT WAS REJECTED. ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 4 6. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID REJEC TION OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 7. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE AS SESSEE POINTED OUT THAT WHERE THE OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE AND WHERE NO BENEF IT WAS EXTENDED TO ANY PARTICULAR RELIGION OR CASTE, THE COMMISSIONER HAS TO GRANT RE GISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT TO SUCH TRUST. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE RATI OS LAID DOWN IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:- 1) CIT VS. DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT, (2014) 364 ITR 31 ( SC) 2) JITO-PUNE CHAPTER VS. CIT-I, PUNE, ITA NO.2167/P UNE/2013, DT. 17.11.2014 3) AHMEDABAD RANA CASTE ASSOCIATION VS. CIT (1971) 82 ITR 704 (SC) 4) CIT VS. AHMEDABAD RANA CASTE ASSOCIATION (1983) 140 ITR 1 (SC) 8. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND POINTED OUT THAT IN VIEW OF THE VIOLATION OF PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO THE CLAIM OF REGISTRAT ION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS REGISTERED UNDER THE BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUSTS ACT, 1950 VIDE NOTIFICATION DATED 17.11.2005. THE ASSESSEE HAD APPLIED FOR REGISTRAT ION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, VIDE APPLICATION FILED IN FORM NO.10A. THE AIMS AN D OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST AS PER THE TRUST DEED WERE AS UNDER:- 1. TO BUILD SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER JAIN TEMPLE, PRAYE R HALL (DHARMSHALA), RENOVATE AND MAINTAIN THEM, ADMINISTER AND IN PURSU ANCE OF THAT TO DO ANYTHING NEEDED TO BE CARRIED ON. 2. TO SET THE RELIGIOUS LIBRARY, MAINTAIN IT, PROPA GATE INDIAN CULTURE AND INCULCATE AND STUDY ALL THE CULTURES OF ALL THE REL IGION. TO TAKE UP RESEARCH ON RELIGIOUS, SOCIAL & EDUCATIONAL IN ORDER TO UPLIFT THE PUBLIC AS A WHOLE. 3. TO ARRANGE NECESSARY MATTERS ENABLING TH E DISCIPLES TO CARRY ON PRAYERS AND WORSHIP. TO TAKE UP ALL THE ACTIVITI ES AS ARE CUSTOMARY OR TRADITIONAL AS PER THE PHILOSOPHY OF JAIN SHWETAMBE R MURTIPUJAK. 4. TO ARRANGE ALL THE CEREMONIES AS ARE ENVISAGED I N THE PHILOSOPHY OF SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK AND TO TAKE UP ALL THE ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS RELATING THERETO. 5. TO ARRANGE RESIDENCE AND DISCOURSES OF SADHUS SADHVIS OF JAIN SHEWATAMBER MURTIPUJAK AND TO TAKE UP AL L THE RELEVANT ACTIVITIES TO PROVIDE NECESSARY SERVICES TO THEM, ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 5 6. ALL THE FAMILIES WHO BELIEVE IN TRADITION AND PH ILOSOPHY OF SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK ARE TO BE ENCOURAGED FOR INTER-SE CO-OPE RATION, SECULARISM AND CREATE FRUITFUL BELIEF AND UNDERSTANDING AND TO TAK E UP THE ACTIVITIES FOR THEIR PROTECTION AND BENEFIT SIMILARLY TO SORT OUT ALL TH E DISPUTES RELATING TO RELIGION OR SOCIAL ISSUES. 7. TO CREATE, ENCOURAGE, PROPAGATE INTER-SE CO-OPER ATION, CO-LIVING AND FEEING OF CO-LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY OF ENTIRE PUBL IC AT LARGE. 10. THE COMMISSIONER WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICAT ION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRIME THRUST OF TRUST WAS TO PROVIDE FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS C OMMUNITY AND FURTHER, THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE I.E. HIRING OF DHARMSHAL A WAS NOT A CHARITABLE OBJECT. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT WAS ORGANIZING BLOOD DONAT ION CAMPAIGNS, MEDICAL CHECK-UP CAMPAIGNS, ETC. IN ITS DHARMSHALA. HOWEVER, THE CO MMISSIONER NOTED THAT THE SAID CAMPS WERE ORGANIZED BY OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AT DHAR MSHALA OF THE ASSESSEE, AGAINST WHICH RENT WAS PAID, WHICH WAS ACCOUNTED FO R BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT. 11. THE ISSUE ARISING BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE ASSE SSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT BEING A C HARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS TRUST AND ALSO WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT, REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT COULD BE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE PERUSAL OF AIMS AND OBJECTS REFLECT THAT THE FIRST OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS TO BUILD SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER JAIN TEMPLE, PRAYER HALL . FURTHER OBJECT OF THE TRUST WAS TO SET UP RELIGIOUS LIBRARY TO MAINTAIN IT AND PROP AGATE INDIAN CULTURE AND INCULCATE AND STUDY ALL THE CULTURES OF ALL THE RELIGION. AS PER CLAUSE NO.3, THE OBJECT WAS TO ARRANGE NECESSARY MATTERS ENABLING THE DISCIPLES TO CARRY O N PRAYERS AND WORSHIP AND ALSO TO TAKE UP ALL ACTIVITIES AS ARE CUSTOMARY OR TRADITIO NAL AS PER THE PHILOSOPHY OF JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK. THE OBJECTS ALSO PROVIDE TH AT THE ASSESSEE WOULD ARRANGE THE RESIDENCE AND DISCOURSES OF SADHUS, SADHVIS OF JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK AND ALSO TO TAKE UP RELEVANT ACTIVITIES TO PROVIDE NECE SSARY SERVICES TO THEM. FURTHER, ALL THE COMMUNITIES WHO BELIEVE IN THE TRADITION AND PH ILOSOPHY OF JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK WERE TO BE ENCOURAGED FOR INTER-SE COOPE RATION AND TO TAKE UP CERTAIN ACTIVITIES AND ALSO BENEFITS. AS PER CLAUSE 7, THE OBJECT WAS TO CREATE, ENCOURAGE, PROPAGATE, INTER-SE COOPERATION, CO-LIVING AND FEEL ING OF CO-LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY OF ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 6 ENTIRE PUBLIC AT LARGE. THE ISSUE WHICH HAS BEEN R AISED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN THIS CASE WHETHER WHERE PRIME THRUST OF THE TRUST WAS TO PROVIDE BENEFITS TO A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, CAN THE ASSESSEE BE ENTITLED T O THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION TO ITS TRUST OF CARRYING ON CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. THE OB JECTIONS OF THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER O F COMMISSIONER WERE THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE NOT FOR THE PROMOTION OF ANY RELIGION AND HENCE, IT COULD NOT BE DENIED THE BENEFIT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 12. WE FIND THAT THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST (2007) 294 ITR 86 (GUJ) WHICH HAS BEEN REFERR ED TO BY PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN JITO-PUNE CHAPTER VS. CIT (SUPRA), HAD CONSIDERED THE ISSUE OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, IT WAS O BSERVED BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT THAT WHERE THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE NOT ONLY TO PROPAGATE JAINISM OR HELP AND ASSIST MAINTENANCE OF TEMPLES, SADHUS, SADHVIS, SHRAVIKS AND SHRAVAKS, AND OTHER GOALS ARE ALSO SET OUT IN THE TRUST DEED, THE TRUST WAS A CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS TRUST AND SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT WOU LD NOT BE APPLICABLE. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 5. THE QUESTION, THAT WHAT SHOULD BE THE PRINCIPLE ADOPTED AND WHETHER JAINISM IS A LIFESTYLE OR A RELIGION, WOULD LOSE MU CH OF ITS IMPORTANCE IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT IN THE MATTER OF CIT VS. BARKATE SAIFIYAH SOCIETY (SUPRA). IF JAINISM IS ACCEPTED TO BE A RELIGION AN D FROM THE COVENANTS OF THE TRUST DEED IT CAN BE SPELT OUT THAT NOT ONLY TO PRO PAGATE JAINISM OR HELP AND ASSIST MAINTENANCE OF THE TEMPLE, SADHUS, SADHVIS, SHRAVIKS AND SHRAVAKS, YET OTHER GOALS ARE SET IN THE TRUST DEED, THEN THE TRUST WOULD BECOME A CHARITABLE TRUST, SO ALSO A RELIGIOUS TRUST OR IT C AN BE ADDRESSED AS A CHARITABLE RELIGIOUS TRUST, AND, IF THAT BE SO, S. 13(1)(B) WO ULD NOT BE APPLICABLE. ONCE THE BASIC QUESTION IS ANSWERED AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF THE REVENUE, THEN THE OTHER QUESTIONS CAN CONVENIENTLY BE DECIDED AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF THE REVENUE. THE REFERENCE STANDS DISP OSED OF ACCORDINGLY. NO COSTS. 13. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT VS. DAWOODI BO HRA JAMAT, (2014) 364 ITR 31 (SC) HAD OBSERVED THAT THE OBJECTS OF TRUST AS D ECLARED IN THE TRUST DEED WOULD GOVERN ITS RIGHT OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT ALSO RECOGNIZED THE CREATION OR ESTAB LISHMENT OF TRUST FOR EITHER RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE OR BOTH RELIGIOUS AND CHARI TABLE PURPOSES. BY LOOKING AT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, IT HAD TO BE DETERMINED WHETH ER THE OBJECTS WERE WHOLLY RELIGIOUS OR WHOLLY CHARITABLE OR BOTH RELIGIOUS AND CHARITAB LE AND IT WAS HELD THAT ON ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 7 CONSIDERATION OF THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, THE RELI GIOUS AND CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST COULD BE DETERMINED. IT WA S FURTHER HELD THAT SECTION 11 OF THE ACT ALLOWS SUCH TRUST WITH COMPOSITE OBJECTS TO CLA IM EXEMPTION FROM TAX AS A RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE TRUST, SUBJECT TO PROVISIO NS OF SECTION 13 OF THE ACT. THOUGH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE BASED ON RELIGIOUS TE NETS BUT WHERE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST FOR BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS WERE NOT EX CLUSIVELY MEANT FOR A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, THEN IT WOULD NOT FALL UNDER T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT AND IT WAS FURTHER HELD THAT WHERE THE ASSE SSEE WAS CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS TRUST, WHICH DID NOT BENEFIT ANY SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY AND HENCE, IT COULD NOT BE HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT WOULD BE ATTRACTED TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST AND THEREFORE, IT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT OBSERVATIONS OF THE HONB LE SUPREME COURT ARE AS UNDER:- (I) THAT DETERMINATION OF THE NATURE OF THE TRUST AS WHOLLY RELIGIOUS OR WHOLLY CHARITABLE OR BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS UNDER T HE ACT IS NOT A QUESTION OF FACT. IT IS A QUESTION WHICH REQUIRES EXAMINATION O F THE LEGAL EFFECTS OF THE PROVEN FACTS AND DOCUMENTS, THAT IS, THE LEGAL IMPL ICATION OF THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST AS CONTAINED IN THE TRUST DEED. IT I S ONLY THE OBJECTS OF A TRUST AS DECLARED IN THE TRUST DEED WHICH WOULD GOVERN IT S RIGHT OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OR 12. IT IS THE ANALYSIS OF THESE OBJEC TS IN THE BACKDROP OF FISCAL JURISPRUDENCE WHICH WOULD ILLUMINATE THE PURPOSE BE HIND CREATION OR ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TRUST FOR EITHER RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE OR BOTH RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE PURPOSE. THEREFORE, THE HIGH COURT HAD E RRED IN REFUSING TO INTERFERE WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN RESPECT OF THE CHARACTER OF THE TRUST ON THE GROUNDS THAT THEY WERE PURE FINDINGS OF FACT. (II) THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST WERE NO T INDICATIVE OF A WHOLLY RELIGIOUS PURPOSE BUT WERE COLLECTIVELY INDICATIVE OF BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELI- GIOUS PURPOSES. ALTHOUGH OBJECTS (C) AND (F) WHICH PROVIDED FOR ACTIVITIES COMPLETELY RELIGIOUS IN NATURE AND RESTRICTED TO TH E SPECIFIC COMMUNITY OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST WERE OBJECTS WITH RELIGIOUS PURPOSE ONLY, THE FACT THAT THE OTHER OBJECTS TRACED THEIR SOURCE TO THE HOLY QURAN AND R ESOLVED TO ABIDE BY THE PATH OF GODLINESS SHOWN BY ALLAH WOULD NOT BE SUFFI CIENT TO CONCLUDE THAT THE ENTIRE PURPOSE AND ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST WERE PUR ELY RELIGIOUS IN COLOUR. THE OBJECTS REFLECTED THE INTENT OF THE TRUST AS OBSERV ANCE OF THE TENETS OF ISLAM, BUT DID NOT RESTRICT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST TO RELIGIOUS OBLIGATIONS ONLY AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. THE PR OVISION OF FOOD TO THE PUBLIC ON RELIGIOUS DAYS OF THE COMMUNITY, THE ESTA BLISHMENT OF MADARSAS AND ORGANISATIONS FOR DISSEMINATION OF RELIGIOUS EDUCAT ION AND RENDERING ASSIST- ANCE TO THE NEEDY AND POOR FOR RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES WOULD REFLECT THE ESSENCE OF CHARITY. THE ACTIVITY OF PROVIDING FOR FOOD ON CERT AIN SPECIFIC OCCASIONS AND OTHER RELIGIOUS AND AUSPICIOUS EVENTS OF THE DAWOOD I BOHRA COMMUNITY DID NOT RESTRICT THE BENEFIT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COMM UNITY. NEITHER THE RELIGIOUS TENETS NOR THE OBJECTS AS EXPRESSED LIMITED THE SER VICE OF FOOD ON THESE OCCA- SIONS TO MEMBERS OF THE SPECIFIC COMMUNITY. THE EST ABLISHMENT OF MADARSAS OR INSTITUTIONS TO IMPART RELIGIOUS EDUCATION TO TH E MASSES WOULD QUALIFY AS A CHARITABLE PURPOSE QUALIFYING UNDER THE HEAD OF EDU CATION UNDER THE PROVI- SIONS OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. SIMILARLY, ASSIS TANCE BY THE ASSESSEE-TRUST TO THE NEEDY AND POOR FOR RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES WOULD N OT DIVEST THE TRUST OF ITS ALTRUIST CHARACTER. THEREFORE, THE OBJECTS OF THE T RUST EXHIBITED THE DUAL TENOR OF RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE PURPOSES AND ACTIVITIES. S ECTION 11 OF THE ACT ALLOWED ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 8 SUCH TRUST WITH COMPOSITE OBJECTS TO CLAIM EXEMPTIO N FROM TAX AS A RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE TRUST SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 13. THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST UNDER SUCH OBJECTS WOULD, THEREFORE, BE E NTITLED TO EXEMPTION ACCORDINGLY. IN RE : TRUSTEES OF THE TRIBUNE [1939] 7 ITR 415 (P C) AND IN RE : SOUTH PLACE ETHICAL SOCIETY; BARRALET V. ATTORNEY GENERAL [1980] 3 ALL ER 918; [1980] 1 WLR 1565; 54 TAX CAS 446 APPLI ED. (III) THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST WERE B ASED ON RELIGIOUS TENETS UNDER THE QURAN ACCORDING TO THE RELIGIOUS FAITH OF ISLAM. THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST THOUGH BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS WERE NOT EXCLUSIVELY MEANT FOR A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. THE OBJECTS DID NOT CHANNEL THE BENEFITS TO ANY COMMUNITY IF NOT THE DAWOODI BOHRA COMMUNITY AND TH US, WOULD NOT FALL UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE-TRUST WAS A CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS TRUST WHICH DID NOT BENEFI T ANY SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY AND, THEREFORE, IT COULD NOT BE HELD THAT SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT WOULD BE ATTRACTED TO THE ASSESSEE-TRUST AND THEREB Y, IT WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. 14. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SAID PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE TO BE LOOKED IN TO AND THOSE OBJECTS CAN BE EITHER CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS IN NATURE OR BOTH CH ARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. THE QUESTION WHICH ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE TRUST WHOSE OBJECTS WERE RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE WOULD BE ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. LOOKING AT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, WE FIND THAT ONE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRU ST WAS TO BUILD A TEMPLE, PRAYER HALL AND MAINTAIN THE SAME AND FURTHER OBJEC T WAS TO SET UP A RELIGIOUS LIBRARY, MAINTAIN IT AND PROPAGATE INDIAN CULTURE A ND INCULCATE AND STUDY ALL THE CULTURES OF ALL THE RELIGION. FURTHER, TO TAKE UP RESEARCH ON RELIGIOUS, SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL IN ORDER TO UPLIFT THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. THE OBJECTS NOS.3 TO 5 OF THE TRUST DEED WERE ADMITTEDLY FOR THE PROPAGATION OF P HILOSOPHY OF SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK. HOWEVER, OBJECT NO.7 WAS TO CREATE, ENCOURAGE AND PROPAGATE INTER-SE COOPERATION, CO-LIVING AND FEELI NG OF CO-LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY OF ENTIRE PUBLIC AT LARGE. THE OBJECTS O F THE ASSESSEE TRUST THUS, REFLECT THE ACTIVITIES TO BE CARRIED ON FOR THE PUR POSE OF JAIN RELIGION AND ALSO FOR THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC AT LARGE. IN VIEW THEREO F, IT COULD NOT BE HELD THAT THE SAME ARE MEANT FOR THE BENEFIT OF ONLY JAIN RELIGIO US COMMUNITY. WE REVERSE THE FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSIONER IN THIS REGARD. ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 9 15. NOW, COMING TO THE SECOND ISSUE OF GRANT OF REG ISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, WHERE THE TRUST WAS BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS. THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TR UST (SUPRA) HAD LAID DOWN THAT EVEN WHERE THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE NOT O NLY TO PROPAGATE THE JAINISM OR HELP AND ASSIST MAINTENANCE OF TEMPLES, SADHUS, SADHVIS, SHRAVIKS AND SHRAVAKS, AND OTHER GOALS AS SET OUT IN THE TRUST D EED, THE TRUST WAS A CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS TRUST AND SECTION 1 3(1)(B) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE. SIMILAR PROPOSITION HAS BEEN LAID D OWN BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. BARKATE SAIFIYA SOCIETY (1995 ) 213 ITR 492 (GUJ), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE EXCLUSION FROM EXEMPTI ON UNDER SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT APPLIES ONLY TO CHARITABLE TRUST AND CHA RITABLE INSTITUTION AND IF THE TRUST WAS CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS IN NATURE , THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. 16. SIMILAR PROPOSITION HAS ALSO BEEN LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT VS. DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT (SUPRA) WHILE HOLDING THE TRUST ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A CHARITABLE RELIGIOUS TRUST AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1) (B) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE. IN VIEW THEREOF, WE DIRECT THE COMMISS IONER TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT AS CHARIT ABLE RELIGIOUS TRUST. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS, ALLOWED. 17. NOW, COMING TO ITA NO.1890/PN/2014, WHERE SIMIL AR ISSUE HAS BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BY RAISING THE FOLLOWING GRO UNDS OF APPEAL:- GROUND NO 1: ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE T HE ID. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS ERRED IN REFUSING THE REGISTRATIO N SOUGHT U/S 12AA(1) TO THE APPELLANT ON THE GROUNDS A) THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED UNDER THE HEAD CHATURMA S EXPENSES I.E CULTURAL EXPENSES ARE NOT WITHIN THE O BJECTS OF THE TRUST. ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 10 B) THAT THE APPELLANT TRUST THOUGH HAS INCURRED THE E XPENSES ON PATHSHALA THERE IS NO SCHOOL SETUP FOR THE SAID PUR POSE OVERLOOKING THE FACT THAT THE TRUST HAS ITS OWN BUI LDING. C) THAT THE JEEVDAYA EXPENSES I.E. EXPENSES INCURRED ON CARING ANIMALS AND AVOIDING CRUELTY TO THEM ARE NOT IN ACC ORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, AND AT THE SAME TIME CATE GORICALLY ADMITTING THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE TO TAKE UP THE ACTIVITIES OF OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC IN THE FIELDS OF S OCIAL, EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS,- SETUP CONFERENCE HALLS, RE LIGIOUS CENTRES FOR SAINTS ETC. INCLUDING ACTIVITIES OF BENEFITING PUBLIC AT LARGE. GROUND NO 2 : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE T HE ID. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HAS ERRED IN REFUSING THE REGISTRATIO N SOUGHT U/S 12AA(1) TO THE APPELLANT ON THE GROUND THAT THE TRUST HAS N O DEFINED DOMINANT CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND FURTHER ERRONEOUSLY HOLDING THAT OFFERING RESPECTFUL SERVICES TO SADHU, SADHVI DELIVERING LEC TURES ON SOCIAL CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL FIELDS ARE NOT TO BE CONSIDER ED AS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE MEANING OF SEC 2(15). THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL MAY KINDLY BE ALLOWED T O BE AMENDED, ALTERED, MODIFIED ETC., IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 18. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN ADDITIONAL GROUN D OF APPEAL, WHICH BEING PURELY LEGAL IN NATURE, IS ADMITTED FOR ADJUD ICATION. THE ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL READS AS UNDER:- ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT HAS ERRED IN IGNORING THE FACTUAL EXPLANATION AND SUBMI SSION MADE TO THE EFFECT THAT APPELLANT IN FACT IS DULY REGISTERED U/ S 12A(A) AND ALL THE EVIDENCES FILED IN SUPPORT THERE FOR. THE CIT HAS FURTHER ERRED IN NOT GRANTING THE REGISTRATION W.E.F. 1974-75. 19. IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE TRUST WA S REGISTERED ON 04.07.1969 UNDER THE BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUSTS ACT, 1950 . HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE MADE A FRESH APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A SE EKING REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, AS PER THE TRUST DEED WERE AS UNDER:- A) TO TAKE UP THE ACTIVITIES OF OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PUBLIC IN THE FIELDS OF SOCIAL, EDUCATIONAL AND RELIGIOUS. B) TO SET UP CONFERENCE HALLS, RELIGIOUS CENTRE'S F OR SAINTS IN ORDER TO TAKE UP THE ABOVE OBJECTS. ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 11 C) TO SET UP SCHOOLS, CLINICS AND ANY OTHER ACTIVIT IES FOR THE BENEFIT OF PUBLIC AT LARGE AND FOR ACHIEVING THE SAID OBJECT E FFICIENTLY AS AGREED BY THE PUBLIC. D) TO SET UP COMMITTEES, SUB-COMMITTEES AND APPOINT THE OFFICE BEARERS AND TO FRAME NECESSARY RULES AND REGULATION S IN ORDER TO CARRY OUT THE ABOVE ACTIVITIES EFFICIENTLY. E) TO EXTEND CO-OPERATION AND PROVIDE FINANCIAL AID TO ALL OTHER TRUSTS COMMITTED FOR CARRYING OUT THE SAME OBJECTS. TO RA ISE FUNDS, DONATIONS, DEPOSITS FROM THE PUBLIC AND UTILIZE THE SAME FOR T HE ABOVE FUNDS 20. THE COMMISSIONER, DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDI NGS NOTED THAT THE ACTIVITIES PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST DURING TH E LAST THREE FINANCIAL YEARS ALONG WITH EXPENSES WERE AS UNDER:- ACTIVITIES ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 CHATURMAS EXPENSES (CULTURAL EXPENSES) 456358 51000 1605647 PATHSHALA EXPENSES I.E. EDUCATIONAL 72355 18669 34594 DHARAMSHALA EXPENSES 150977 32574 27361 JIVDAYA- CARING OF ANIMALS 31000 78000 159001 CHARITABLE EXPENSES OUT OF SADHARAN FUND FOR MEAL TO PUBLIC, ARRANGING SOCIAL RELIGIOUS FUNCTIONS. 114636 530955 154074 PROVIDING RESPECTFUL SERVICES TO SADHU SADHVI WHO DELIVERS LECTURES ON SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL FIELD 42849 13460 15060 21. THE COMMISSIONER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ACTIV ITIES PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE IN LINE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSES SEE TRUST. VIDE PARA 6 OF THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, THE COMMISSIO NER NOTED THAT THE TRUST WAS FORMED WITH CERTAIN OBJECTS, BUT THERE WERE NO DEFI NED DOMINANT CHARITABLE PURPOSES IN THE TRUST DEED, TO WHICH THE SAID OBJECTS WOULD SERVE AS ANCILLARY OBJECTS AND WHICH WERE MEANT TO FEED THE DOMINANT PURPOSE I.E. CHARITABLE. THE COMMISSIONER FURTHER OBSERVED THAT JIVDAYA EXPENSES AND PROVIDIN G SERVICES TO SADHU, SADHVI, ETC. WHO DELIVER LECTURES ON SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND EDUCAT IONAL FIELD COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 12 AS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AND DOES NOT FALL WITHIN T HE MEANING OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. ANOTHER OBJECTION RAISED BY THE COMMISSIONER WAS THAT AS TO WHY THE TRUST SHOULD NOT BE TREATED TO BE AN ENTITY WORKING ESPEC IALLY FOR A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY OR CASTE AND REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE REJECTED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE COMMISSIONER REJECTED THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATI ON UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 22. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDE R OF COMMISSIONER. 23. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS REGISTERED WAY BACK IN 1974-75. HOWEVER, RELEVANT LETTER OF ENROLLMENT OR CERTIFICATE WAS NO T TRACEABLE, HENCE, FRESH APPLICATION WAS MADE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FO R THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS INCLUDING COPIES OF INCOME TAX RETURNS, IN WHICH EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT WAS CLAIMED A ND ALSO OTHER DOCUMENTS, WHICH ESTABLISHED THE EXISTENCE OF TRUST SINCE PAST MANY YEARS. THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSES SEE WAS THAT NONE OF THE REASONS MENTIONED BY THE COMMISSIONER JUSTIFYING THE REJECT ING OF REGISTRATION WERE RELEVANT, AS THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON AND THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST WERE NOT FOUND TO BE NON- GENUINE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, IN WHICH UNDER PARA 2(B), IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT THOUGH MOST OF THE OBJECTS WERE CHARITABLE, BUT SOME OF THE CHARITABLE OBJECTS APPEAR RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSES SEE THUS, SUBMITTED THAT IN OTHER WORDS, IT CAN BE SAID THAT THERE IS A ADMIXTU RE OF CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS OBJECTS. IN THAT CASE, THE REGISTRATION IS NOT TO BE DENIED. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON VARIOUS DECISIONS INCLUDING THE RATIOS LAID DOWN BY HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST (2007) 294 ITR 86 (GUJ ) AND THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CIT VS. DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT, (2014) 364 IT R 31 (SC). 24. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND, PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER. ITA NO.1353/PN/2014 ITA NO.1890/PN/2014 SHRI JAIN SHWETAMBER MURTIPUJAK SANGH & ANOTHER 13 25. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST AS ENUMERATED IN THE PARAS HEREI NABOVE, ARE BOTH FOR PUBLIC AT LARGE AND FOR CARRYING OUT CERTAIN ACTIVITIES FOR J AIN COMMUNITY. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THE W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAS FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT MOST OF THE OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE TH OUGH SOME OF THE OBJECTS APPEAR TO BE RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. IN VIEW THEREOF AND ALSO I N VIEW OF OUR REASONING IN THE PARAS HEREINABOVE IN THE APPEAL RELATING TO ITA NO.1353/P N/2014 AND FOLLOWING THE SAME RATIO, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE RE LIGIOUS TRUST AND IF THAT IS SO, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE COMMISSIONER TO GRANT THE REGISTRATION T O THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT AS CHARITABLE RELIGIOUS TRUST. THE GROU NDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS, ALLOWED. 26. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 31 ST DAY OF MARCH, 2015. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 31 ST MARCH, 2015. GCVSR COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO: - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT-I, PUNE; 4) THE DR B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 5) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PUNE