M/s. Vidya Bharati Society for Educational & Scientific Advancement, Kolkata V. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 1456/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1497 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-03-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of cross examination; Retrospective amendment; Reasonable cause; Corroborative evidences; Third party statement; Accommodation entries; Benefit of exemption; Cancellation of registration; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 133A; 133(6); 80G; 12A; 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : KOLKATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM & SHRI M.BALA GANESH, AM ] I.T.A NO. 1456/KOL/20 16 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL -VS- CIT( EXEMPTION), KOLKATA & SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT, [PAN : AAATV2139H] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI J.P. KHAITAN, SR. ADV SHRI PAWAN KR. AGARWAL, FCA SHRI PRATYUSH JHUNJHUNWALA, ADV FOR THE RESPONDENT : GOULEN HANGSHING, CIT, DR DATE OF HEARING : 24.07.2017. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06.09.2017 ORDER PER M.BALAGANESH, AM 1. THIS APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA(3) & 12AA(4) OF THE ACT PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), KOLKATA [ IN SHORT LD CIT(E) ] VIDE H IS ORDER DATED 6.5.2016. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IS THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE WEST BENGAL SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1961 ON 12. 8.1965. THE ASSESSEE IS AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION RUNNING 3 SCHOOLS NAMELY (I ) BIDYA BHARATI GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL ; (II) BIDYA BHARATI SCHOOL (MOMINPORE) AND (III) BIDYA BHARATI SCHOOL (BEHALA) HAVING ACCREDITATION FROM WEST BENGAL HIGH ER SECONDARY BOARD OF 2 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF WEST BENGAL AND CLOSE TO 3 400 STUDENTS ARE STUDYING IN THE SAID SCHOOLS. ONE SCHOOL IS IMPARTING EDUCATI ON UPTO CLASS XII AND THE OTHER TWO SCHOOLS ARE IMPARTING EDUCATION UPTO CLASS IV. THE ASSESSEE WAS CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S 10(22) OF THE ACT UPTO ASST YEAR 1998 -99 AND THEREAFTER PURSUANT TO OMISSION OF THE SAID SECTION FROM THE STATUTE, SOUG HT TO OBTAIN REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT WHICH WAS DULY GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE W ITH EFFECT FROM 1.7.1999 FROM THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CALCUTTA V IDE PROCEEDINGS NO. DIT(E) / T-80/8E/340/98-99 DATED 6.8.1999 . IT WAS ALSO GRA NTED APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT. HENCE FROM ASST YEAR 1999-2000 ONWARDS , THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT ITS RECEIPTS WERE APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. 3. THE LD CIT(E) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD IN DULGED IN THE PRACTICE OF MONEY LAUNDERING THROUGH PAYMENT OF BOGUS DONATIONS. HE OBSERVED THAT THESE FACTS WERE CONFIRMED IN A SURVEY OPERATION CONDUCTED U/S 133A OF THE ACT ON 3.9.2015 IN THE CASE OF M/S BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH T RUST, WHEREIN A STATEMENT OF SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI, VICE CHAIRMAN AND TRUSTEE, WAS RECORDED DURING THE SURVEY OPERATION . IN THE SAID STATEMENT, HE ACCEP TED THE ALLEGED MODUS OPERANDI OF RECEIVING BOGUS DONATIONS FROM VARIOUS CORPORATE S / INDIVIDUALS / FIRMS AND REPAYMENT IN CASH TO THE DONORS THROUGH WEB OF FINA NCIAL TRANSACTIONS AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ONE OF SUCH BOGUS DONORS. HE REPRODUC ED CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE SAID STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI IN HIS ORDER AND ACCORDINGLY SHOW CAUSED THE ASSESSEE FOR CANCELLATION OF REGIST RATION U/S 12AA(3) OF THE ACT. THE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE LD CIT(E) ON 3.12.2015 IS REPRODUCED AS BELOW:- 3A. BASED ON ABOVE ALLEGED TRANSACTIONS, A SHOW-CA USE NOTICE FOR CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA(3) WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 03.12.2015. RELEVANT PORTION OF SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 3 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. 2. A SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WA S CONDUCTED ON BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST , KOLKATA BY ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1(2), KOLKATA ON 03.09.2015 IN KOLKATA. DURING THE SURVEY OPERATION, IT WAS FOUND THAT BATANAGAR EDUCATION AN D RESEARCH TRUST, KOLKATA WAS INVOLVED IN ACCEPTING BOGUS DONATIONS A ND RETURNING IN CASH THROUGH WEB OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS. 4. IT IS SEEN THAT YOU HAVE PAID DONATION AMOUNTING TO APPROXIMATELY RS. 25,00,000/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 AND RS. 1,2 5,00,000/- IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED PER SON-BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST, KOLKATA. IT IS EVIDEN T THAT BY GIVING BOGUS DONATION AND THEN ACCEPTING THE MONEY IN CASH YOU H AVE INDULGED IN MONEY LAUNDERING WHICH IS ILLEGAL, NOT GENUINE AND NOT AT PAR WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST/SOCIETY. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE YOUR REQUESTED TO EXPLAIN W HY THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A/12AA WILL NOT GET CANCELLED BY INVOKING THE PRO VISION OF SECTION 12AA(3). 6. YOU ARE REQUESTED TO FURNISH THE FOLLOWING DOCU MENTS: A) INCOME & EXPENDITURE A/C. AND BALANCE SHEET FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12 TO 2015-16. B) CERTIFICATE U/S 12A/12AA AND ANY OTHER REGISTRAT ION CERTIFICATE GRANTED BY THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES. C) LIST OF DONATIONS CORPUS/NON-CORPUS RECEIVED BY YOU ALONG WITH THEIR PAN, NAME AND ADDRESS FROM 01.04.2010 TO 31.03.2015 . 4. IN RESPONSE THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A REPLY DATE D 17.12.2015 FILED BEFORE THE LD CIT(E) ON 22.12.2015 , WHEREIN , APART FROM GIVING BRIEF INTRODUCTION ABOUT THE VARIOUS SCHOOLS RUN BY IT AND ITS ACTIVITIES, STATE D THAT IT HAD DECIDED TO MAKE DONATIONS TO OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND TRU STS FOR BETTERMENT OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES WITHIN INDIA OUT OF SURPLUS FUND AVAILAB LE WITH THE SOCIETY AND IN THE COURSE OF CARRYING OUT SUCH ACTIVITIES , THE SOCIET Y HAD GIVEN THE FOLLOWING DONATIONS :- 4 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFIC ADVANCEMENT DONATION PAID NAME P AN AMOUNT CHQ NO. FINANCIAL YEAR 2011 - 12 BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST AABTB3024G 1000000 648049 - DO - AABTB3024G 1500000 648052 1/1/1, JODHPUR PARK, KOLKATA - 700068 TOTAL 2500000 FINANCIAL YEAR 2012-13 SETH POKHARMAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY AADTS0508A 2500000 C/O - RDPS, CD - BLOCK, PITAMPURA, NEW DELHI - 110034 BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST AABTB3024G 1500000 648076 - DO - AABTB3024G 2500000 648078 - DO - AABTB3024G 3000000 648080 - DO - AABTB3024G 3000000 997561 1/1/1, JODHPUR PARK, KOLKATA - 700068 TOTAL 12500000 FINANCIAL YEAR 2013-14 EMAMI FOUNDATION AAATE2145C 100000 997582 A/C EMAMI UTTARAKHAND RELIEF FUND SE/28, SWAMI RAM TIRATH NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110055 BALLARAM HANUMANDUS CHARITABLE TRUST AAATB5411C 2500000 767913 - DO - AAATB5411C 2500000 767914 TOBACO HOUSE, 1, OLD COURT HOUSE CORNER, KOLKATA-700001 TOTAL 5100000 FINANCIAL YEAR 2014-15 NABADWIP MANDAL DEVELOPMENT TRUST 5000000 767921 - DO - 2000000 767943 SRIDHAM MAYAPUR, P.O. - SRI MAYAPUR, DIST - NADIA, PIN - 741313 TOTAL 7000000 5 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. 4.1 THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IN THE SAID REPLY LETTER D ATED 17.12.2015 CATEGORICALLY DENIED THAT IT HAD RECEIVED BACK CASH FROM BATANAGA R EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST OUT OF DONATIONS MADE TO THEM DURING FINANCIA L YEARS 2011-12 AND 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE ALSO QUESTIONED THE BASIS ON WHICH THE LD CIT(E) HAD ASSERTED IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE THAT M/S BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST HAD RETURNED CASH TO ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT FOR THE COPY OF STATEMENTS RECORDED FROM SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI AND SUCH OTHER EVIDENC ES WHICH WERE RELIED UPON BY THE LD CIT(E) FOR DRAWING ADVERSE INFERENCES AGAINS T THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SOUGHT FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE W ITNESS IN PERSON ON WHOSE STATEMENT SUCH ADVERSE CONCLUSION HAD BEEN REACHED BY THE LD CIT(E). THE ASSESSEE APART FROM MAKING THESE OBJECTIONS , PRODU CED THE APPEAL LETTER ISSUED BY M/S BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST TO ASSES SEE, ASSESSEES LETTER OF DONATION AND MONEY RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE RECIPIENT TRUST, TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF DONATIONS PAID BY ASSESSEE TO BATANAGAR EDUCATIO N AND RESEARCH TRUST SUPPORTED BY PROPER DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. IT WAS A LSO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY CASH FROM BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST OUT OF DONATIONS PAID TO THEM BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES. I T WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IF THERE IS ANY MISAPPROPRIATION OR SIPHONING OF FUNDS AT THE END OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST, THE ASSESSEE HAD NO R OLE TO PLAY IN SUCH ACT DONE BY THE OTHER TRUST AND PLEADED THAT IT IS IN COMPLETE DARKNESS ABOUT THE ALLEGATIONS LEVELED ON IT. APART FROM STATING THESE FACTS AND OBJECTIONS, THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LD CIT (E) :- A) BALANCE SHEET, INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNTS, RECEI PTS AND PAYMENTS ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AS WELL AS IT SCHO OLS FOR THE ASST YEARS 2011-12 TO 2015-16. 6 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. B) COPY OF CERTIFICATE U/S 12A OF THE ACT AND COPY OF SOCIETY REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE UNDER WEST BENGAL SOCIETY REGISTRATION ACT. C) LIST OF DONATIONS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2010 TO 31.3.2015. D) LIST OF DONATIONS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2010 TO 31.3.2015. 4.2. THE ASSESSEE WAS HANDED OVER THE COPY OF STATE MENT ON 5.1.2016 RECORDED FROM SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI, VICE CHAIRMAN AND TRU STEE OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AND WAS ALSO AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNI TY TO FILE ITS OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, AND ALSO CROSS-EXAMINE THE SAID PERSON, IF IT SO DESIRES. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FILED ITS REPLY BY FILING ITS OBJE CTIONS TO THE STATEMENTS RECORDED FROM SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI, VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 13.1.2016 FILED IN PERSON BEFORE THE LD CIT(E) ON 14.1.2016. IN THE SAID LETTER, THE ASSESSEE CATEGORICALLY DENIED ALL THE ALLEGATIONS LEVELED AGAINST IT BY RELYING O N THE SWORN STATEMENT OF SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI. IT CATEGORICALLY DENIED HAVIN G HAD ANY FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS WITH 7 PERSONS MENTIONED IN THE STATEMENT OF SRI RA BINDRANATH LAHIRI AND HENCE THERE IS NO QUESTION OF ASSESSEE RECEIVING ANY CASH IN LIEU OF CHEQUE DONATIONS PAID TO BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST. THE ASSESS EE ALSO DENIED HAVING EVEN HEARD THE NAME OF SRI GULAB PINCHA AND STATED IT HA D NO TRANSACTION WITH SRI GULAB PINCHA WHICH WAS MENTIONED IN THE STATEMENT OF SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DENIED HAVING GIVEN ANY CORPUS DONATI ON TO BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AND ALSO REFERRED TO QUESTION NO. 10 & 11 WHICH ONLY MENTIONED ABOUT CORPUS DONATIONS AND NOT REGULAR REVENUE DONA TIONS. IT WAS ALSO POINTED OUT THAT IN QUESTION NO. 19 OF THE SAID STATEMENT , THE BOGUS DONATIONS ALONG WITH BOGUS DONORS HAD EMERGED DURING THE PERIOD 1.4.2014 TO 4.9.2014 , BUT , WHEREAS THE DONATIONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST TO BATANG AR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST 7 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. WERE DURING THE ASST YEARS 2012-13 & 2013-14 ONLY. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT IF THERE IS ANY MISAPPROPRIATION OR SIPHONING OF FUNDS AT THE END OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST, THEN ACTION NEEDS TO BE TAKEN ON THAT TRUST AND NOT ON THE ASSESSEE. MOREOVER, THE SEVEN PERSONS TO WHOM BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST HAD ALLEGEDLY MADE PAYMENTS ARE NOT RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER AND ASSESSEES NAME DOES N OT GET REFLECTED IN THE SAID LIST. BASED ON THESE REPLIES, THE ASSESSEE TRUST CATEGORICALLY DENIED ALL THE ALLEGATIONS LEVELED AGAINST IT IN THE SHOW CAUSE NO TICE OF THE LD CIT(E) AND STATED THAT IT IS A GENUINE PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST IMPART ING EDUCATION BY RUNNING 3 SCHOOLS AS A NOBLE CAUSE AND PARTICIPATING IN THE NATION BU ILDING PROCESS. 4.3. ON 15.1.2016, THE LD CIT(E) DIRECTED THE ASSES SEE TO PRODUCE THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY MR MUKUL AGARWAL FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE TOGETHER WITH HIS COMPUTATION OF TOTAL INCOME, BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR ASST YEARS 2012-13 , 2013-14 , 2014-15 & 2015-16. ON 9.2.2016 , MR MUKUL AGARWAL APPEARED IN PERSON BEFORE THE LD CIT(E) AND WAS ASK ED TO EXPLAIN ABOUT THE DONATIONS GIVEN TO (I) SETH POKHARMAL EDUCATIONAL S OCIETY , DELHI ; (II) BALLARAM HANUMANDAS CHARITABLE TRUST, KOLKATA AND (III) NABA DWIP MANDAL DEVELOPMENT TRUST AND NO QUESTIONS WERE ASKED ABOUT DONATIONS G IVEN TO BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST BY THE LD CIT(E) TO MR MUKUL AGARW AL. THE REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONS ASKED BY THE LD CIT(E) ABOUT THE THREE OT HER DIFFERENT TRUSTS AS ABOVE WERE DULY FILED IN WRITING BY MR MUKUL AGARWAL ON 1 5.2.2016. ON 11.4.2016, THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMIN E MR RABINDRANATH LAHIRI OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AND DATE WAS F IXED FOR THE SAME ON 21.4.2016. BUT ON 21.4.2016, MR RABINDRANATH L AHIRI WAS PRESENT IN THE DEPARTMENT BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSES SEE . ON 3.5.2016 , THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FILED A LETTER DATED 3.5.2016 FOR NON-APPEARANCE ON 3.5.2016 DUE 8 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. TO ILLNESS OF AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR UNDERGOING MAJOR SURGERY AND ACCORDINGLY IT WAS PLEADED FOR ONE MORE HEARING. 4.4. ON 10.5.2016, THE LD CIT(E) WITHOUT PROVIDING FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, PROCEEDED TO PASS AN ORDER U/S 12 AA(3) OF THE ACT CANCELLING THE REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST BASED ON THE SHOW CAUSE N OTICE ISSUED BY HIM AND WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS REPLIES FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AND BY MAKING ALLEGATIONS THAT ALL THE DONATIONS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE WERE THROUGH ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES . ACCORDINGLY HE CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVE N DONATIONS TO VARIOUS TRUSTS IN AND OUT OF KOLKATA THROUGH ENTRY OPERATORS AND H AD RECEIVED CASH BACK FROM THE VARIOUS TRUSTS. THE LD CIT(E) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD STARTED EARNING HUGE SURPLUS IN EACH YEAR AND THE PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY STARTED SIPHONING OFF THE FUNDS FROM THE SO CIETY IN THE FORM OF BOGUS DONATIONS IN LIEU OF CASH FOR THEIR PERSONAL BENEFI T. HE ACCORDINGLY HELD THAT THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AS N OT TO BE GENUINE AND ACTIVITIES ARE NOT AS PER ITS OBJECTS AND WAS ONLY INVOLVED IN MON EY LAUNDERING. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED THROUGH BOGUS DONATIONS ARE NOT EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH T HE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS CREATED. ACCORDINGLY HE SOUGHT TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATION U/ S 12AA(3) OF THE ACT. THE LD CIT(E) ALSO INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA( 4) READ WITH SECTION 13 OF THE ACT WHICH WAS INTRODUCED WITH EFFECT FROM 1.10.2014 ONWARDS. BASED ON THESE OBSERVATIONS, HE WITHDREW THE REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12A OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2011. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US O N THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- (A) FOR THAT THE ORDER WITHDRAWING/CANCELLING REGIS TRATION U/S 12A WAS PASSED IN GROSS VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATU RAL JUSTICE, WITHOUT DISCLOSING THE MATERIALS RELIED UPON, WITHOUT AFFOR DING 9 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. REASONABLE/ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO CONTROVERT AND/O R DEAL WITH THE SAME INCLUDING BY WAY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION AND WITHOUT T AKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. (B) FOR THAT THE CIT ERRED IN WITHDRAWING/CANCELLIN G THE ASSESSEES REGISTRATION U/S 12A AND THAT TOO WITH RETROSPECTIV E EFFECT FROM 01.04.2011. (C) FOR THAT THE CIT ERRED IN HOLDING THAT (I) ANY DONATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS BOGUS, FICTI TIOUS, ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OR FOR MONEY LAUNDERING OR THA T THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED BACK ANY CASH; (II) THE ASSESSEE RESORTED TO ANY MODUS OPERANDI OR DEAL T WITH ANY ENTRY OPERATOR OR SIPHONED OFF SOCIETYS MONEY. (III) THE PRESIDENT OR MEMBERS OR TRUSTEES OF THE ASSESSE E RECEIVED CASH OR BENEFITED FROM THE DONATIONS OR THE STUDENT S WERE DEPRIVED; (IV) SECTION 13(1) OR SECTION 13(2) OR SECTION 13(3) WER E APPLICABLE; (V) THE ASSESSEE MISUSED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA OR SECTION 80G(5)(VI); (VI) NO CHARITABLE WORK WAS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE BY GIV ING DONATIONS; (VII) THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT GENUINE OR WERE NOT CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH OR WERE CONTRARY TO ITS OBJECTS OR ILLEGAL OR IMMORAL; AND HIS PURPORTED FINDINGS INVOKING SUB-SECTIONS (3 ) AND (4) OF SECTION 12AA AND WITHDRAWING/CANCELLING THE REGISTR ATION U/S 12A ARE WHOLLY ARBITRARY, ERRONEOUS, UNREASONABLE AND P ERVERSE. (D) FOR THAT FURTHER AND IN ANY EVENT AND WITHOUT P REJUDICE TO THE AFORESAID, THE CIT HAD NO POWER AND/OR JURISDICTION TO WITHDRAW/CANCEL THE REGISTRATION WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM APRIL 1 ,2011. (E) FOR THAT THE ORDER APPEALED AGAINST IS OTHERWIS E ERRONEOUS ON FACTS AND/OR IN LAW. THE ASSESSEE CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD TO, ALTER, AMEND A ND/OR MODIFY THE GROUNDS TAKEN HEREIN. 6. THE LD AR APART FROM REITERATING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY BEFORE THE LD CIT(E) VIDE VARIOUS WRITTEN SUBMISSIO NS AS STATED SUPRA , STATED THAT 10 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. THE ASSESSEE NEED NOT HAVE CROSS-EXAMINED SRI RABIN DRANATH LAHIRI AS NOTHING WAS STATED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY OR ITS MEMBERS/ OFFICE BEARERS , BY THE SAID PERSON IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED DURING SURVEY . HE NCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AT ALL AGGRIEVED BY THE STATEMENT OF SRI RABINDRANATH LAHI RI AND HENCE CHOOSE NOT TO CROSS EXAMINE HIM. HE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM REASONABLE CAUSE BY NOT PRESENTING ITSELF ON THE SC HEDULED DATE OF HEARING FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION , THOUGH THE LETTER TO THIS EFFEC T WAS FILED BELATEDLY BEFORE THE LD CIT(E). HE ULTIMATELY ARGUED THAT ONLY WHEN THE S TATEMENT OF ANY PERSON RELIED UPON BY THE LD CIT(E) CONTAINS ANY ADVERSE CONTENTS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE REQUIRED / WARRANTED TO CROSS-EXA MINE THE SAID PERSON. IN THE INSTANT CASE, NO ADVERSE COMMENTS WERE STATED BY SR I RABINDRANATH LAHIRI ABOUT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY OR ITS OFFICE BEARERS AND HENC E MERE NON-UTILISATION OF AN OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE ASSESSEE WO ULD NOT MAKE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY INGENUINE. HE ARGUED THAT ABS OLUTELY NO EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE LD CIT(E) TO PROVE THAT TH E ASSESSEE SOCIETY OR ITS OFFICE BEARERS HAD INDEED RECEIVED BACK THE CASH IN LIEU O F DONATION CHEQUES GIVEN BY IT, APART FROM MERELY MAKING A BALD ALLEGATION TO THAT EFFECT. MOROEVER, THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE POSED TO SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI WHILE RE CORDING STATEMENT ON 3.9.2015 WERE ONLY IN RESPECT OF CORPUS DONATIONS RECEIVED B Y BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AS COULD BE EVIDENT FROM VARIOUS QUE STIONS IN THE STATEMENT. THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN ANY CORPUS DONATIONS TO BATA NAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AND ALL THE ALLEGATIONS LEVELED BY THE LD CIT (E) BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE SAID STATEMENT IS TOTALLY UNWARRANTED AND HAS GOT N O LEGS TO STAND IN THE EYES OF LAW. MOREOVER, THE ADVERSE CONCLUSION WAS REACHED B Y THE LD CIT(E) FROM THE STATEMENT OF SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI VIDE QUESTION NO. 19 WHEREIN HE WAS ASKED BY THE DEPARTMENT TO INFORM ABOUT THE CORPUS DONATI ONS RECEIVED DURING THE PERIOD 1.4.2014 TO 4.9.2014 (ASST YEAR 2015-16) ONLY, WHER EAS THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN 11 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. REVENUE DONATIONS TO THE SAID TRUST DURING ASST YEA RS 2012-13 & 2013-14. MOREOVER, NOWHERE IN THE ENTIRE STATEMENT OF SRI RA BINDRANATH LAHIRI , HE HAD MENTIONED THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE OR ITS OFFICE BE ARERS AND HENCE THERE IS NO REASON TO DRAW AN ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE BASED ON A THIRD PARTY STATEMENT, WHICH IS ACTUALLY NOT AGAINST THE ASSESS EE. HE ALTERNATIVELY ARGUED THAT EVEN IF THE DONATIONS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE WERE HEL D TO BE BOGUS, THEN THE SAME SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME U/S 11 OF THE ACT AND FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12AA OF THE A CT NEED NOT BE WITHDRAWN. HE ARGUED THAT ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE HAD BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE LD CIT(E) THAT THE OFFICER BEARERS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HA D INDEED RECEIVED BACK THE CASH IN LIEU OF DONATIONS GIVEN BY CHEQUES FROM BATANAGAR E DUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AND OTHER TRUSTS. INFACT WHEN THE LD CIT(E) EXAMI NED THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY MR MUKUL AGARWAL, NO QUESTIONS WHA TSOEVER WERE EVEN PUT TO HIM ABOUT THE TRANSACTIONS WITH BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST AS COULD BE EVIDENT FROM THE ORDER SHEET ENTRIES FILED HEREWITH . ALL THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE LD CIT(E) FROM MR MUKUL AGARWAL ABOUT THE OTHER THR EE TRUSTS WERE DULY FILED IN WRITING BY HIM VIDE LETTER DATED 15.2.2016, WHICH H AS BEEN CONVENIENTLY IGNORED BY HIM IN THE ORDER OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION . IN ANY CASE, HE ARGUED THAT THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THE ACT FOR WITHDRAWAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT WHEN THE SAID PROVISION I TSELF CAME INTO EFFECT ONLY FROM 1.10.2014. IN SUPPORT OF HIS VARIOUS ARGUMENTS A S ABOVE, HE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS :- A) DECISION OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS APEEJAY EDUCATION SOCIETY REPORTED IN (2015) 59 TAX MANN.COM 102 (PUNJAB & HARYANA) DATED 10.3.2015. 12 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. B) DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, LUCKNO W BENCH, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS RED ROSE SCHOOL REPORTED IN (2007) 163 TAXMAN 19 (ALL) DATED 7.2.2007. C) DECISION OF HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION REPORTED IN (2015) 54 TAXMANN. COM 255 (KARNATAKA) DATED 9.9.2014. D) DECISION OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF KOLKATA TRIBUNA L IN THE CASE OF JHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST VS CIT (E) IN ITA NOS. 931- 933 / KOL / 2016 DATED 17.3.2017. 7. THE LD DR VEHEMENTLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(E) . 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD INCLUDING THE DETAILED PAPER BOOK FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE COMPRISING OF VARIOUS CORRESPONDENCES BETWEEN THE LD CIT(E) , REP LIES FILED THEREON TOGETHER WITH THE ANNEXURES AND STATEMENT OF SRI RABINDRANAT H LAHIRI WHICH WAS HEAVILY RELIED UPON BY THE LD CIT(E). THE FACTS HAVE BEEN ELABORATELY DEALT WITH IN THE AFORESAID PARAGRAPHS AND HENCE THE SAME ARE NOT REI TERATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. WE FIND THAT THE TRIGGERING FACTOR FOR THE LD CIT(E ) FOR INVOKING THE PLENARY POWERS OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA(3) AND 12AA(4) OF THE ACT IS THE STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI, VI CE CHAIRMAN AND TRUSTEE OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE STATEMENT HAD BEEN RECORDED FROM VICE CHAIRMAN & TRUSTEE OF BATAN AGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST ON 3.9.2015 DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY OPERA TION CONDUCTED IN THE HANDS OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST, WHEREIN , HE HAD DEPOSED THAT THE SAID TRUST HAD RESORTED TO RECEIPT OF CERTAIN BOGUS CORP US DONATIONS FROM VARIOUS OTHER TRUSTS. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI ARE REPRODUCE D BELOW:- 13 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. Q.10. IT IS SEEN FROM THE DONOR LIST THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED CORPUS DONATION AMOUNTING TO RS. 9,17,17,550/- FORM VARIOUS PERSONS OVER A PERIOD OF SIX (6) YEARS FROM FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 TO FINANCIAL YEAR 2013-14. DID YOU CLAIM EXEMPTION UNDER SEC 11(1)(D) FOR SUCH CORPUS DONATI ON? A.10. YES. Q.11. PLEASE CONFIRM THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED CORPUS DONATION. A.11. A MAJOR PART OF THE DONATIONS THAT WERE CLAIM ED EXEMPTION U/S 11(1)(D) WERE NOT GENUINE. THE DONATION RECEIVED IN FINANCIA L YEARS 2008-09, 2009-10 AND 2010-11 WERE GENUINE CORPUS DONATION RECEIVED EITHE R FROM THE TRUSTEES OR PERSONS WHO WERE CLOSE TO THE TRUSTEES. IN FINANCIA L YEAR 2011-12 AND 2012-13 A PART OF THE DONATION WERE GENUINE LIKE THE EARLIER YEARS. HOWEVER, A MAJOR PART OF THE DONATIONS RECEIVED IN THESE TWO FINANCIAL YEARS VIZ. 2011-12 AND 2012-13, SHOWN AS CORPUS DONATION, WERE IN THE NATURE OF ACC OMMODATION ENTRIES TO FACILITATE TWO THINGS- (A) TO PROCURE LOANS FROM THE BANK WE HAD TO SHOW SUBST ANTIAL AMOUNT OF CAPITAL RESERVE IN OUR BALANCE SHEET. (B) WE REQUIRED FUNDS FOR THE EXPANSION OF OUR COLLEGE. THE FEES RECEIVED FROM THE STUDENTS ALONG WITH GENUINE DONATIONS FROM THE TRUSTEES AND THEIR CONTACTS WERE NOT SUFFICIENT TO RUN THE INSTI TUTION. Q.12. WHY ARE YOU SAYING THAT A MAJOR PART OF THE D ONATIONS RECEIVED WERE NOT GENUINE? A.12. IN THOSE CASES, WHICH I ADMIT AS ACCOMMODATIO N ENTRIES, A PART OF THE DONATION RECEIVED WAS RETURNED BACK TO THE DONORS T HROUGH INTERMEDIARIES. Q.13. WHO WERE THE INTERMEDIARIES AND WHAT WERE THE MODES OF RETURNING THE MONEY? A.13. WE WERE INSTRUCTED TO TRANSFER FUNDS THROUGH RTGS TO THE FOLLOWING SEVEN(7) PERSONS: 1. SANTWANA SYNDICATE 2. P.C. SALES CORPORATION 3. KALYANI ENTERPRISES 4. RIYA ENTERPRISES 5. LAXMI NARAYAN TRADERS 14 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. 6. HANUMAN TRADERS 7. RANI SATI TRADE CUM PVT. LIMITED THESE PAYMENTS WERE BOOKED AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD BUILDING. Q.14. IN RESPONSE TO THE EARLIER QUESTION YOU HAVE STATED THAT YOU WERE INSTRUCTED. WHO GAVE YOU THE INSTRUCTION? A.14. I CAN REMEMBER ONLY ONE NAME RIGHT NOW, THAT IS SHRI GULAB PINCHA, MOB NO. 9831015157. HE WAS THE HEY PERSON FOR PROVIDING A L ARGE PART OF BOGUS DONATION RECEIVED WHICH WAS IMMEDIATELY RETURNED BACK TO THE DIFFERENT PARTIES IN THE GUISE OF PAYMENTS TOWARDS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE IN BUILDING. W E DO NOT KNOW ANY DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE DONORS ON BEHALF OF WHOM SHRI GULAB PINCHA ACTED AS A MIDDLE MAN. SHRI PINCHA PROVIDED US WITH THE DETAILS OF THE DON ORS, CHEQUE OF THE DONATIONS, LETTERS OF THE CORPUS DONATIONS ETC. HE ALSO PROVIDED US WI TH THE NAMES AND BANK A/C DETAILS OF THE SEVEN (7) PERSONS, MENTIONED IN ANSWER 13 TO WH OM MONEY HAS TO BE RETURNED BACK THROUGH RTGS. HE ALSO COLLECTED THE MONEY RECE IPTS/80G CERTIFICATIONS ON BEHALF OF THE DONORS. Q.15. DO YOU KNOW ANYONE BY THE NAME OF SHRI ASHOKE KUMAR ROY, PH NO. 9432058699? A.15. NO, I DO NOT KNOW ANY SUCH PERSON. Q.16. WHAT ARE THE ADDRESS AND PAN NO OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED SEVEN (7) PERSONS/ENTITIES. A.16. IT WILL BE PROVIDED IN DUE COURSE. Q.17. IT IS SEEN THAT YOUR TRUST HAS BEEN TAKEN OV ER BY THE TECHNO GROUP IN THE YEAR 2013. WHAT WAS MODUS OPERANDI AND CONSIDERATION REC EIVED OF SUCH TAKE OVER? A.17. AS PER THE UNDERSTANDING SIX(6) OUT OF THE OR IGINAL NINE (9) TRUSTEES RESIGNED FROM THE BOARD AND THEY WERE REPLACED BY SIX(6) TRU STEES BY THE TECHNO GROUP. AS A CONSIDERATION THE TECHNO GROUP PROVIDED UNSECURED S OFT LOANS TO THIS TRUST WHICH IS REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. Q.18. THE LEDGER COPY FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.04.201 4 TO 04.09.2014 IN RESPECT OF GENERAL FUND OF YOUR TRUST HAVING DETAILS OF THE DONORS IS BEING SHOWN TO YOU TO IDENTIFY THE BOGUS DONATIONS ALONG WITH BOGUS DONOR S. A.18. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE LIST OF THE DONORS AP PEARED IN SUCH LEDGER IT IS UNDERSTOOD THAT THE DONORS WHOSE NAMES ARE WRITTEN IN CAPITAL LETTERS UNDER THE SUB- HEAD DONATION-13, DONATION-I AND DONATION-II HAVING TOTAL AMOUNT OF RS. 6,03,07,550/- IS BOGUS AND OUT OF WHICH RS. 5,96,28 ,973/- WAS RETURNED BACK THROUGH 15 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. RTGS TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED SEVEN (7) PERSONS FOLLO WING THE INSTRUCTIONS OF MEDIATORS. 8.1. ONCE THIS STATEMENT WAS FURNISHED TO THE ASSES SEE BY THE LD CIT(E) , THE ASSESSEE REPLIED VIDE LETTER DATED 13.1.2016. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE ENTIRE LETTER DATED 13.1.2016 FILED ON 14.1.2016 IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- JANUARY13, 2016 TO, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-KOLKATA 10B, MIDDLETON ROW, 6 TH FLOOR KOLKATA-700071. DEAR SIR, SUB: CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12A/1 2AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961- REGARDING REF: (1) YOUR LETTER NO. CIT(E)/KOL/12AA/2015-16/35 90 DATED 03.12.2015 (2) OUR LETTER DATED 17 TH DECEMBER, 2015 SUBMITTED ON 22 ND DECEMBER, 2015 YOUR HONOUR GRANTED US A HEARING ON THE ABOVE SUBJE CT ON 5 TH JANUARY, 2016. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING YOU SUBMITTED TO US, T HROUGH OUR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SHRI P.K. AGRAWAL, FCA, A COPY OF ST ATEMENT OF SHRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI, VICE-CHAIRMAN OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RE SEARCH TRUST RECORDED ON 3 RD SEPTEMBER, 2015. YOUR HONOUR HAD INSTRUCTED US TO SUBMIT OUR REPLY/COMMENTS ON THE ABOVE STATEMENT. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAME WE SUBMIT OUR REPLY AND COMMENTS AS UNDER: 1. YOU ALLEGED IN YOUR SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE DATED 3 RD DECEMBER, 2015 THAT BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST, KOLKATA, HA D RETURNED CASH TO US THROUGH WEB OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS. OUR TRUST H AD NO FINANCIAL TRANSACTION WITH 7(SEVEN) PERSONS MENTIONED IN REPLY TO QUESTIO N NO. 13. THESE NAMES ARE NEW FOR US AND FOR THE FIRST TIME THESE NAMES HAVE COME TO OUR NOTICE. NOW THE QUESTION ARISE THAT THESE SEVEN PERSONS GAVE CASH T O WHOM? THIS REPLY CAN BE GIVEN BY THESE SEVEN PERSONS ONLY. HOWEVER, WE DENY THAT WE HAD ANY FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS WITH SUCH PERSONS. A FURTHER QUESTION ARISE IN THIS REGARD THAT 16 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. WHETHER THESE SEVEN PERSONS HAD GIVEN ANY STATEMENT THAT THEY OR ANY ONE OF THEM HAD GIVEN ANY CASH TO OUR TRUST? 2. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 14 NAME OF SHRI GULAB P INCHA APPEARS IN THE ANSWER. WE HAVE NOT HEARD THIS NAME ANY TIME BEFORE RECEIPT OF THIS STATEMENT, NOR WE HAD ANY FINANCIAL TRANSACTION WITH HIM. WE WOULD LIKE T O KNOW FROM YOUR HONOR THAT WHETHER SHRI GULAB PINCHA HAD GIVEN STATEMENT THAT HE HAD ANY FINANCIAL TRANSACTION WITH OUR TRUST? IT IS REQUIRED TO BE AS CERTAINED FROM MR. GULAB PINCHA THAT WHETHER HE KNOW ANY OF OUR TRUSTEE OR I TS OFFICE BEARERS AT ANY POINT OF TIME. 3. CLARIFICATION IS REQUIRED FROM REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 19, ACCORDING TO WHICH A LIST OF DONORS APPEARING IN THE LEDGER COPY WAS SHO WN TO THE DEPONENT. WHETHER SUCH LIST INCLUDE THE NAME OF OUR TRUST WHICH HAD B EEN TERMED AS BOGUS BY THE DEPONENT. IN ANY CASE BEFORE ALLEGING A DONATION AS BOGUS, APPROPRIATE EVIDENCE(S) MUST SUPPORT SUCH ALLEGATION. 4. IN QUESTION NO. 10 &11 THE TERM CORPUS DONATION HAD BEEN USED. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 11 THE DEPONENT HAD STATED- IN FINANC IAL YEAR 2011-12 AND 2012-13 A PART OF THE DONATION WERE GENUINE LIKE THE EARLIE R YEARS. WE STATE THAT OUR DONATION GIVEN TO THE SAID BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST FALLS UNDER THIS PART. FURTHER THE DEPONENT HAD STATED IN THE SAME REPLY HOWEVER A MAJOR PART OF DONATION RECEIVED IN THIS TWO FINANCIAL YEARS VIZ. 2011-12 AND 2012-13, SHOWN AS CORPUS DONATION, WERE IN THE NATURE OF ACCOMMODATI ON ENTRIES.. PLEASE NOTE THAT OUR TRUST HAD NOT MADE ANY CORPUS DONATION TO THE SAID BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST. RATHER OUR DONATION WAS SIMPLE DONATION I.E. NON-CORPUS, WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM OUR DONATION LETTERS AS WELL AS RECEIPTS GRANTED BY THE SAID BATANAGAR EDUCATION AN D RESEARCH TRUST, WHERE YOU WILL NOT FIND THE TERM CORPUS USED ANYWHERE. 5. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 12 WE STATE THAT THE CA SE REFERRED IN THE REPLY ARE WITH REFERENCE TO CORPUS DONATION AS MENTIONED IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 11. THEREFORE, THIS PART OF THE STATEMENT DOES NOT RELATE TO OUR T RUST. 6. IN THE ENTIRE STATEMENT NOWHERE THE DEPONENT I.E . SHRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI, HAD MENTIONED THE NAME OF OUR TRUST. 7. WE HAD STATED IN OUR LETTER DATED 17 TH DECEMBER, 2015 AT PARAGRAPH 4 THAT WE, HOWEVER, WOULD LIKE TO ADD HERE THAT IF THERE IS ANY MISAPPROPRIATION OR SIPHONING OF FUND AT THE END OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST, OUR SOCIETY HAD NO ROLE TO PLAY IN SUCH ACT DONE BY THE BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST PEOPLE AND WE ARE IN THE DARK AND NO T AWARE OF SUCH FACTS. 17 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. IT APPEARS TO US AFTER GOING THROUGH THE STATEMENT OF SHRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI THAT THE TRANSFER OF FUNDS THROUGH RTGS TO THE SEVE N PERSONS MENTIONED IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 13 ARE PART OF MISAPPROPRIATION OR SIPHONING OF FUNDS AT THE END OF BATANAGAR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH TRUST AND TO COVER THEIR OWN MISDEEDS THEY MADE UP A STORY WITHOUT ANY PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT DONATION RECEIVED WAS RETURNED BACK TO THE DONORS. 8. WE ONCE AGAIN REITERATE THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CR OSS-EXAMINE THE SAID SHRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI BEFORE AN INCOME TAX AUTHORITY, BEFORE HIS STATEMENT IS TAKEN AS LEGAL PIECE OF DOCUMENT IN OUR CASE. 9. WE STATE THAT NO DIRECT & LEGAL EVIDENCE, HAD BE EN BROUGHT ON RECORD WHICH THROW LIGHT ON THE ALLEGATIONS MADE IN YOUR SHOW-CA USE NOTICE DATED 3 RD DECEMBER, 2015. 10. COPY OF AFFIDAVIT DULY SWORN & AFFIRM BY THE UN DERSIGNED IS ATTACHED. IN CONCLUSION WE ONCE AGAIN STATE THAT OUR TRUST HA D MADE GENUINE DONATIONS AND CARRIED OUT CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE EVIDENT FROM INCOME AND EXPENDITURE AND BALANCE SHEET OF THREE SCHOOLS RUNS BY OUR SOCI ETY FOR DIFFERENT YEARS AND FURTHER RECONFIRM THAT OUR TRUST IS NOT ENGAGED IN RECEIVING BACK ANY DONATED AMOUNT FROM THE DONEE. BY GIVING DONATIONS TO OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIO NS OUR SOCIETY HAD BEEN SPREADING THE EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES IN OUR NATION AND THESE ARE A NOBLE CAUSE FOR WHICH OUR SOCIETY IS FUNCTIONING FOR LAST SO MANY YEARS. WE REQUEST YOUR HONOUR TO NOT TO TAKE ANY ADVERSE STEPS WHICH WILL ADVERSE LY AFFECT THE ACTIVITIES OF RUNNING OUR SCHOOLS AND MAKING FURTHER DONATIONS TO OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS WITHIN INDIA. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE WE REQUEST YOU TO DROP THE PRO CEEDINGS FOR CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE GRANTED U/S 12A OF THE I.T . ACT, 1961. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, FOR VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTI FIC ADVANCEMENT (B.N. JAIN) JT. SECRETARY 18 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. 8.2. AT THE OUTSET, WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE AR GUMENTS OF THE LD AR THAT THERE IS NO NEED TO CROSS-EXAMINE SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI BY THE ASSESSEE AS NO ADVERSE STATEMENTS / CONTENTS WERE REFLECTED AGAINST THE AS SESSEE IN THE SAID STATEMENT. IN FACT THERE IS NOT EVEN A WHISPER ABOUT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY OR ITS OFFICE BEARERS IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER IN THE ENTIRE STATEMENT OF SR I RABINDRANATH LAHIRI. HENCE THE LD CIT(E) DECIDING AGAINST THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD NOT AVAILED THE OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS-EXAMINATIO N IS OF NO RELEVANCE FOR INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA(3) OF THE A CT. WE FIND THAT THE LD CIT(E) HAD MADE A BALD ALLEGATION THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y WAS INVOLVED IN MONEY LAUNDERING BY RECEIVING CASH FROM VARIOUS OTHER TRU STS IN LIEU OF DONATIONS PAID TO THEM BY CHEQUES. THIS ALLEGATION IS NOT PROVEN BY ANY MATERIAL EVIDENCE BROUGHT ON RECORD AND IS COMPLETELY WITHOUT ANY BASIS. IT COULD BE SEEN FROM THE STATEMENT REPRODUCED SUPRA THAT SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI HAD I N FACT DEPOSED THAT CERTAIN CORPUS DONATIONS RECEIVED BY BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST WERE BOGUS. BUT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN ANY CORPUS DONATIONS TO THE SAID TRUST. INFACT IT HAD GIVEN ONLY REVENUE DONATIONS TO THE SAID TRUST. MO ROEVER, WE FIND FROM THE STATEMENT THAT SOME OF THE CORPUS DONATIONS DURING THE PERIOD 1.4.2014 TO 4.9.2014 WERE BOGUS, BUT WHEREAS, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN ANY DONATIONS TO BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TRUST DURING THE SAID PERIOD. INFACT FROM THE DETAILS OF DONATIONS PAID BY ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO OTHER TRUSTS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD GIVEN DONATIONS TO BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH T RUST ONLY IN ASST YEARS 2012-13 & 2013-14. MOREOVER, IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 13 IN THE SAID STATEMENT, SRI RABINDRANATH LAHIRI HAD REPLIED THAT THEIR TRUS T WERE INSTRUCTED TO TRANSFER FUNDS THROUGH RTGS TO SEVEN DIFFERENT PERSONS , OUT OF WHICH, NONE OF THE SEVEN PERSONS WERE RELATED TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. INFA CT THE LD CIT(E) HAD NOT BROUGHT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD LINKING THOSE SEVEN PERSONS WITH EITHER THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY OR THE OFFICE BEARERS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, IN A NY MANNER WHATSOEVER. IT IS WELL 19 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. SETTLED THAT THE PERSON MAKING THE ALLEGATION HAS T O PROVE WITH MATERIAL EVIDENCES THAT THE ALLEGATION LEVELED AGAINST ANY OTHER PERSO N IS TRUE AND CORRECT. IN THE INSTANT CASE, EXCEPT MAKING A BALD ALLEGATION, NO E VIDENCES IN ANY MANNER WHATSOEVER HAD BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD . WE FIND THA T THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD BEEN UNNECESSARILY IMPLEADED BY THE LD CIT(E) IN THE ENT IRE EPISODE, WITHOUT ANY BASIS. MOREOVER, WE FIND THAT WHEN THE LD CIT(E) EXAMINED THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY MR MUKUL AGARWAL, NO QUESTIONS WERE POSED O N HIM ABOUT THE TRANSACTIONS WITH BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TR UST. THIS IS EVIDENT FROM THE COPIES OF ORDER SHEET ENTRIES FILED BY THE LD AR. ALL THE DETAILS CALLED FOR BY THE LD CIT(E) FROM MR MUKUL AGARWAL ABOUT THE OTHER THREE TRUSTS WERE DULY FILED IN WRITING BY HIM VIDE LETTER DATED 15.2.2016, WHICH W E FIND HAD BEEN IGNORED BY THE LD CIT(E) IN THE ORDER OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRAT ION. ACCORDINGLY WE HOLD THAT THERE IS NO CASE MADE OUT BY THE LD CIT(E) FOR INVO KING POWERS OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA(3) AND 12AA(4) OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE HAD CROPPED UP BEFORE THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRI BUNAL WITH REFERENCE TO TRANSACTIONS WITH BATANAGAR EDUCATION & RESEARCH TR UST IN THE CASE OF JHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST VS CIT(E) IN ITA NOS. 931-933/KOL /2016 DATED 17.3.2017 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER:- 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE INS TANT CASE RELATES TO THE CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED U/S 12A/12AA OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INVOLVED IN PROVIDING THE BOGUS DONATION TO THE VARIOUS TRUST AND SOCIETIES. THIS FACT OF BOGUS TRA NSACTIONS IN THE FORM OF DONATION WAS REVEALED ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT OF THE M ANAGING TRUSTEE RECORDED IN THE COURSE OF SURVEY U/S 133A OF THE ACT ON BERT. THE M ANAGING TRUSTEE OF BE BERT ADMITTED THAT IT HAS RECEIVED BOGUS DONATION THROUG H A PERSON NAMELY SHRI GULAB PINCHA. THUS THE ID. CIT(EXEMPTION) CANCELLED THE R EGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED U/S 12A OF THE ACT. HOWEVER ON THE PERUSAL OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY TH E MANAGING TRUSTEE OF THE BERT WE FIND THAT HE ADMITTED THAT THE MAJOR BOGUS DONATION WAS RECEIVED FROM VARIOUS TRUST/SOCIETIES BUT THE ID CIT(EXEMPTION) H AS NOT PROVIDED ANY LIST IN ITS ORDER WHERE THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS REFLE CTING. WE ALSO FIND AS PER THE 20 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. STATEMENT OF MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT THAT THE BOGU S DONATION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE VARIOUS TRUSTS/ SOCIETIES THROUGH SHRI GUL AB PINCHA AND HE HAS NOT PROVIDED THE NAMES OF THE DONORS. SIMILARLY, THE BO GUS DONATION RECEIVED WAS SHOWN AS INCURRED FOR THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE BY IS SUING CHEQUES IN THE NAME OF SEVERAL PERSONS. THE NAMES OF THESE PERSONS WERE VE RY MUCH DISCLOSED BY THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT BUT THE NAME OF THE DONORS WAS NOT ANYWHERE SHOWN IN THE RECORDED STATEMENT. 8.1 IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO WHIS PER ABOUT THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAS GIVEN BOGUS DONATION AND THE S AME HAS COME BACK TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF CASH THROUGH THE CHANNEL O F SOME PERSONS. ADMITTEDLY THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN DONATION TO BERT FOR RS. 51ACS. THE SAME WAS TREATED AS BOGUS DONATION ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT OF THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT BUT WE FIND THAT THE STATEMENT OF THE MANAGING TRUSTEE IS NOT REFLECTING THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE RATHER IT IS SAYING THAT MAJOR DONATION RE CEIVED' WAS BOGUS. THE MAJOR DONATION DOES NOT MEAN HUNDRED PERCENT DONATION RAT HER IT REFERS MAJOR PART OF THE DONATION. NOW THE QUESTION ARISES WHETHER THE N AME OF THE ASSESSEE IS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF MAJOR DONATION. IT IS A QUESTION OF FACT WHICH HAS TO BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCES. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORD SUGGESTING THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE L IST OF BOGUS DONORS. AS PER THE ORDER OF ID CIT (EXEMPTION) SHRI GULAB PINCHA WAS A CTING AS THE CONDUIT IN ARRANGING THE BOGUS DONATION BUT NO STATEMENT WAS R ECORDED OF SHRI GULAB PINCHA BY ISSUING NOTICE U/ 131 OF THE ACT. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE STATEMENT SHRI GULAB PINCHA WA: VERY MUCH IMPORTANT TO UNVEIL THE FACT' OF THE BOGUS DONATION BUT THE ID CIT (EXEMPTIONS) HAS MISE RABLY FAILED TO DO SO. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE REVENUE FADED TO PR OVE WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE THAT THE MONEY HAS COME BACK TO THE ASSESSEE. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE EVEN ASSUMING THAT T HE DONATION TO BERT IS BOGUS THEN THE AMOUNT OF BOGUS DONATION WILL NOT BE ELIGI BLE FOR EXEMPTIONS U/S 11 OF THE ACT. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE ISSUED U/S 12A OF THE ACT CANNOT BE CANCELLED AS LONG AS THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE WITHIN THE PROVISIONS OF LAW. THE OBJECTS BYELAWS OF THE TRUS T ARE PLACED ON PAGES 264 TO 283 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND ON THE BASIS OF SAME OBJE CTS THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE U/S 12A AND 80G AND 10(23C ) OF THE ACT. WHILE HOLDING SO, WE FIND SUPPORT & GUIDANCE FROM THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. APEEJAY EDU CATION SOCIETY REPORTED IN 59 TAXMANN.COM 102 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: 'UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, THE COMMISSIONER, A T THE RELEVANT TIME IN THE YEAR 1999 HAD CALLED FOR ALL DOCUMENTS AND INFO RMATION FROM THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GE NUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INSTITUTION AND AFTER MAKING ENQU IRES HAD PASSED THE ORDER REGISTERING THE SAID INSTITUTION AND GIVING IT THE BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 12A 21 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. OF THE ACT, WHICH MADE THE INSTITUTION ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. UNDER SECTION 12AA(3) OF THE ACT, THE COMMISSIONER WAS TO BE SATISFIED ABOUT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SAID INSTITUTION AND IF THEY WERE NOT GENUINE AND THE SA ME WERE NOT BEING CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE I NSTITUTION HE COULD PASS THE ORDER CANCELLING THE REGISTRATION. IT CANNOT BE DISPUTED THAT THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING OUT ITS OBJECTS AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE SAME HAS NEVER BEEN DOUBTED. THE ALLEGATION ISREGARDING THE ALLEGED SUPPLY OF THE INSTALLATION OF THE SOFTWARE AND WHETHER THE SAME WAS DONE BY M/S. WSL OR NOT. MEREL Y BECAUSE SH. SANJAY D. SONAWANI HAD GIVEN A STATEMENT, THE COMMI SSIONER AS SUCH IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CANCELLING THE REGISTRATION GRANTE D ON 13.05.1999 W.E.F. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. THE ASSESSEE HAD PLACED VA RIOUS MATERIALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL TO SHOW THAT SOFTWARE MODULES P URCHASED WERE INSTALLED BETWEEN 2004 TO 2011 AND THE ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED AS MUCH AS 91.71% OF THE RECEIPTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004 -05. ACCORDINGLY, KEEPING IN VIEW THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS OTICED ABOVE, HIGH COURT ARE OF THE OPINION THAT TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PASSING THE IMPUGNE D ORDER FOR WITHDRAWING THE EXEMPTION AS ADMITTEDLY, THE RESPON DENT-ASSESSEE IS CARRYING OUT EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES BY RUNNING A LA RGE NUMBER OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND, THEREFORE, THE QUESTIONS OF LAW SOUGHT TO BE RAISED DO NOT ARISE. ' THE FACTS OF THE ABOVE CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THE INST ANT CASE BEFORE US. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE TRUST DULY CONSTI TUTED A CHARITABLE TRUST DULY CONSTITUTED UNDER A DEED OF TRUST AS A PUBLIC CHARI TABLE TRUST FOR IMPARTING EDUCATION WHICH IS A 'CHARITABLE PURPOSE' U/S. 2( 1 5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE TRUST DULY APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE IT ACT OF THE JHA EDUCATIONAL TRUST BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) IN CONFORMITY WITH RULE 17 A AND SUBMITTED FORM NO. 1OA TOGETHER WITH OTHER REQU ISITE DOCUMENTS. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) AFTER VERIFICATI ON OF DOCUMENTS AND AFTER BEING SATISFIED ABOUT THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST AND G ENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES GRANTED REGISTRATION EFFECTIVE FROM 01.04.2001 VIDE ORDER NO. DIT(E)(F- 3/8E/437/2CCI-02 DATED 11.04.2002. A COPY OF THE SA ID REGISTRATION IS ENCLOSED ON PAGES 4-6 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) GRANTED APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G, INITIALLY FROM 26.03.2002 TO 31.03.2005 AND THEN FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. FURTHER, ON 23.09.2011 IT WAS EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY. A COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE GRANTING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G IS ENCLOSED ON PAGES 6A TO 6C OF THE PAPER BOOK. IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT NO DONATION WHATSOEVER HAS B EEN RECEIVED BY JHA TRUST (IN 22 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. SHORT) TILL DATE. JHA TRUST IS RUNNING SCHOOLS IN T WO CAMPUS SINCE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.ONE IS PRIMARY AND JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL ON VIP ROAD, BAGUIATI, KOLKATA-159 AND ANOTHER IS SECONDARY (ICSE) AND HIGHER SECONDAR Y (ISC) SCHOOL AT ASWINI NAGAR, BAGUIATI, KOLKATA-159. THE SCHOOL IS AFFILIA TED WITH COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATIONS NEW DELHI (ICSE-X A ND ISC-XII). THE TRUST HAS STARTED ANOTHER SCHOOL NEAR RANCHI WHICH IS SITUATE D IN REMOTE AREA MAINLY WITH THE OBJECT OF IMPARTING EDUCATION TO GENERAL AND TR IBAL POOR STUDENTS AND PROVIDING FREE TUITION AND/OR CHARGING CONCESSIONAL RATE OF TUITION FEES TO A LARGE NUMBER OF STUDENTS IN DESERVING CASES. THE SCHOOL I S OPERATIONAL SINCE APRIL 2015. THE ROLL- STRENGTH OF STUDENTS AT PRESENT IS ABOUT 3000 IN ALL THE SCHOOLS TAKEN TOGETHER. AT PRESENT, MORE THAN 200 STAFF MEMBERS A RE INVOLVED IN THE SCHOOL INCLUDING TEACHING AND NON- TEACHING STAFF. APART F ROM STAFF SEVERAL OTHER PERSONS ARE DEPENDENT ON SCHOOLS FOR THEIR LIVELIHOOD AS TH EY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH RELATED ACTIVITIES OF SCHOOL SUCH AS CANTEEN, TRANSPORTATIO N ETC., THE HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL IS IMPARTING GOOD EDUCATION. THE PASS RESULT IS BETWEEN 97% T 100% AT CLASS X AND CLASS XII LEVELS WITH HIGHEST SCORE TOU CHING AS HIGH AS 9 CC FURTHER, EVERY YEAR MORE THAN 40 STUDENTS SCORE MORE THAN 90 % AND MAN MERITORIOUS STUDENTS HAVE COME OUT FROM THIS SCHOOL WHO HAVE GO NE FOR FURTHER HIGHER STUDIES IN ENGINEERING, MEDICAL AND OTHER PROFESSIONAL DEGR EES. EVERY YEAR A SCHOOL MAGAZINE 'DAWN' IS PUBLISHED BY THE STUDENTS AND TE ACHERS. TRUST ALSO PUBLISHES QUARTERLY NEWS BULLETINS FOR THE BENEFIT OF STUDENT S. A SAMPLE COPY WAS ALSO FILED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE RECORD. IN OTHER CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES ALSO MAY STUDENTS HAVE REPRESENTED AT ST ATE AND NATIONAL LEVEL THE VISION OF THE TRUST IS TO IMPART EDUCATION WHERE TH E NEED IS MORE AND AS SUCH THE SCHOOLS ARE BEING OPENED IN RURAL AREAS. LAST YEAR, IT HAS ACQUIRED LAND AT RAHIKI, IN MADHUBANI DISTRICT OF BIHAR AND IT PLANS TO STAR T CONSTRUCTION IN THE NEXT YEAR. HOWEVER ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE ID. CIT(EXEM PTION) HAS NO WHERE HIGHLIGHTED THE ABOVE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE AN D NO DEFECT HAS ALSO BEEN REPORTED. THEREFORE, IT CAN SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THA T ALL THE ACTIVITIES ARE THE GENUINE ACTIVITIES. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE TH AT THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE AY 2012-13 WAS CARRIED OUT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AND T HE DONATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DULY ACCEPTED. IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE DONATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE OVER THE SEVERAL YEARS ARE NEGLIGIBLE TO THE GROSS RECEIPTS OF THE TRUST A S DETAILED UNDER:- FY GROSS RECEIPT DONATION DONATION AS % OF GROSS RECEIPT 2010-11 42,296,282 2,010,000 5% 2011-12 46,450,797 500,000 1% 2012-13 51,353,957 1,400,000 3% 2013-14 60,157,202 1,000,000 2% 2014-15 67,355,336 11,000 0% 23 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. 8.2 SIMILARLY, WE ALSO RELY IN THE JUDGMENT OF HON' BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION RE PORTED IN 59 TAXMANN.COM 102 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER:- 'IF TRUSTEES WERE MISAPPROPRIATING FUNDS AND WERE MAINTAINING FALSE ACCOUNTS, IT WAS OPEN TO AUTHORITIES TO DELL) BENEFIT UNDER SECT ION 11 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, BUT THAT COULD NOT BE GROUND FOR CANCELATION OF REG ISTRATION ITSELF.' APPLYING THE ABOVE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE H IGH COURT OF KAMATAKA IN THE CASE OF ISLAMIC ACADEMY OF EDUCATION (SUPRA), IT CA N BE CONCLUDED THAT EVEN THE DONATION TO BERT IS PROVED TO BE BOGUS THEN ALSO TH E REGISTRATION U1S 12A OF THE ACT CANNOT BE CANCELLED BUT THE SAID AMOUNT OF DONA TION WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12A OF THE ACT PRESCRIBE CONDITIONS FOR REGISTRATION OF TRUST AND MAKE OBLIGATORY TO THE TRUST OR THE INSTI TUTION TO SEEK REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, IF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTI ON INTENDS TO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. THE SE PROVISIONS THUS MAKE IT CLEAR THAT IF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION IS NOT REGISTE RED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, IT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CLAIM ANY EXEMPTION OR EXCLUSI ON OF ITS INCOME FROM THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR, EVEN IF SUCH INCOME IS OTHERWISE LIABLE TO BE EXCLUDED UNDER ANY OF THE CLAUSES OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THUS, IN A CASE WHERE REGISTRATION IS REFUSED, THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTI ON WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO CLAIM ANY SUCH EXEMPTION OR EXCLUSION OF ITS INCOME FROM THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. THE INCOME-TAX ACT THROUGH SECTION 1 2A HAS MADE IT OBLIGATORY FOR CHARITABLE TRUSTS AND INSTITUTIONS TO GET THEMSELVE S REGISTERED WITH THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES FAILING WHICH THE BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION FROM INCOME TAX WOULD BE DENIED. THE REQUIREMENT OF REGISTRATION BEING PROCE DURAL IS PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT WHICH READS AS UNDER:- 'PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION. 12AA. (1) THE [***] [PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF] COM MISSIONER, ON RECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF A TRUST OR INSTITUT ION MADE UNDER CLAUSE (A) [OR CLAUSE (AA) OF SUB-SECTION (L)] OF SECTION 12A, SHA LL- (A) CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS 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 INSTITUTION AND MAY ALSO MAKE SUCH INQ UIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN THIS BEHALF; AND (B) AFTER SATISFYING HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF T HE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES, HE- 24 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. (I) SHALL PASS AN ORDER IN WRITING REGISTERING THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION; (II) SHALL, IF HE IS NOT SO SATISFIED, PASS AN ORDE R IN WRITING REFUSING TO REGISTER THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION, AND A COPY OF SUCH ORDER SHALL BE SENT TO THE APPLI CANT:' FROM THE ABOVE PROVISIONS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ID CIT(EXEMPTION) BEFORE GRANTING THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE SHALL CONDUCT NECESSAR Y ENQUIRIES AS HE THINK FIT IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF A CTIVITIES OF THE TRUST. ONCE THE ID CIT(EXEMPTION) IS SATISFIED WITH THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES THEN HE WILL GRANT THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE. IN THE INSTANT CASE BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED EXCEP T THE DONATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO BERT. THUS IN OUR VIEW AT THE MOST THE E EMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT WILL BE DENIED TO SUCH DONATION. THUS, IN SUCH CIRC UMSTANCES THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT CANNOT BE CANCELLED. IN THIS REGARD, WE RELY IN THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF CIT VS. RED ROSE SCHOOL (2007) 212 CTR 394 (ALL). THE RELEVANT EXTRA CT OF THE JUDGMENT IS EXTRACTED BELOW: 'A READING OF PROVISIONS OF SUB-CLS. (A) AND (B) OF S. 12M MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE CIT HAS TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUI NENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND ALSO ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION. ON BEING SATISFIED ABOUT THE GENUINENE SS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION AND ALSO ABOUT ITS OBJECTS , THE CIT WOULD EITHER GRANT THE CERTIFICATE OR WOULD REJECT THE PRAYER. I N ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUS T OR THE INSTITUTION, HE CAN CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION FROM THE TRU ST OR THE INSTITUTION, AS HE THINKS NECESSARY AND HE IS ALSO EMPOWERED TO MAK E SUCH ENQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN THIS BEHALF. THE OBJECTS O F THE TRUST CAN BE HAD FROM THE BYE-LAWS OR THE DEED OF TRUST, AS THE CASE MAY BE AND UNLESS, OF COURSE, THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST APPARENTLY MAKE OU T THAT THEY WERE NOT IN CONSONANCE WITH THE PUBLIC POLICY OR THAT THEY' WER E NOT THE OBJECTS OF ANY CHARITABLE PURPOSE, REGISTRATION CANNOT BE REFUSED ; ACCORDINGLY ON THIS GROUND. IN REGARD TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVIT IES OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION, WHOSE OBJECTS DO NOT RUN CONTRARY TO P UBLIC POLICY AND ARE, IN FACT, RELATED TO CHARITABLE PURPOSES, THE CIT IS AG AIN EMPOWERED TO MAKE ENQUIRIES AS HE THINKS FIT. IN CASE THE ACTIVITIES ARE NOT GENUINE AND THEY ARE NOT BEING CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OB JECTS OF THE TRUST/SOCIETY OR THE INSTITUTION, OF COURSE, THE RE GISTRATION CAN AGAIN BE REFUSED. BUT ON MERE PRESUMPTIONS AND ON SURMISES T HAT INCOME DERIVED BY THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION IS BEING MISUSED OR THAT THERE IS SOME APPREHENSION THAT THE SAME WOULD NOT BE USED IN THE PROPER MANNER AND FOR THE PURPOSES RELATING TO ANY CHARITABLE PURPOSE , REJECTION CANNOT BE MADE. SEC. 12AA, WHICH LAYS DOWN THE PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION, DOES NOT SPEAK ANYWHERE THAT THE CIT, WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR 25 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. REGISTRATION, SHALL ALSO SEE THAT THE INCOME DERIVE D BY THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION IS EITHER NOT BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABL E PURPOSE OR SUCH INSTITUTION IS EARNING PROFIT. THE LANGUAGE USED IN THE SECTION ONLY REQUIRES THAT ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION MUS T BE GENUINE, WHICH ACCORDINGLY WOULD MEAN, THEY ARE IN CONSONANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST/INSTITUTION, AND ARE NOT MERE CAMOUFLAGE BUT ARE REAL, PURE AND SINCERE, NOR AGAINST THE PROPOSED OBJECTS. THE PROFIT EARNING OR MISUSE OF THE INCOME DERIVED BY CHARITABLE INSTITUTION FROM ITS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES, MAY BE A GROUND [OR REFUSING EXEMPTION ONLY WAIT RESPECT TO THAT PART OF THE IN COME BUT CANNOT BE TAKEN TO BE A SYNONYM TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIE S OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION. IT IS SIGNIFICANT TO MENTION THAT REGI STRATION UNDER S. 12AA DOES NOT NECESSARILY ENTITLE THE ASSESSEE TO GET TH E INCOME EXCLUDED FROM THE INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATION OF TAX LIABILITY BUT IT ONLY ENTITLES THE ASSESSEE TO CLAI M SUCH EXEMPTION, WHICH OTHERWISE COULD NOT BE CLAIMED IN THE ABSENCE OF RE GISTRATION. THE ENQUIRY BY THE CIT SHALL REMAIN RESTRICTED TO THE EXAMINATI ON, AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSEE, WHO HAS MOVED THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTR ATION UNDER S. 12A, IS ACTUALLY IN THE ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE GENUINE. GENUI NENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION HAS TO BE SEEN, KEE PING IN MIND THE OBJECTS THEREOF, WHICH NECESSARILY MEANS THAT THE CIT SHALL SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE AND IN CON SONANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION. IN OTHER WORDS, IF ESTABLISHING AND RUNNING A SCHOOL IS THE OBJECT OF THE SOCIETY, AS GIVEN IN IT S BYE-LAWS, IT HAS TO BE SATISFIED THAT THE SOCIETY HAS ESTABLISHED THE SCHO OL, WHERE EDUCATION IS BEING IMPARTED AS PER RULES AND THE FACTUM OF ESTAB LISHMENT AND RUNNING SCHOOL IS A GENUINE ACTIVITY. THE ENQUIRY REGARDING GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES CANNOT BE STRETCHED BEYOND THIS. SUFFICI ENT SAFEGUARDS HAVING BEEN GIVEN IN SS. 11, 12 AND 13 FOR ASSESSING THE I NCOME WHICH HAS NOT BEEN APPLIED TO THE PURPOSE OF THE TRUST OR THE INS TITUTION, THE INTENTION OF THE LAW MAKER AND THE SCOPE AND PURPORT OF THE PROV ISION IS APPARENT WHILE CONSIDERING THE QUESTION OF REGISTRATION. ' IN VIEW OF ABOVE PRECEDENT, WE FIND THAT THE ACTIVI TIES OF THE TRUST IN RELATION TO ITS EDUCATION ACTIVITIES HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED AND ON T HE BASIS OF SAME ACTIVITIES VARIOUS REGISTRATIONS U/S 12A, 80G AND 1O(23C) WERE AWARDED TO THE ASSESSEE. SIMPLY THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN DONATION TO A TRUST W HICH IS INVOLVED IN THE BOGUS TRANSACTIONS CANNOT BE THE BASIS FOR THE DENIAL OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATES AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. 8.3 IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GIVING DONATION IN EVERY YEAR WHICH HAS BEEN DULY ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE AS EVIDENCED FROM THE DETAILS SUBMITTED WHICH IS PLACED ON PAGES 23 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE AMOUNT OF DONATION 26 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST OVER THE SEVERAL YEARS TO THE OTHER TRUST IS VERY MUCH CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES.. IN THIS CONNECTION THE CBDT HAS .ISSUED INSTRUCTION NO. 1132 DATE 05.01.1978 WHEREIN IT WAS CLARIFIED THAT THE PAYMENT OF A SUM BY ONE CHARITABLE TRUST TO ANOTHER FOR UTILIZATION BY THE DONEE-TRUST TOWARDS ITS CHARITABLE OBJECTS IS PROPER APPLICATION OF INCOME FOR A CHARITABLE PURPOSE. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE NOTICE FOR THE CANCELLATION O F THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE WAS ISSUED U/S 12AA(3) OF THE ACT AS EVIDENT FROM THE N OTICE PLACED ON PAGE 12 OF THE PAPER BOOK. HOWEVER, LD. CIT(EXEMPTION) HAS ALSO IN VOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA(4) OF THE ACT FOR CANCELLING THE REG ISTRATION CERTIFICATE WHICH IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW AGAINST THE PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL J USTICE. THE ID. CIT(E) BEFORE INVOKING THE PROVISION SECTION 12AA(4) SHOULD HAVE ISSUED THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. THEREFORE, WE FIND THAT THE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO T HE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN FURNISHED. 8.4 WE ALSO FIND THAT ID. AR HAS GIVEN THE DETAILED PROFILE OF THE ASSESSEE AND ITS ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE PLACED IN ITS ANNUAL MAGAZINE WITH THE NAME 'DAWN'. THE TRANSACTION FOR THE DONATION WAS MADE THROUGH BANKI NG CHANNEL AND THE DEPARTMENT FAILED TO BRING ANYTHING ON RECORD THAT THE DONATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE HAS COME BACK TO IT IN THE FORM OF THE CAS H. AT THE MOST, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE REVENUE COULD HAVE BROUGHT THE AMOUNT OF DONATION TO THE TAX. IN THE INSTANT CASE SHREE GULAB PINCHA (SGP FOR SHO RT) MOB. NO.9831015157 WAS ACTING AS CONDUIT IN PROVIDING A LARGE AMOUNT OF BO GUS DONATION RECEIVED WHICH WAS IMMEDIATELY RETURNED BACK TO THE DIFFERENT PART IES IN THE GUISE OF PAYMENTS TOWARDS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE IN BUILDING. HOWEVER, N O STATEMENT WAS -SGP WAS RECORDED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BY ISSUING ANY NOTICE/SUMMON U/S 133(6) / 131 OF THE ACT. THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT HAS AC CEPTED IN HIS STATEMENT THAT SGP WAS INVOLVED IN THE AFORESAID BOGUS DONATION TR ANSACTION. THEREFORE, IT WAS NECESSARY FOR THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES TO CROSS EXAM INE SGP TO ESTABLISH / ASCERTAIN HOW THE MONEY HAS RETURNED BACK TO THE AS SESSEE-TRUST. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT HAS HIGHLIGHTED THE NAME OF 7 INTERMEDIARIES USED FOR RETURNING THE MONEY OF THE DONATION AND TH E NAME OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT APPEARING IN THAT LIST. SIMILARLY, THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT HAS NOT MENTIONED THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE BOGUS D ONATION WAS RECEIVED. THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF BERT-HAS MENTIONED VERY VAGUELY THAT MAJOR PART OF THE DONATION WAS BOGUS WITHOUT BRINGING THE NAME OF THE DONORS ON RECORD. BUT HE MENTIONED THE NAME OF SGP AS THE MIDDLE MAN FOR ARR ANGING SUCH BOGUS DONATION. THUS IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE STATEMEN T OF SGP WAS NECESSARY FOR ESTABLISHING THE FACT THAT HOW THE MONEY HAS RETURN ED TO ASSESSEE AND WHETHER THE MONEY WAS ACTUALLY RETURNED TO THE ASSESSEE-TRUST. AS THE STATEMENT OF THE SGP HAS NOT BEEN RECORDED, THE QUESTION OF CONFRONTING THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT ARISE. AS PER QUESTION NO. 14 OF THE STATEMENT OF THE MANAGING TRUSTEE OF 27 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. BERT, IT IS CLEAR THAT SGP WAS THE ONLY PARTY TO AR RANGE ALL THE BOGUS DONATIONS BUT HIS STATEMENT IS MISSING WHICH WAS CRUCIAL TO U NVEIL THE CHAIN OF BOGUS DONATION. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN REVERSIN G THE ORDER OF ID. CIT(E) AND ACCORDINGLY THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. NOW COMING TO THE OTHER APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA 9321K0L/2016 AND 933/KOL/2016 9. AT THE OUTSET, WE FIND THAT WE HAVE ALREADY ADJU DICATED THE ISSUE RAISED BY ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 9311K02016 IN ITS FAVOUR. FOLLO WING THE SAME PRINCIPLES, WE ALLOW BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE. 10. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS OF ASSESSE E ARE ALLOWED. 8.3. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FINDINGS AND RESPECTF ULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS RELIED UPON HEREINABOVE, WE HOLD THAT TH E LD CIT(E) OUGHT NOT TO HAVE INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA(3) AND 12AA( 4) OF THE ACT FOR CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y. ACCORDINGLY THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. SINCE THE PRELIMINAR Y GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED, WE ARE NOT GIVING ANY FINDING WITH REG ARD TO WITHDRAWAL OF REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12A OF THE ACT WITH RETROS PECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1.4.2011 IN THIS APPEAL. 9.IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 06.09.2017 SD/- SD/- [A.T.VARKEY] [ M.BALAGANESH ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 06.09.2017 SB, SR. PS 28 ITA NO.1456/KOL/2016 VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIFI C ADV. A.YR. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIDYA BHARATI SOCIETY FOR EDUCATIONAL & SCIENTIF IC ADVANCEMENT 2. CIT(EXEMPTION), KOLKATA 3. C.I.T.- KOLKATA. 4. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVAT E SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O., ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHE S