Geetanjali Medical Trust, Nashik V. Commissioner of Income-tax: 1,

ITA 1579/PUN/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1305 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 8 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-08-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR HARSHVARDHINI BUTY
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

] IQ.KS IQ.KS IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE !' # BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM / ITA NO.1579/PN/2007 GEETANJALI MEDICAL TRUST, C/O. DR. VAIBHAV J. PUSTAKE, B/H-SHIVAM TOWERS, A/P. PIMPALGAON, BASWANT, DIST. NASHIK PAN NO. AABTG0002D . / APPELLANT V/S CIT-I, NASHIK . / RESPONDENT / ASSESSEE BY : NONE (WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED) / DEPARTMENT BY : DR. HARSHVARDHINI BUTY $ / ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 27-09-2007 PASSED BY THE CIT-I, NASHIK REFUSING R EGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, A WRITTEN SUBMISSION HAS BEEN FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE REQUESTING THE TRIBUNAL TO CONSIDER THE SAME A ND DECIDE THE ISSUE. ACCORDINGLY, THE MATTER WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEA RING AND / DATE OF HEARING :11.08.2015 !' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:14.08.2015 2 ITA NO.1579/PN/2007 THE APPEAL IS BEING DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF THE WRITTEN SU BMISSION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTME NTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 3. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE REA DS AS UNDER : THE CIT-I, NASHIK IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING THE A PPLICATION OF THE APPELLANT FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT. 4. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE MAD E AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A ON 20-03-2007 REQUESTING FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE I.T. ACT. THE LD.CIT NOTED TH AT THE TRUST HAS COME INTO EXISTENCE W.E.F. 13-12-2006 AS PER TH E TRUST DEED WHICH IS DULY REGISTERED WITH ASSISTANT CHARITY COMM ISSIONER FOR TRUST, NASHIK UNDER BPT ACT, 1950 NO.E-1116 DATED 1 3-12- 2006. THE ENQUIRIES WERE MADE THROUGH THE ADDL. CIT,RAN GE-1. NASHIK AND THE ITO, WARD-1(1),NASHIK WHO REPORTED THAT TH E TRUST HAS NOT CONDUCTED ANY ACTIVITIES EXCEPT MEDICAL CHECK-UP CAMP FOR WHICH ALSO THERE IS NO EVIDENCE/PROOF TO SHOW THAT THE M EDICAL CHECK-UP CAMP HAD BEEN HELD. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE C IT WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE TRUST HAS NOT CONDUCTED ANY CHAR ITABLE ACTIVITIES SO FAR. HE, THEREFORE, REJECTED THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE . WE FIND IN THE INSTANT CASE THE LD.CIT REJECTED THE CLAIM OF REGI STRATION 3 ITA NO.1579/PN/2007 U/S.12AA ON THE GROUND THAT THE TRUST DID NOT CONDUCT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES EXCEPT MEDICAL CHECK-UP CAMP AND FOR THIS ALSO THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT MEDICAL CHECK-UP CAMP HAD BEEN HELD. HOWEVER, WE FIND THE CIT HAS NOT EXPRESSED A NY RESERVATION ON THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AS NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE . 7. WE FIND THE PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF USHAPANNA PITALIYA CHARITABLE TRUST VS. CIT VIDE ITA NO.716/PN/2013 ORDER DATED 21-04-2014 HAD AN OCCASIO N TO DECIDE SUCH AN ISSUE WHERE IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER : 'WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ONLY REASON WEIGHING WITH THE COMMISSIONER TO DENY REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT IS THE ABSENCE OF ANY OF THE ACTIVITIES STATED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION. THE COMMISSIONE R HAS NOT DOUBTED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST AS CONTAINE D IN THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT PRESCRIBES THE PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION, WHEREBY IT IS REQUIRED THAT THE COMMISSIONER SHALL SATISFY HIMSELF ABOU T THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES IN OR DER TO GRANT REGISTRATION. QUITE CLEARLY, THE PHRASEOLOGY OF SECTIO N 12AA OF THE ACT WHICH LAYS DOWN THE PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION DOES NO T CONTAIN ANY PROHIBITION THAT A TRUST OR INSTITUTION CANNOT SEEK RE GISTRATION UNLESS IT STARTS ITS ACTIVITIES AS MANIFESTED ITS OBJECTS CLAUSE. T HEREFORE, THE OBJECTION OF THE COMMISSIONER, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPIN ION, IS QUITE EXTRANEOUS TO THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SEC TION 12AA(1) OF THE ACT, WHICH GOVERN THE PROCEDURE OF REGISTRATI ON. THE PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ADVIK FOUNDATIO N (SUPRA) HAS CONSIDERED A SIMILAR SITUATION AND FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF FOUND ATION OF OPHTHALMIC & OPTOMETRY RESEARCH EDUCATION CENTRE (SU PRA) AND THAT OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KUT CHI DASA OSWAL MOTO PARIWAR AMBAMA TRUST (SUPRA) NEGATED THE STAND OF THE REVENUE DENYING REGISTRATION MERELY DUE TO THE ABSENC E OF ANY ACTIVITY BY THE TRUST. FOLLOWING THE SAID PRECEDENT, WHICH HAS BEEN RENDERED UNDER IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE INCLIN ED TO DISAGREE WITH THE STAND OF THE COMMISSIONER CONTAINED IN THE IM PUGNED ORDER. WE HOLD SO. 7. IN SO FAR AS THE RELIANCE PLACED BY THE LD. CIT-DR ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SELF EMPLOYERS SERVICES SOCIETY (SUPRA) AND THAT OF THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HAR YANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF AMAR SHIV MANDIR TRUST (REGD.) (SUPRA) ARE CONCERNED, OSTENSIBLY THE VIEWS EXPRESSED THEREIN ARE IN VARIANCE T O THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF FOUNDATION OF OPHTHALMIC & OPTOMETRY RESEARCH EDUCATION CENTRE (SUP RA) AND ALSO BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF D IT (EXEMPTIONS) 4 ITA NO.1579/PN/2007 VS. MEENAKSHI AMMA ENDOWMENT TRUST, (2013) 354 ITR 219 (KARN). IN-FACT, THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT WHILE RULING IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS CONSIDERED THE CONTRARY VIEWS EXPRESSED BY THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF AMAR SHIV MANDIR TRUST (REGD.) (SUPRA) AND ALSO BY THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF SELF EMPLOYERS SERVICES SOCIETY (SUPRA), AND, THERE AFTER IT HAS ADOPTED THE VIEW EXPRESSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MEENAKSHI AMMA ENDOWMENT TRUST (SUPRA) IN P REFERENCE TO THE VIEW OF THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH CO URT AND THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT. THE SAID JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY THE PUNE BENCH OF TH E TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ADVIK FOUNDATION (SUPRA). BE THAT AS IT MAY, SI NCE THERE ARE CONTRARY VIEWS OF DIFFERENT HIGH COURT AND IN THE A BSENCE OF ANY JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO FOLLOW A VIEW WHICH IS FAVOURABLE TO THE A SSESSEE FOLLOWING THE PARITY OF REASONING LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUP REME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VEGETABLE PRODUCTS LTD., 88 ITR 192 (S C).' (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED). 8. WE FIND THE PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF MALPANI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY 2539/PN/2012 ORDER DATED 12-05- 2014 HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER : 'IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ONLY, REASON GIVEN BY THE LD . CIT-I, PUNE IS THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS STARTED ITS ACTIVITY, AS PER THE OBJECTS MENTIONED IN THE MEMORA NDUM OF ASSOCIATION. THE LD. CIT HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY RESERVATIO N ON THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THOSE ARE NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE. WE, THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ADVIK FOUNDATION (SUPRA) ALLOW THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E AND DIRECT THE CIT-I, PUNE TO GRANT THE REGISTRATION U/S. 12A OF THE ACT.' (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED) 9. SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE S OF SETH BECHARDAS MANCHAND JAIN SHWETAMBER VISHASHRIMALI TR UST VS. CIT VIDE ITA NO. 1537/PN/2013 ORDER DATED 27-03-20 14 & OM SAI SHAIKSHANIK PRASARAK SANSTHA VS CIT VIDE ITA NO. 1967/PN/2012 ORDER DATED 09-07-2014. 10 FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DECISIONS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE LD.CIT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN NOT GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE I.T. ACT TO THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE, DIRECT HIM TO G RANT 5 ITA NO.1579/PN/2007 REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 TO THE ASSESSE E. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14-08-2015. SD/- SD/- ( VIKAS AWASTHY ) ( R.K. PANDA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IQ.KS PUNE ; #$% DATED : 14 TH AUGUST, 2015. LRH'K $%&''( ) *' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ' ' ( ( ) S / THE CIT(A)-I, NASHIK 4. ' ' ( S / THE CIT-I, NASHIK 5. 6. +,- ., ' .', IQ.KS / DR, ITAT, B PUNE; -0 1 / GUARD FILE. $+ , / BY ORDER , + //TRUE C + //TRUE COPY// 23 4 .5 / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ' .', IQ.KS / ITAT, PUNE