Shri Gurudev Dutta Seva Trust, Pune V. Commissioner of Income-tax: 1,

ITA 1911/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 191124514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K MODI
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHAY A SHASHTRI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1911/PN/2013 SHRI GURUDEV DATTA SEVA TRUST, S.NO.206/1, TUKAIDARSHAN, DESHMUKH COLONY, FURSUNGI, TALUK : HAVELI, DIST : PUNE-412 308 .. APPELLANT PAN NO.AAMTS3940D VS. CIT-I, PUNE .. RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ABHAY A. SHASHTRI REVENUE BY : SHRI A.K. MODI DATE OF HEARING : 21-05-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26-05-2014 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 30-09-2013 OF THE CIT-I, PUNE REJECTING THE REQUEST FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE TRUST WAS SET UP VIDE A DEED OF TRUST DATED 08-12-2003. IT FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A BEFORE THE LD.CIT FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12A IN THE STATUS OF A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST. THE LD. CIT WHILE EX AMINING THE APPLICATION NOTED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE PREDOMINANTLY RELIGIOUS, I.E. TO CONSTRUCT AND SET UP A TEMPLE OF GOD GURU D ATTA, TO LOOK AFTER THE MANAGEMENT OF THE TEMPLE, CONDUCT VARIOUS RELIGIOUS PROGRAMMES IN THE TEMPLE, TO CELEBRATE VARIOUS RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS AN D TO CARRY OUT OTHER 2 CONNECTED ACTIVITIES. IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE REL IGIOUS OBJECTS, THE TRUST DEED ALSO CONTAINS SEVERAL CHARITABLE OBJECTS. IN SHORT, HE OBSERVED THAT THE OBJECTS ARE MIXED. ACCORDING TO HIM, A PLAIN R EADING OF SECTION 11 AND 12 WOULD CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THESE SECTIONS W OULD APPLY TO TRUSTS WHICH ARE EITHER WHOLLY RELIGIOUS OR WHOLLY CHARITA BLE. HE, THEREFORE, ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY ITS APPLICA TION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12A SHOULD NOT BE REJECTED SINCE THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE MIXED. HE ALSO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH YEAR-WISE DET AILS/BREAK-UP OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY IT ON THE OBJECTS. THE ASS ESSEE FURNISHED SUCH DETAILS. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT SEC TION 12A DOES NOT PROHIBIT REGISTRATION OF A TRUST WHOSE OBJECTS ARE RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE. VARIOUS DECISIONS WERE ALSO BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE LD.CIT FOR THIS PROPOSITION. 3. HOWEVER, THE LD.CIT WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE E XPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND REJECTED THE CLAIM OF REGISTRAT ION U/S.12A BY OBSERVING AS UNDER : 3. AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT, THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A IS DISPOSED OF AS UNDER: 3.1 REFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE TO THE OBJECTS OF THE APP LICANT TRUST BEING MIXED. IN THE CASE OF GHULAM MOHIDIN TRUST VS. CIT (2001), 245 ITR 587, IT WAS HELD BY THE HONBLE JAMMU & KASHMIR H IGH COURT THAT WHERE THE OBJECTS ARE DISTRIBUTIVE AND IN THAT WAY BO TH RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE, THEN THE INSTITUTION IS NOT ENTITLED FO R EXEMPTION U/S.11. GOING BY THE ABOVE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE HO N'BLE JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT, THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IN FORM N O.10A IS LIABLE TO BE REJECTED. NO DOUBT, THERE ARE CONTRARY JUDGMENTS AS WELL. HOWEVER, THESE JUDGEMENTS ARE NOT DISCUSSED HERE BECAUSE THE APPLI CANT'S REQUEST FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12A IS LIABLE TO BE REJECTED EVE N OTHERWISE FOR THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE SUCCEEDING PARAGRAPHS. 3.2 IT HAS BEEN ALREADY NOTED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE APPLICANT TRUST ARE PRIMARILY RELIGIOUS. THERE ARE OTHER CHARITABLE OBJE CTS AS WELL. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS MADE ITS APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A REQUESTING FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION IN THE STATUS OF A 'PUBLIC CHARI TABLE TRUST'. NEEDLESS TO SAY, A TRUST HAVING PREDOMINANTLY RELIGIOUS OBJECTS CANNOT BE REGISTERED AS A 'PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST'. 3 3.3 IF IT IS ASSUMED, WITHOUT ACCEPTING THAT THE APPLI CANT IS A 'PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST', THEN THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(L) (B) SHALL APPLY FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS. IN THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO STATED ITS OBJECTS AS UNDER: 'TO ACHIEVE SOCIAL OBJECTS LIKE MEDICAL AND EDUCATION AL BENEFITS TO THE DOWNTRODDEN THROUGH RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES.' IT IS AMPLY CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE THAT THE PRIMARY FOCUS OF THE APPLICANT TRUST IS TO CARRY OUT RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES. OTHER SOCIAL OBJECTS ARE SOUGHT TO BE ACHIEVED ONLY THROUGH SUCH RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES. THEREFORE, IT IS N ECESSARY TO CONSIDER WHAT THESE RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES ARE. THE RELIGIOUS ACTI VITIES OF THE APPLICANT TRUST CONSIST OF MAINTAINING THE TEMPLE OF S HRI GURUDEV DATTA, CONDUCTING RELIGIOUS PROGRAMMES AND CELEBRATING RELIG IOUS ACTIVITIES. IT CANNOT BE GAINSAID THAT THESE ACTIVITIES ARE MEANT FOR THE MEMBERS OF A SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY I.E. THE COMMUNITY OF HI NDUS. IT WILL BE FAR- FETCHED TO HOLD THAT MEMBERS OF THE OTHER RELIGIOUS C OMMUNITIES WOULD PARTICIPATE IN THE RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES MENTIONED SUPR A. BY THE APPLICANT'S OWN SUBMISSION, AS MADE IN THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.1 0A WHICH HAS BEEN REPRODUCED HEREINABOVE, IT SEEKS TO ACHIEVE ITS SO CIAL OBJECTS THROUGH RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES. WHAT FOLLOWS IS THAT I F THE RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES ARE MEANT FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE MEMBERS OF A SPECIFI C RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, THEN EVEN THE SOCIAL OBJECTS WOULD BE MEAN T FOR THE MEMBERS OF THE SAID RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY ONLY. CONSEQUEN TLY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 WILL APPLY AS PER WHICH THE BENEFITS OF SECTIONS 11 & 12 WOULD NOT B E AVAILABLE TO A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST OR INSTITUTION ESTABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY SPECIFIC RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OR CASTE. ONCE SECTION 13( 1)(B) BECOMES APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF THE APPLICANT TRUST, IT WIL L NOT BE ENTITLED TO THE BENEFITS ENVISAGED IN SECTIONS 11 & 12. REGISTRATION U/S. 12A IS BUT AN IN- PRINCIPLE RECOGNITION OF THE ENTITLEMENT OF A TRUST OR INSTITUTION TO THE BENEFITS SO ENVISAGED. WHEN THE SAID BENEFITS WILL NOT B E AVAILABLE TO A TRUST AT ALL BY VIRTUE OF APPLICATION OF SECTION 13(1 )(B), NO PURPOSE WILL BE SERVED BY GRANTING SUCH A TRUST REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 4. FOR THESE REASONS, THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 CANNOT BE ACCEDE D TO. CONSEQUENTLY, THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10 IS REJECTED. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT THE ASSESSE E IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WITH THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. ON FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE COMMISSIONER WAS CLEARLY WRONG IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTIT LED TO REGISTRATION ON THE GROUND THAT THE SOCIAL ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION CANNOT BE ACHIEVED AS RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES ARE SOME OF THE OBJECT S OF THE TRUST. 2. ON FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF REJECTING REGISTRATION UNDER INCOME TA X UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT WAS BAD IN LAW AS THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT PRO VIDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 4 3. BECAUSE THE TRUST APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A ON 15.03.2013 FOR F.Y. 2012-13 ALONG WITH COPIES OF TRUST DEED AND BALANCE SH EETS FOR EARLIER THREE YEARS. THE TRUST CARRIED ON ACTIVITIES SOCIAL, RELIGIOU S AS WELL AS VOCATIONAL FOR THE BENEFIT OF FURSUNGI SELF HELP GROUP. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET F ILED A COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN TH E CASE OF MARUTI DEV TRUST VS. CIT VIDE ITA NO.2548/PN/2012 ORDER DATED 28-02-2014. REFERRING TO THE SAID DECISION, HE SUBMITTED THAT U NDER IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE CIT REJECTED THE REGISTRATION U/S .12A ON THE GROUND THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE MIXED, I.E. BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL IN THE S AID DECISION HAS DIRECTED THE CIT TO ALLOW REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THIS BEING A COVERED MATTER HE SUBMITTED THAT THE L D.CIT BE DIRECTED TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S.12A OF THE I.T. ACT. 6. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHER HAND HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY B OTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAV E ALSO CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS DECISIONS CITED BEFORE US. WE FIND THE LD.C IT REJECTED THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION U/S.12AA ON THE GROUND THAT (A) OBJ ECTS OF THE APPLICANT TRUST ARE PREDOMINANTLY RELIGIOUS AND (B) RELIGIOUS EXPENSES PRE- DOMINATED DURING THREE YEARS. FROM THE DETAILS FUR NISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PAPER BOOK, WE FIND FOR THE F.YRS ENDING 20 10, 2011 AND 2012, BARRING THE FIRST YEAR, THE CHARITABLE EXPENSES ARE MORE THAN THE RELIGIOUS EXPENSES. FROM THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESS EE, WE FIND FOR THE 5 YEAR ENDING 2010 THE RELIGIOUS EXPENSES ARE 3,37,78 9/- AS AGAINST CHARITABLE EXPENSES AT RS.47,500/-. HOWEVER, FOR T HE F.Y. ENDING 2011 AND 2012 THE CHARITABLE EXPENSES ARE RS.3,52,247/- AND RS.3,80,244/- AS AGAINST RELIGIOUS EXPENSES OF RS.2,39,638/- AND RS. 3,64,947/-. THEREFORE, THE FINDING OF THE LD.CIT THAT RELIGIOUS EXPENSES ARE PRE- DOMINATED DURING THE THREE YEARS IS NOT CORRECT. W E FIND FROM THE NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 35AC OF THE I.T. ACT BY GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, A COPY OF WHICH IS PLACED AT PAPER BOOK PAGES 22 TO 27, THAT THE ASSESSEE TRU ST HAS BEEN APPROVED AS ELIGIBLE PROJECT BY NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR PROMOTIO N OF SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC WELFARE. 7.1 WE FIND THE PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE C ASE OF MARUTI DEV TRUST (SUPRA) WHILE DIRECTING THE CIT TO GRANT REGI STRATION U/S.12AA HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER : 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AT THE OUTSET, WE MAY OBSERVE THAT SO FAR AS THE NATURE OF THE OBJECT S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CONCERNED, THE COMMISSIONER HAS NOT FOUND ANY FAUL T WITH THE SAME EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE SAME ARE AN ADMIXTURE OF RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE PURPOSES. IN-FACT, THE EXISTENCE OF BOTH T YPES OF OBJECTS IS THE BASIS FOR THE COMMISSIONER TO DENY REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE MAIN REASON ADVANCED IS BECAUSE OF THE EXPRESSION WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES CONTAINED IN SECTION 11(1)(A) OF THE ACT. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE SAID EXPRESSION CANNOT BE INTER PRETED TO MEAN THAT A TRUST HAVING BOTH CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURP OSE IS NOT ENTITLED TO CLAIM EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT OR FOR GRANT OF RE GISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF A.A. BIBIJIWALA TRUST (SUPRA) AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF BARKATE SAIFIYA H SOCIETY (SUPRA) HAS HELD THAT A TRUST IS ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION U /S 11/12 OF THE ACT, IF IT IS EITHER FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES OR FOR CHARITABL E PURPOSES OR FOR BOTH RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE PURPOSES. IN ANY CASE, F OR THE PRESENT WE ARE ONLY CONCERNED WITH GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A A OF THE ACT AND AT THIS STAGE, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE COMMISSIONER CAN ONLY LOOK INTO THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND EXAMINE IF THEY ARE OF THE NATURE CONTEMPLATED BY SECTION 11 OF THE ACT I.E. CHARITABL E OR RELIGIOUS OR FOR BOTH CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. 7. THE RELIANCE PLACED BY THE COMMISSIONER ON THE JUD GEMENT OF THE HONBLE JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GH ULAM MOHIDIN TRUST (SUPRA) TO SAY THAT THE BENEFITS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 WOULD APPLY ONLY TO A TRUST WHICH IS WHOLLY CHARITABLE OR WHOLLY RELIGIOUS AND NOT TO A 6 TRUST WHICH IS BOTH RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE, IN OUR VIEW IS QUITE MISPLACED. THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE JAMMU & KASH MIR HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GHULAM MOHIDIN TRUST (SUPRA), IN OUR CO NSIDERED OPINION, HAS BEEN RENDERED IN THE BACKGROUND OF ITS PECULIAR FACTS. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT WAS CONSIDERING A SITUATION WHERE THE TRUST WAS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, NAMELY, MUSLIM COMMUNITY. MOREOVER, IN T HE CASE BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, THE TRUST DEED GAVE ABSOLUTE DISCRETION ON THE TRUSTEES TO SPEND THE INCOME OF THE TRUST AND NO DEFINI TE PART OF THE PROPERTY OR INCOME WAS ALLOCABLE TOWARDS CHARITABLE P URPOSES. QUITE CLEARLY, THE FACT POSITION IN THE PRESENT CASE IS QUIT E DIFFERENT INASMUCH AS THE APPELLANT IS A TRUST WHICH HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS SOCIETY AND IT IS A PUBLIC CHAR ITABLE TRUST REGISTERED UNDER BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUST ACT, 1950. MOREOVER, IN T HE CASE BEFORE THE HONBLE JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GH ULAM MOHIDIN TRUST (SUPRA) ISSUE RELATED TO ALLOWABILITY OR OTHERWISE OF THE BENEFIT OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT WHILE PRESENTLY IN THE C ASE BEFORE US THE ISSUE RELATES TO GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE A CT. IN-FACT, WHEN THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US WOULD SEEK EXEMPTION U/S 11/12 OF T HE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS COMPETENT TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM AS TH ERE ARE ADEQUATE PROVISIONS, NAMELY, SECTION 13(1)(A) & (B) OF THE ACT TO DENY EXEMPTION IN THE EVENT OF THE INCOME NOT BEING SPENT IN THE MANNER CONTEMPLATED BY THE TRUST DEED. AT THE PRESENT STAGE, THE SCOPE OF ENQUIRY BY THE COMMISSIONER IS ONLY TO CONFIRM THAT TH E OBJECTS ARE EITHER CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS IN NATURE. THEREFORE , THE RELIANCE PLACED BY THE COMMISSIONER ON CERTAIN OBSERVATIONS BY THE HONBL E JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GHULAM MOHIDIN TRUST (SUPRA) ARE NOT RELEVANT AT THE PRESENT STAGE. 8. APART THEREFROM, EVEN IF WE ARE TO ACCEPT THE PR OPOSITION OF THE COMMISSIONER BASED ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE JAM MU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT THAT THE BENEFITS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT ARE APPLICABLE ONLY TO A TRUST WHICH IS WHOLLY CHARITABLE OR WHOLLY RELIGIOUS AND NOT TO A TRUST WHOSE OBJECTS ARE AN ADMIXTURE BOTH RELIGIOUS AS WELL AS CHARITABLE; THEN, WE CANNOT LOSE SIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE JUDGEMENTS OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF A.A. B IBIJIWALA TRUST (SUPRA) AND IN THE CASE OF BARKATE SAIFIYAH SOCIETY (SUPRA) A RE TO THE CONTRARY. AS PER THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF A .A. BIBIJIWALA TRUST (SUPRA) EVEN IF A TRUST IS PARTLY RELIGIOUS AND PARTLY CHARITABLE SO LONG AS NO PART OF THE INCOME OR CORPUS CAN BE UTILIZED FOR A PURPOSE WHICH IS NEITHER RELIGIOUS NOR CHARITABLE, THE EXEMPTION U/S 1 1 OF THE ACT WILL BE AVAILABLE. THUS, THE PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE HO NBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IS DIVERGENT TO THAT LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT AND IN SUCH A SITUATION, FOLLOWING THE PAR ITY OF REASONING LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VEGETABLE PRODUCTS LTD., 88 ITR 192 (SC) A VIEW WHICH IS FAVOUR ABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE ADOPTED, SO LONG AS THERE IS NO BINDIN G VIEW OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. EVEN IN SUCH A SCENARIO, IN OUR VIEW, FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PROPOSITION, THE ACTION OF THE COMMISSION ER IN DENYING REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 12AA OF THE ACT IS UNSUSTAI NABLE, AS THE VIEW CANVASSED BY THE ASSESSEE IS SUPPORTED BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT. 9. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID DISCUSSION, WE SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER AND DIRECT HIM TO ALLOW REGISTRATION U/S 1 2AA OF THE ACT IN PURSUANCE TO THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN F ORM NO.10A DATED 30.08.2011. 7 7.2 SINCE THE FACTS OF THE IMPUGNED APPEAL ARE IDEN TICAL TO FACTS OF THE CASE CITED (SUPRA), THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWI NG THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL CITED (SUPRA), WE DIRECT THE LD.CIT TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST U/S.12A OF THE I.T. ACT. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26-05-2014. SD/- SD/- (R.S. PADVEKAR) (R.K. PAND A) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUN TANT MEMBER PUNE DATED: 26 TH MAY, 2014 SATISH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. THE D.R, B PUNE BENCH 4. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE