Shree Songadh Sikh Gurudwara Sahib, Tapi V. The Income Tax Officer(Exemption Ward), Surat

ITA 1953/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2087 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-07-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRINIVAS T BIDARI
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Retrospective amendment; Benefit of exemption; Condonation of delay
• Section: 147; 12; 154; 11; 12A; 12AA; 143(1)

Judgement Text

SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 1 OF 9 INCOM TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT-BENCH-SURAT BEFORE SHRI C .M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O. P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1953/AHD/2016: ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 SHREE SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB, OPP. R.T.O CHECK POST, FORT, SONGADH DISTRICT, TAPI 394 670. PAN: AADAS 0020 L V S . ACIT , CIRCLE - 4 , NOW ITO (EXEMPTION), ROOM NO. 608, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SURAT. APPELLANT /RESPONDENT /ASSESSEE BY: SHRI RAJESH M. UPADHYAY, A.R. /REVENUE BY: SHRI SRINIVAS T. BIDARI, CIT(D.R.) / DATE OF HEARING: 07.03.2018 /PRONOUNCEMENT DATE: 15 .03.2018 ORDER PER O. P. MEENA, AM 1. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, SURAT (IN SHORT THE CIT (A)) DATED 29.06.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM THE ORDER DATED 19.06.2014 PASSED BY THE ACIT CIRCLE 4, NOW ITO- (EXEMPTION)-SURAT (IN SHORT THE AO) UNDER SECTION 154 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. BY GROUND NO. 1 AND 2, THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER OF CIT (A) IN NOT ALLOWING ASSESSEE`S CLAIM UNDER SECTION 11 AND ASSESSING THE INCOME OF SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 2 OF 9 THE ASSESSEE TRUST AT RS.4,25,180/- AS AGAINST RETURNED INCOME AT RS. 1,09,179/- EVEN THOUGH TRUST IS A CHARITABLE TRUST AND REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA. THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING ACITS EX-PARTE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT BY WHICH CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF EXPENSES AND APPLICATION OF FUND THROUGH INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1) IS UPHELD. 3. THE SHORT FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE TRUST REGISTERED BY ASSISTANT CHARITY COMMISSIONER, SURAT. IT HAS FILED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,09,180/-. RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) AND INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.4,25,180/-. THE ASSESSEE FILED RECTIFICATION APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE AO, WHICH CAME TO BE REJECTED VIDE ORDER DATED 19.06.2014. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1) AS WELL AS RECTIFICATION ORDER DTD. 19.06.2014 IN APPEAL BEFORE CIT (A). IT WAS CLAIMED THAT RECTIFICATION ORDER WAS PASSED ON 19.06.2014 WHEREAS REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT WAS GRANTED ON 22.09.2014 WITH EFFECT FROM 06.03.2014. SINCE THE AO HAS NOT PROVIDED THE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD, THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY CIT-II, SURAT COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE HIM. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS COVERED BY PROVISO INSERTED IN SECTION 12A WITH EFFECT FROM 01.10.2014 WHICH IS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION. HOWEVER, THE CIT (A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MENTIONED THE DATE OF REGISTRATION AND NUMBER OF CERTIFICATE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, THEREFORE, IN SUCH SITUATION THE BENEFIT CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 3 OF 9 ACT IS PRIMA-FACIE IS NOT ALLOWABLE AND AS SUCH PRIMA-FACIE ADJUSTMENTS HAVE TO BE MADE UNDER SECTION 143(1). IT IS ALSO CLEAR FOR THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT EVEN THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A AT THE TIME OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME. HENCE, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG IN THE ACTION OF THE AO. THEREFORE, THE DECISION OF CHENNAI BENCH IS NOT APPLICABLE AS FACTS ARE DIFFERENT. THE CIT (A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT DECISION OF SHREE BAHNUSHALI MITRA TRUST V. ITO IN I.T.A. NO. 2515/AHD/2015 SMC BENCH OF AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL TO THE EFFECT THAT AMENDMENT IS RETROSPECTIVE IN NATURE AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDING ARE EXTENSION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IS ALSO NOT APPLICABLE. ACCORDING TO THE CIT (A), THE SMC BENCH OF TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THE DECISION IN THE LIGHT OF CALCUTTA BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF SHRI SHREE RAMAKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (ITA NO.1680/AHD/2012 FOR A.Y.2003-04 DATED 09.10.2015. BUT, STILL HAS NOT GIVEN CATEGORICAL FINDING OF RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF THE SAID AMENDMENT IN OPERATIVE PART. THE AMENDMENT REFERRED IN PROVISO IS WITH EFFECT FROM 01.10.2014 AS EXPRESSLY STATED IN THE SAID AMENDMENT ITSELF. THE ITAT- KOLKATA HAS HELD THAT THE AMENDMENT IS CURATIVE IN NATURE AND HENCE, IT IS APPLICABLE RETROSPECTIVELY, TO MITIGATE THE HARDSHIP OF THE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS. THIS DECISION OF TRIBUNAL CANNOT BE STRETCHED TO INCLUDE THE TRUSTS WHICH HAD EVEN NOT APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE APPELLANT FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.10.2012 CLAIMING BENEFIT OF SECTION-11, IT FILED APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A ON SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 4 OF 9 06.03.2014. HENCE, CLAIM OF BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 11, IN THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS PATENTLY WRONG. THE LD.CIT(A), THEREFORE, UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS MADE AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT ON 06.03.2014 WHICH WAS REJECTED ON 19.06.2014. THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A WAS GRANTED ON 22.09.2014 WITH EFFECT FROM 06.03.2014. THUS, RECTIFICATION PROCEEDING UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE ACT WERE PENDING BEFORE THE AO. THEREFORE, THE PROVISO INTRODUCED WITH EFFECT FROM 01.10.2014 IS APPLICABLE TO ALL PENDING PROCEEDING AS HELD BY THE KOLKATA TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI SREE RAMAKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (SUPRA) IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE. FURTHER ALSO, THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS WERE PENDING BEFORE THE CIT (A) WHICH IS AN EXTENSION OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, HENCE, ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE PENDING WHEN THE REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED UNDER SECTION 12A BY CIT-II SURAT ON 22.09.2014. FURTHER, THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO COVERED BY THE DECISION OF SHREE BAHNUSHALI MITRA TRUST V. ITO IN I.T.A. NO. 2515/AHD/2015 OF AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE AMENDMENT IS RETROSPECTIVE IN NATURE AS WELL AS APPELLATE PROCEEDING ARE EXTENSION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IS ALSO NOT APPLICABLE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE SMC BENCH OF AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 5 OF 9 SHREE BHANUSHALI MITRA MANDAL V. ITO VAPI I.T.A. NO. 2515/AHD/2015 DTD. 22.02.2016 AS HELD AS UNDER: 7. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE THAT ARISE FOR MY CONSIDERATION ARE OF TWO FOLDS, NAMELY, (I) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS ENTITLED TO REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. (II) IF THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT WHETHER SURPLUS ACCORDING TO ASSESSEE TRUST WHICH IS CORPUS DONATION IS LIABLE TO BE TAXED. 7.1 TO EXAMINE THE FIRST ISSUE, NECESSARILY I HAVE TO ANALYSE THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS, NAMELY, THE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 12A BY FINANCE ACT, 2014 W.E.F. 01.10.2014 BY WAY OF INSERTION OF PROVISOS TO SECTION 12A()2) OF THE ACT WHICH IS REPRODUCED BELOW FOR READY REFERENCE: [(2) WHERE AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE ON OR AFTER THE 1 ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RELATION TO THE INCOME OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH SUCH APPLICATION IS MADE:] [PROVIDED THAT WHERE REGISTRATION HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION UNDER SECTION 12AA, THEN, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER TRUST OF ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR PROCEEDING THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT YEAR, FOR WHICH ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS ON THE DATE OF SUCH REGISTRATION AND THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION REMAIN THE SAME FOR SUCH PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR: PROVIDED FURTHER THAT NO ACTION UNDER SECTION 147 SHALL BE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN CASE OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION FOR ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR PRECEDING THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT YEAR ONLY FOR NON-REGISTRATION OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION FOR THE SAID ASSESSMENT YEAR : PROVIDED ALSO THAT PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE FIRST AND SECOND PROVISO SHALL NOT APPLY IN CASE OF ANY TRUST OR INSTITUTION WHICH WAS REFUSED REGISTRATION OR THE REGISTRATION GRANTED TO IT WAS CANCELLED AT ANY TIME UNDER SECTION 12AA.]: 7.2 IT IS ALSO RELEVANT TO REPRODUCE THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO THE PROVISIONS OF FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 AS GIVEN IN CBDT CIRCULAR NO.01/2015 DATED 21.01.2015 IN REFERENCE F.NO.142/13/2014-TPL, WHICH READ AS FOLLOWS: SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 6 OF 9 PARA 8.2 NON-APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION FOR THE PERIOD PRIOR TO THE YEAR OF REGISTRATION CAUSED GENUINE HARDSHIP TO CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS. DUE TO ABSENCE OF REGISTRATION, TAX LIABILITY IS FASTENED EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY OTHERWISE BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION AND FULFIL OTHER SUBSTANTIVE CONDITIONS. HOWEVER, THE POWER OF CONDONATION OF DELAY IN SEEKING REGISTRATION WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THIS CLEARLY GOES TO PROVE THAT THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 12A(2) WAS BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE ONLY AS RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT WITH A VIEW NOT TO AFFECT GENUINE CHARITABLE TRUSTS AND SOCIETIES CARRYING ON GENUINE CHARITABLE OBJECTS IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND SUBSTANTIVE CONDITIONS STIPULATED IN SECTION 11 TO 13 HAVE BEEN DULY FULFILLED BY THE SAID TRUST. THE BENEFIT OF RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION ALONE COULD BE THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE AND THIS POINT IS ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES VIDE ITS CIRCULAR NO.01/2015 DATED 21.01.2015. APPARENTLY THE STATUTE PROVIDES THAT REGISTRATION ONCE GRANTED IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR, THE BENEFIT OF THE SAME HAS TO BE APPLIED IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS FOR WHICH ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE LD. A.O., UNLESS THE REGISTRATION GRANTED EARLIER IS CANCELLED OR REFUSED FOR SPECIFIC REASONS. THE STATUTE ALSO GOES ON TO PROVIDE THAT NO ACTION U/S.147 COULD BE TAKEN BY THE AO MERELY FOR NON-REGISTRATION OF TRUST FOR EARLIER YEARS. 7.3 IN THE INSTANT CASE, IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED W.E.F. 17.12.2013 BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 08.05.2014. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE DURING THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. WHEN SECTION 12A OF THE ACT WAS AMENDED BY INTRODUCING NEW PROVISOS TO SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 12A BY FINANCE ACT, 2014 WITH EFFECT FROM 01.10.2014, THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE WERE PENDING IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. DURING SUCH PENDENCY, THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED RESISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT ON 17.12.2013 W.E.F. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THE APPEAL IS THE CONTINUATION OF THE ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS AND THAT THE POWER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX WAS CO- TERMINUS WITH THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WERE TWO WELL ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF LAW. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND GOING BY THE PRINCIPLE OF PURPOSIVE INTERPRETATION OF STATUES, AN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING WHICH IS PENDING IN APPEAL BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY SHOULD BE DEEMED TO BE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT TERM AS ENVISAGED UNDER THE PROVISO. IT FOLLOWS THERE-FROM THAT THE ASSESSEE WHICH OBTAINED REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT DURING THE PENDENCY OF APPEAL WAS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S 11 OF THE ACT. 7.4 THE EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO FINANCE (NO.2) BILL, 2014, WHICH SOUGHT TO AMEND SECTION 12A EXPLAINS THE OBJECTS AND REASONS FOR MAKING SUCH AMENDMENTS. THE EXPLANATION MAKES IT CLEAR THAT IT WAS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO SUCH TRUSTS IN RESPECT OF WHICH, DUE TO ABSENCE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA TAX LIABILITY GOT ATTACHED THOUGH OTHERWISE THEY WERE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION BY FULFILLING OTHER SUBSTANTIVE CONDITIONS THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS BROUGHT IN. THAT BEING SO, DENYING SUCH BENEFIT TO A TRUST LIKE THE ASSESSEE WHO HAD OBTAINED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA DURING THE SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 7 OF 9 PENDENCY OF THE APPEALS FILED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY, BY NARROWLY INTERPRETING THE TERM, PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER SO AS TO EXCLUDE ITS PENDENCY BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WILL BE DOING VIOLENCE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE AND, AS SUCH, LIABLE TO BE INTERFERED WITH. MOREOVER, UNDER THE SCHEME OF THE ACT, SECTIONS 11 AND 12 ARE SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS WHICH PROVIDE FOR EXEMPTIONS TO A RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE TRUST. SECTIONS 12A AND 12AA DETAIL THE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS FOR MAKING AN APPLICATION TO CLAIM EXEMPTIONS UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE GRANT OR REJECTION OF SUCH APPLICATION BY THE COMMISSIONER. THUS, IN MY VIEW, SECTIONS 12A AND 12AA ARE ONLY PROCEDURAL IN NATURE. HENCE, IT IS NOT THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA BY ITSELF THAT OFFERS IMMUNITY FROM TAXATION. A RECEIPT WHETHER IT IS REVENUE OR CAPITAL IN NATURE IS TO BE DECIDED AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE. BEING PROCEDURAL IN NATURE, IN MY VIEW, LIBERAL INTERPRETATION WILL GIVE EFFECT TO THE INTENTION OF THE AMENDMENT, THEREBY REMOVING THE HARDSHIP IN GENUINE CASES LIKE THE PRESENT ASSESSEE UNDER CONSIDERATION. 7.5 I AM ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE ORDER OF KOLKATA BENCH OF ITAT IN CASE OF SREE SREE RAMKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (ITA NO.16808/2012, ORDER DATED 09.01.2015) WHERE IT WAS HELD THAT AMENDMENT TO SECTION 12A W.E.F. 01.10.2014 IS RETROSPECTIVE. THE RELEVANT FUNDING OF THE HONBLE KOLKATA BENCH IN CASE OF SREE SREE RAMAKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (SUPRA) READ AS FOLLOWS: 6.10. WE HOLD THAT IT IS AN ESTABLISHED POSITION IN LAW THAT A PROVISO WHICH IS INSERTED TO REMEDY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND TO MAKE THE PROVISION WORKABLE, A PROVISO WHICH SUPPLIES AN OBVIOUS OMISSION IN THE SECTION AND IS REQUIRED TO BE READ INTO THE SECTION TO GIVE THE SECTION A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION, REQUIRES TO BE TREATED AS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION. SO THAT A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION CAN BE GIVEN TO THE SECTION AS A WHOLE AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAID INSERTION OF FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 12A(2) OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FROM 1.10.2014 SHOULD BE READ AS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION WITH EFFECT FROM THE DATE WHEN THE CONDITIONS OF ELIGIBILITY FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 & 12 AS MENTIONED IN SECTION 12A PROVIDED FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA AS A PRE-CONDITION FOR APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 12A. 7.6 FURTHER, THE KOLKATA TRIBUNAL OBSERVED AS UNDER : 6.11. WE ALSO HOLD THAT THOUGH EQUITY AND TAXATION ARE OFTEN STRANGERS, ATTEMPTS SHOULD BE MADE THAT THESE DO NOT REMAIN ALWAYS SO AND IF A CONSTRUCTION RESULTS IN EQUITY RATHER THAN IN INJUSTICE, THEN SUCH CONSTRUCTION SHOULD BE PREFERRED TO THE LITERAL CONSTRUCTION. IT IS ONLY ELEMENTARY THAT A STATUTORY PROVISION IS TO BE INTERPRETED UT RES MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PEREAT, I.E TO MAKE IT WORKABLE RATHER THAN REDUNDANT. APPLYING THIS LEGAL MAXIM, IT WOULD BE JUST AND FAIR TO HOLD THAT THE AMENDMENT IN SECTION 12A IS BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE TO CONFER BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT ON THE GENUINE TRUSTS WHICH HAD NOT CHANGED ITS OBJECTIVES AND HAD CARRIED ON THE SAME CHARITABLE OBJECTS IN THE PAST AS WELL AS IN THE CURRENT YEAR BASED ON WHICH THE REGISTRATION U/S.12AA IS GRANTED BY THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS). 7.7 IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID REASONING AND THE ORDER OF KOLKATA BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF SREE SREE RAMKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (SUPRA), I DIRECT THE DIRECTOR SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 8 OF 9 OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS) TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE. 6. IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE DECISION AND ADVERTING TO THE FACTS OF INSTANT CASE, WE FIND THAT IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED W.E.F. 06.03.2014 BY THE CIT-II SURAT VIDE ORDER DATED 22.09.2014. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE DURING THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA ON 06.03.2014 BEFORE CIT-II, SURAT. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO MADE AN APPLICATION U/S.154 OF THE ACT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS APPLICATION U/S.154 WAS REJECTED ON 19.06.2014. HOWEVER, DURING THIS PERIOD, THE APPLICATION U/S.12A WAS PENDING BEFORE THE CIT-II, SURAT. THE CIT-II, SURAT HAS GRANTED REGISTRATION ON 22.09.2014 W.E.F. 06.03.2014. THUS, THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN THE MEANING OF PROVISO TO SECTION 12AA INSERTED W.E.F. 01.10.2014. DURING SUCH PENDENCY, THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT ON 22.09.2014 W.E.F. 06.03.2014. FURTHER, THE APPEAL IS THE CONTINUATION OF THE ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS AND THAT THE POWER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX WAS CO-TERMINUS WITH THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND GOING BY THE PRINCIPLE OF PURPOSIVE INTERPRETATION OF STATUES, AN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING WHICH IS PENDING IN RECTIFICATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND IN APPEAL BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY SHOULD BE DEEMED TO BE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN THE MEANING OF THE TERM AS ENVISAGED UNDER THE PROVISO. IT FOLLOWS THERE-FROM THAT THE ASSESSEE WHICH SONGADH SIKH GURUDWARA SAHIB TRUST V. ITO (E) SURAT /I.T.A. NO.1953/AHD/2016/A.Y.12-13 PAGE 9 OF 9 OBTAINED REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT DURING THE PENDENCY OF PROCEEDINGS U/S.154 BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) WAS ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S.11 OF THE ACT. 7. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE RATIO OF ABOVE DECISIONS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S.11 OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE CLAIMS U/S.11 OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS NO.1 & 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15.03.2018 SD/- SD/- (C.M. GARG) (O.P.MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SURAT: DATED: 15 TH MARCH, 2018/OPM COPY OF ORDER SENT TO- ASSESSEE/AO/PR. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/GUARD FILE OF ITAT. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, SURAT