T.Abdul Wahid Educational Society, CHENNAI V. DDIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2186/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7702 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 25-02-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S BALASUBRAMANIAM
• Assessee Lawyers: G BASKAR
• Section: 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , . !' , # $ % [ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ./ I.T.A.NO.2186/MDS/2014 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : N.A T. ABDUL WAHID EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY NO.53, VEPERY HIGH ROAD PERIAMET CHENNAI - 3 VS. THE DY. DIRECTOR OF INCOM E - TAX(EXEMPTIONS)-III CHENNAI [PAN AAADAT 1523 B ] ( &' / APPELLANT) ( ()&' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI G. BASKAR, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.BALASUBRAMANIAM, CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 25 - 02 - 2016 ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18 - 0 3 - 2016 / O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS EARLIER DISPOSE D OF BY AN ORDER DATED 10.4.2015. HOWEVER, ON THE MISCELLANEO US PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE, THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 10 .4.2015 WAS RECALLED AND THE APPEAL WAS RESTORED ON FILE. ACCO RDINGLY, THE APPEAL IS POSTED FOR FINAL DISPOSAL. 2. SHRI G. BASKAR, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT IN THE EARLIER ROUND OF LITIGATION, THIS TRIBUNAL, BY AN ORDER DATED ITA NO. 2186/14 :- 2 -: 5.12.2013, THE COPY OF WHICH IS AVAILABLE AT PAGE 2 3 OF THE PAPER BOOK, DIRECTED THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/ S 12AA OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENT TO THE DIRECTION, THE DIT(E) GRANTED REG ISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 2.5.2013. THE LD. COUNSEL CLARIFIED TH AT THE ASSESSEE- SOCIETY WAS ESTABLISHED BY A MEMORANDUM AND BYE-LAW S DATED 19.7.2012 AND THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA WAS FILED ON 5.9.2012. INITIALLY, THE DIT(E) REJECTED THE APPLI CATION OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THE OBJECT OF THE SOCIETY WAS IN VIOLATION OF SEC. 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. THE LD. COUNSEL FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE BYE- LAWS WAS AMENDED ON 2.7.2013. FURTHER, CONSIDERING THE AMENDED BYE-LAWS OF THE SOCIETY, THIS TRIBUNAL DIRECTED THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION. ONCE THE BYE-LAWS WAS AMENDED, ACCOR DING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE DIT(E) HAS TO GRANT REGISTRATION FROM THE DATE OF ITS ESTABLISHMENT AND NOT FROM THE DATE OF AMENDMENT OF BYE-LAWS. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI S.BALASUBRAMANIAM, LD. DEPART MENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT INITIALLY THE ASSESS EE-SOCIETY FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION ON 5.9.2012. THE DIT( E) BY AN ORDER DATED 28.3.2013 REJECTED THE SAME ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT GET THE BENEFIT OF SEC. 11 SINCE THE SOCIETY WAS ES TABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGION. SUBSEQUENTLY, TH E ASSESSEE AMENDED THE BYE-LAWS OF THE SOCIETY ON 2.7.2013. AFTER C ONSIDERING THE AMENDED BYE-LAWS, THIS TRIBUNAL BY AN ORDER DATED 5 .12.2013 DIRECTED ITA NO. 2186/14 :- 3 -: THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE A CT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION ONLY FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE BYE-LAWS WAS AMENDED ENABLING THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY TO EXTEND ITS BENEFIT TO ALL SECTIONS OF THE SOCIETY. THEREFORE, THE DIT(E) HAS RIGHTLY GRANTED REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 2.5.2013. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITHER SIDE AND ALSO PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AD MITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON 5.9.2012 I.E WITHIN TWO MONTHS PERIOD FROM ITS ESTA BLISHMENT. THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REJECTED BY THE DI T(E) ON THE GROUND THAT THE BENEFIT OF THE SOCIETY WAS FOR A PARTICULA R RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY AMENDED THE BYE -LAWS AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE AMENDMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, TH IS TRIBUNAL DIRECTED THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL BEFORE TH IS TRIBUNAL IN THE EARLIER ROUND OF LITIGATION IS ON APPLICATION FILED ON 5.9.2012. AFTER CONSIDERING THE AMENDMENT MADE IN THE BYE-LAWS, THI S TRIBUNAL DIRECTED THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION ONLY ON T HE APPLICATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON 5.9.2012. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE SOCIETY WAS ESTABLISHED ON 19.7.2012. THE OBJECT CLAUSE IN THE BYE-LAWS WAS AMENDED BY THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY ON 2.7.2013. THER EFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE AMENDMENT WAS ITA NO. 2186/14 :- 4 -: MADE IN THE BYE-LAWS OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY IT RE LATES BACK TO THE DATE OF ORIGINAL ESTABLISHMENT, HENCE THE AMENDED B YE-LAWS WOULD BE APPLICABLE FROM 19.7.2012. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPLICATION WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF ITS ES TABLISHMENT, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 19.7.2012. THEREFORE , THE DIT(E) IS NOT CORRECT IN GRANTING REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 2 .5.2013. ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE DIT(E) GRANTING REGISTRAT ION WITH EFFECT FROM 2.5.2013 IS MODIFIED AND THE DIT(E) IS DIRECTE D TO GRANT REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 19.7.2012 I.E THE DAT E OF ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH MARCH, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . !' ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ' ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER #$ / CHENNAI %& / DATED: 18 TH MARCH, 2016 RD &' ()*) / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 4. + / CIT 2. / RESPONDENT 5. ),- . / DR 3. +/' / CIT(A) 6. -01 / GF