Shri Bhanushali Mitra Mandal Trust, Vapi V. Income Tax Officer, Vapi, Ward-3, Vapi

ITA 2515/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9482 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 17-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-08-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Benefit of exemption; Condonation of delay
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 147; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR: 2011-12 SHREE BHANUSHALI MITRA MANDAL TRUST, PLOT NO.B/15, 158, NEW B TYPE, GIDC, VAPI - 396195 VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VAPI, WARD -3, VAPI - 396195. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN AAITS8730R APPELLANT BY SHRI RAJESH M. UPADHYAY, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI KAMLESH MAKWANA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING: 17/02/2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 2 2/02/2016 O R D E R PER GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER. THIS APPEAL AT THE INSTANCE OF ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST CIT(A), VALSAD, ORDER DATED 15.06.2015. THE RELEVANT ASSES SMENT YEAR IS 2011-12. 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED READ AS FOLLOWS: 1] LR. CIT(A), VALSAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACT S TO HELD THAT AMENDMENT MADE IN SECTION 12A BY FINANCE ACT NO.2 OF 2014 IS NOT RESTROPECTIVE IN NATURE AND ONLY EFFECTIVE FROM DT. 1/10/2014 AS THE LEGISL ATURE HAS CLEARLY DECITHRED THE DATE OF ITS APPLICATION. 2] THE AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS TO COMPUTE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE TRUST AT RS.10,94,090/-, WHICH IS GROSS RECEIPT OF THE TRUST FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. LR. CIT(A), VALSAD HAS ALSO ERRED IN DIREC TING DEDUCTION OF EXPENSES FOR RS.2,98,763/- AND CORPUS DONATION FOR RS.1,11,111/- ONLY INSTEAD OF DIRECTING THE AO TO TAKE TAXABLE INCOME AT RS.1,96,210/. ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 2 3] LR. CIT(A), VALSAD HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE CHARITABLE TRUST IS NOT REGISTERED THAN THE INCOME TO BE ASSESSED AT MAXIMU M MARGINAL RATE OF TAX. 4] LR. CIT(A), VALSAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS TO CONSIDER APPELLANTS CASE ON THE PRINCIPLE OF MUTUALITY OVER LOOKING THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT TRUST HAS COLLECTED DONATION FROM BHANUSHALI COMMUNITY AND HA D SPENT THE SAME FOR THE BENEFIT OF BHANUSHALI COMMUNITY. THEREFORE, SURPLU S, IF ANY, NOT TAXABLE ON THE GROUND OF MUTUALITY. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESS EE IS A TRUST REGISTERED U/S.12AA OF THE ACT W.E.F. 17.12.2013. FOR A.Y. 20 11-12, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 31.03.2012, DECLARING TOTAL INC OME AT RS.3,30,860/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE A.O. THAT ASSESSEE TRUST HAD CLAIMED AN AMOUNT OF RS.5,93,113 /- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME APPLIED DURING THE YEAR AND RS.1,64,113/- UNDER THE HEAD AMOUNT ACCUMULATED OR SET APART NOT EXCEEDING 15%. THUS, ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED EXEMPTION U/S.11 OF THE ACT IN TOTAL AMOUNTING TO R S.7,63,226/-. THE A.O. DENIED THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 DEDUCTION, SINCE A CCORDING TO THE A.O., ASSESSEE TRUST WAS NOT REGISTERED U/S.12AA OF THE A CT DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE TRUST PREFERRED AN APPEA L BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY, IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION U/ S.12AA OF THE ACT W.E.F. 17.12.2013 AND IN VIEW OF INTRODUCTION OF PROVISO T O SECTION 12A BY THE FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 W.E.F. 01.10.2014, REGISTR ATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN GRANTED FOR THE CURRENT ASSE SSMENT YEAR AS WELL, SINCE THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE OBJECTS AND THE ACTIVI TIES OF ASSESSEE TRUST IS CHARITABLE IN NATURE FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YE AR ALSO. SECONDLY, IT WAS ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 3 CONTENDED THAT THE ENTIRE SURPLUS IS CORPUS DONATIO N AND SAME CANNOT BE TAXED AS REVENUE RECEIPT. 5. THE CIT(A), HOWEVER, REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS RA ISED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THE RELEVANT FINDI NG OF THE CIT(A) READS AS FOLLOWS: (AT PAGE 13) I HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. I FIND TH AT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CORRECTLY DISALLOWED THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S 11 OF THE ACT AS THE APPELLANT TRUST WAS NOT REGISTERED U/S12AA OF THE ACT. SO FAR AS THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT BY FINANCE ACT , 2014 SHOULD BE MADE EFFECTIVE FROM THE RETROSPECTIVE DATE, IT IS NOT AC CEPTABLE AS THE LEGISLATURE HAS CLEARLY DECIPHERED THE DATE OF ITS APPLICATION. FRO M THE FACTS AS GATHERED FROM THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT THAT HE APPELLANT HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE AND HAS SHOWN THE GROSS RECEIPT AS INCOME. IN THE SITUATION WHERE THE CHARITABLE TRUST IS NOT REGISTERED THEN THE INCOME TO BE ASSESSED IN TH E STATUS OF A.O.P. BY THE APPLYING THE MAXIMUM MARGINED RATE OF TAX. HERE IT IS FOUND THAT THE TRUST HAS INCURRED EXPENSE OF RS. 2,98,763/-, THE DETAILS OF WHICH WERE SUBMITTED TO THE AO ON BEING CALLED FOR DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS AND IS PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN VERIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AS THE TRU ST IS TO BE ASSESSED AN AOP SO THESE EXPENSES OF RS.2,98,763/- NEEDS TO BE ALLOWED . SO FAR AS THE DONATION OF RS.1,11,111/- IS CONCERNED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER I S DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE FACTS AND CONSIDER THE ALLOWABILITY OF THIS AMOUNT AS PER LAW . THEREFORE THE GROUND OF APPEAL STANDS DISPOSED OFF. 6. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE A.R. REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE INCOME T AX AUTHORITIES AND ALSO RELIED ON THE ORDER OF ITAT C BENCH, KOLKATA IN T HE CASE OF SREE SREE RAMKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT ( ITA NO. 1680/2012, A.Y . 2003-04, ORDER DATED 09.10.2015) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE PROV ISOS INTRODUCED TO SECTION 12A BY FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 IS CURATIVE IN NATU RE AND IS RETROSPECTIVE. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES. 7. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE THAT ARISE FOR MY CONSIDERATION ARE OF TW O FOLDS, NAMELY, ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 4 (I) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS ENTITLED TO REGIS TRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, (II) IF THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS NOT ENTITLED FOR REGI STRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT WHETHER SURPLUS ACCORDING TO ASSESSEE TRUST WHICH I S CORPUS DONATION IS LIABLE TO BE TAXED. 7.1 TO EXAMINE THE FIRST ISSUE, NECESSARILY I HAVE TO ANALYZE THE RELEVANT PROVISION, NAMELY, THE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 12A BY FINANCE ACT, 2014 W.E.F. 01.10.2014 BY WAY OF INSERTION OF PROVISOS T O SECTION 12A(2) OF THE ACT WHICH IS REPRODUCED BELOW FOR READY REFERENCE: [(2) WHERE AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE ON OR AFTE R THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RELATION TO THE INCOME OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMED IATELY FOLLOWING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH SUCH APPLICATION IS MADE:] [PROVIDED THAT WHERE REGISTRATION HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE TRU ST OR INSTITUTION UNDER SECTION 12AA, THEN, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION S 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME DERIVED FROM PROPERTY HELD UN DER TRUST OF ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR PRECEDING THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT YEAR, FOR W HICH ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS ON THE DATE OF SUCH REGISTRATION AND THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITU TION 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 AN Y 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 P ROVISO SHALL NOT APPLY IN CASE OF ANY TRUST OR INSTITUTION WHICH WAS REFUSED REGISTRATION OR THE REGISTRATION GRANTED TO IT WAS CANCELLED AT ANY TIM E UNDER SECTION 12AA.] 7.2 IT IS ALSO RELEVANT TO REPRODUCE THE EXPLANATOR Y NOTES TO THE PROVISIONS OF FINANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 AS GIVEN IN CBDT CIRCUL AR NO.01/2015 DATED 21.01.2015 IN REFERENCE F. NO.142/13/2014-TPL, WHIC H READ AS FOLLOWS: ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 5 PARA 8.2 NON-APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION FOR THE PERIOD PRIO R 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 FULFILL OTHER SUBSTANTIVE CONDITI ONS. HOWEVER, THE POWER OF CONDONATION OF DELAY IN SEEKING REGISTRATION WAS NO T AVAILABLE. THIS CLEARLY GOES TO PROVE THAT THE FIRST PROVISO T O SECTION 12A(2) WAS BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE ONLY AS A RETROSPECTIVE EFFE CT WITH A VIEW NOT TO AFFECT GENUINE CHARITABLE TRUSTS AND SOCIETIES CARRYING ON GENUINE CHARITABLE OBJECTS IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND SUBSTANTIVE CONDITIONS STI PULATED IN SECTION 11 TO 13 HAVE BEEN DULY FULFILLED BY THE SAID TRUST. THE BE NEFIT OF RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION ALONE COULD BE THE INTENTION OF THE LEG ISLATURE AND THIS POINT IS FURTHER STRENGTHENED BY THE EXPLANATORY NOTES TO FI NANCE (NO.2) ACT, 2014 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES VIDE IT S CIRCULAR NO. 01/2015 DATED 21.1.2015. APPARENTLY THE STATUTE PROVIDES T HAT REGISTRATION ONCE GRANTED IN SUBSEQUENT YEAR, THE BENEFIT OF THE SAME HAS TO BE APPLIED IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS FOR WHICH ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE LD. A.O., UNLESS THE REGISTRATION GRANTE D EARLIER IS CANCELLED OR REFUSED FOR SPECIFIC REASONS. THE STATUTE ALSO GOE S ON TO PROVIDE THAT NO ACTION U/S147 COULD BE TAKEN BY THE AO MERELY FOR N ON-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 08.0 5.2014. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE DURING THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. WHEN SEC TION 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 ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 6 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF THE P RESENT ASSESSEE WERE PENDING IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHOR ITY. DURING SUCH PENDENCY, THE ASSESSEE WAS GRANTED REGISTRATION 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 T HE POWER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX WAS CO-TERMINUS WITH THA T 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 AP PELLATE AUTHORITY SHOULD BE DEEMED TO BE 'ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS PENDING BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER' WITHIN THE MEANING OF THAT TERM AS ENVISAG ED 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) BI LL, 2014, WHICH SOUGHT TO AMEND SECTION 12A EXPLAINS THE OBJECTS AN D REASONS FOR MAKING SUCH AMENDMENTS. THE EXPLANATION MAKES IT CLEAR TH AT 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 TH OUGH OTHERWISE THEY WERE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION BY FULFILLING OTHER SUBSTANT IVE CONDITIONS THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS BROUGHT IN. THAT BEING SO, DENYING S UCH BENEFIT TO A TRUST LIKE THE ASSESSEE WHO HAD OBTAINED REGISTRATION U/S 12AA DURING THE 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 AUTHOR ITY, WILL BE DOING VIOLENCE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE AND, AS SUCH, LIAB LE TO BE INTERFERED WITH. ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 7 MOREOVER, UNDER THE SCHEME OF THE ACT, SECTIONS 11 AND 12 ARE SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS WHICH PROVIDE FOR EXEMPTIONS TO A RELIGI OUS OR CHARITABLE TRUST. SECTIONS 12A AND 12AA DETAIL THE PROCEDURAL REQUIRE MENTS FOR MAKING AN APPLICATION TO CLAIM EXEMPTIONS UNDER SECTIONS 11 A ND 12 BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE GRANT OR REJECTION OF SUCH APPLICATION BY T HE 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 M Y VIEW, LIBERAL INTERPRETATION WILL GIVE EFFECT TO THE INTENTION OF THE AMENDMENT, THEREBY REMOVING THE HARDSHIP IN GENUINE CASES LIKE THE PRE SENT ASSESSEE UNDER CONSIDERATION. 7.5 I AM ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE ORDER OF KOLKATA BEN CH OF ITAT IN CASE OF SREE SREE RAMKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (ITA NO. 1680 /2012, ORDER DATED 09.10.2015) WHERE IT WAS HELD THAT AMENDMENT TO SEC TION 12A W.E.F. 01.10.2014 IS RETROSPECTIVE. THE RELEVANT FUNDING OF THE HONBLE KOLKATA BENCH IN CASE OF SREE SREE RAMKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DC IT (SUPRA) READ AS FOLLOWS: 6.10. WE HOLD THAT IT IS AN ESTABLISHED POSITION I N LAW THAT A PROVISO WHICH IS INSERTED TO REMEDY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND TO M AKE 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 REASONA BLE INTERPRETATION, REQUIRES TO BE TREATED AS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION, SO THAT A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION CAN BE GIVEN TO THE SECTION AS A WHOLE AND ACCORDIN GLY THE SAID INSERTION OF FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 12A(2) OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FR OM 1.10.2014 SHOULD BE READ AS RETROSPECTIVE IN OPERATION WITH EFFECT FROM THE DAT E WHEN THE CONDITION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 & 12 AS MENTIONED IN SECTION 12A PROVIDED FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA AS A PRE-CONDITI ON FOR APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 12A. 7.6 FURTHER, THE KOLKATA TRIBUNAL OBSERVED AS UNDER : ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 8 6.11. WE ALSO HOLD THAT THOUGH EQUITY AND TAXATION ARE OFTEN STRANGERS, ATTEMPTS SHOULD BE MADE THAT THESE DO NOT REMAIN ALWAYS SO A ND IF A CONSTRUCTION RESULTS IN EQUITY RATHER THAN IN INJUSTICE, THEN SUCH CONSTRUC TION 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 J UST 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 N OT CHANGED ITS OBJECTIVES AND HAD CARRIED ON THE SAME CHARITABLE OBJECTS IN THE P AST AS WELL AS IN THE CURRENT YEAR BASED ON WHICH THE REGISTRATION U/S.12AA IS GR ANTED BY THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS). 7.7 IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID REASONING AND THE ORDE R OF KOLKATA BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF SREE SREE RAMKRISHNA SAMITY VS. DCIT (SUPRA), I DIRECT THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION) TO GR ANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE TRUST FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUT E, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, NAMELY; I) THE REGISTRATION U/S.12AA (1)(B)(I) OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT, 1961 DOES NOT AUTOMATICALLY EXEMPT THE INCOME OF THE TRU ST/INSTITUTION. THE QUESTION OF TAXABILITY OF THE INCOME OF THE TRUST/I NSTITUTION SHALL BE EXAMINED AND DECIDED UPON BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT BASED ON THE CONDUCT OF THE ACTIVITIES, COMPLIANCE WITH VARIOUS STATUTORY AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS, ETC., AS REFERRED TO IN SECTIONS 2(15), 11, 12 & 13 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, WITHOUT PREJUD ICE TO THE FACT OF GRANTING MERELY IN PRINCIPLE REGISTRATION BY DIT(E) . II) WITH EFFECT FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, T HE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY OTHER THAN REL IEF OF THE POOR, EDUCATION AND MEDICAL RELIEF AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2(15) OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT SHALL NOT BE A CHARITABLE PURPOSE, IF IT INVOLVES THE CAR RYING ON OF ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINESS, OR ANY A CTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSIN ESS, FOR A CESS OR FEE OR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE NATURE OF USE OR APPLICATION, OR RETENTION, OF THE INCOME FROM SUCH ACTIVITY. III) AMENDMENTS TO THE DEED/MEMORANDUM, RULES AND R EGULATIONS, IF ANY, OF THE TRUST / INSTITUTION SHALL BE MADE ONLY WITH THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS) OR ANY O THER PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961. ITA NO. 2515/AHD/2015 ASST. YEAR 2011-12 9 IV) THE REGISTRATION MAY BE WITHDRAWN ON VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE STIPULATIONS LAID DOWN IN THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, V) THE SOCIETY/TRUST SHALL REGULARLY FILE ITS INCOM E TAX RETURN. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND FEBRUARY, 2016 SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 22/02/2016 TRUE COPY S K SINHA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHMEDABAD