Sh. Agrawal Sabha, Mathura V. C.I.T.-1, Agra

ITA 317/AGR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 67465 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 28-10-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 30-08-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIRUDH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: M M AGARWAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 11; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 SHRI AGRAWAL SABHA, VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF 243, MAHARAJA AGRASEN ATITHI BHAWAN, OF INCOME-TA X-I, AGRA. KUSHAK GALI, DORI BAZAR, MATHURA. (PAN: AAEAS 2330 J) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.M. AGARWAL, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANIRUDH KUMAR, CIT/DR DATE OF HEARING : 28.10.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 31.10.2013 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT-I, AGRA DATED 15.07.2013, REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REG ISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE IT ACT. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE SOCIETY FILED APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE IT ACT. THE LD. CIT IN ORDER TO ENQUIRE INTO THE GENUINENESS OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y CALLED FOR A REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ON THE SPOT ENQUIRY WAS ALSO GOT CONDUCTED THROUGH THE AO IN WHICH THE AO HAS SUBMITTED THAT NEITHER WORKS D ONE BY THE SOCIETY COME UNDER ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 2 THE PURVIEW OF CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES NOR SAME COULD BE VERIFIED AS NO EVIDENCES IN THIS REGARD MADE AVAILABLE. THE LD. CIT IN ORDER T O EXAMINE THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE RELEVANT DOCUMENTS/RECORDS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THE LD. CIT QUOTED THREE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND FOUND THAT DOMINANT OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE FOR THE BENEFIT OF AGARWAL COMMUNITY O NLY. IT WAS ALSO NOTICED THAT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12, THE ASSESSEE SOC IETY EARNED INCOME OF RS.17,96,148/- AND INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF RS.20,74 ,763/- IN ORGANIZING SHREE MAHARAJA AGRASEN JAYANTI ETC., THE ACTIVITIES MEAN T FOR AGRAWAL COMMUNITY. THE OTHER EXPENSES SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WERE F OR DONATION, WEBSITE EXPENSES, STATIONERY, BAD DEBTS, BANK CHARGES, MISC. EXPENSES , SALARY EXPENSES AND SCOOTER EXPENSE. IT WAS, THEREFORE, EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESS EE SOCIETY HAS INCURRED EXPENSES MAINLY ON ORGANIZING SHREE MAHARAJA AGRASEN JAYANTI ETC. AND OTHER EXPENSES INCURRED BY IT ARE NOT RELATED TO ANY CHARITABLE AC TIVITY. NO EXPENSES ON OTHER OBJECTS HAVE BEEN MADE OR INCURRED ON ESTABLISHING HOSPITALS, DHARMSHALAS, LIBRARIES, SCHOOLS, PROGRAMS FOR WOMEN AND YOUNG ME N OR TO HELP WIDOWS. NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ACTIVITIES OF GE NERAL PUBLIC UTILITY WAS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THE LD. CIT, THE REFORE, FOUND THAT NO CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES FOR GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY HAVE BEEN CAR RIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. ALL ITS ACTIVITIES AND EXPENSES ARE RELATED TO A PA RTICULAR COMMUNITY. NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 3 ACTIVITIES OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY SO AS TO MAKE HIM ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA OF THE IT ACT. APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION WA S ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL, CHALLENGING THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT IN REJECTING THE REGISTRATION APPLICATION U/S. 12AA OF THE IT AC T. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED WITHOUT GIVING PROPE R OPPORTUNITY AND THAT THE LD. CIT HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT INSTITUTION WAS ALREAD Y RUNNING DHARAMASHALA KNOWN AS MAHARAJA AGRASEN ATITHI BHAWAN SINCE VERY LONG A ND WAS ALSO IN PROCESS OF ESTABLISHING ANOTHER DHARAMASHALA KNOWN AS AGRA VA TICA AND SUCH FACILITIES WERE NOT RESTRICTED TO ANY CASTE, COMMUNITY OR CREE D. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH TH E PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDING IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL A VAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. SECTION 12AA OF THE IT ACT PROVIDES PROCEDURE FO R GRANT OF REGISTRATION AND THE LD. CIT SHALL HAVE TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES BEFORE GRANTI NG OR REFUSING TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER THE ABOVE PROVISIONS. THUS, THE OBJECTS OF TH E ASSESSEE AND GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES SHALL HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL PRODUCED ON RECORD. SECTION 11 OF THE IT ACT PROVIDES FOR EXEMP TION TO THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION REGISTERED UNDER THE ACT, WHICH IS PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SECTION 11 THAT WILL DOMINATE ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 4 OR PREVAIL OVER OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. SECTION 11 PR OVIDES FOR THIS EXEMPTION ONLY IF THE PROPERTY HELD IS FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PU RPOSE. IT IS ONLY WHEN SUCH A PURPOSE IS SHOWN, THE REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA CAN BE GRANTED. SECTION 2(15) OF THE IT ACT PROVIDES DEFINITION OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE I NCLUDES RELIEF OF THE POOR, EDUCATION, MEDICAL RELIEF AND PRESERVATION OF MONUM ENTS OR PLACES OR OBJECTS OF ARTISTICAL OR HISTORIC INTEREST AND ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THE DOCUMENTS FILED ON RECORD SUGGEST THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS REGISTERED WAY BACK IN JANUARY, 1991. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT MOST OF THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ARE MEANT FOR THE BENEFIT OF A GARWAL COMMUNITY ONLY. THERE ARE CERTAIN OTHER OBJECTS LIKE ESTABLISHMENT OF HOS PITAL, DHARAMASHALA, LIBRARY ETC., BUT THE ASSESSEE SINCE ITS INCEPTION HAVE NOT CARRI ED OUT ANY SUCH ACTIVITIES MEANT FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SINCE IN THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE SOCIETY, NOTHING HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR PROVIDING RELIEF TO THE POOR, EDUCATIO N OR MEDICAL RELIEF. THEREFORE, THE LAST PROVISION PROVIDED IN SECTION 2(15) OF THE IT ACT IN THE DEFINITION OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE WILL BE CONSIDERED, I.E., ADV ANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THE LD. CIT HAS SPECIFICAL LY NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12, THE ASSESSE E HAS EARNED INCOME OF RS.17.96 LACS AND INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF RS.20.74 LACS IN O RGANIZING SHREE MAHARAJA AGRASEN JAYANTI MEANT FOR AGARWAL COMMUNITY ONLY. T HE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF ARGUMENTS DID NOT CON TRADICT THIS FINDING OF FACT RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER. IT I S, THEREFORE, CLEAR THAT IN THE ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 5 PRECEDING YEAR OF MAKING REGISTRATION APPLICATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS MAINLY ORGANIZED SHREE MAHARAJA AGRASEN JAYANTI MEANT FOR AGARWAL COMMUNITY ONLY. THEREFORE, IT COULD NOT BE TREATED HAVING ANY CHARI TABLE PURPOSE FOR ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SATISFY AS TO HOW THE GENERAL PUBL IC WOULD HAVE BEEN BENEFITED BY ORGANIZING MAHARAJA AGRASEN JAYANTI OUT OF THE TOTA L INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THE OTHER EXPENDITURE NOTED ABOVE ARE ALSO NOT EXPLAINED AS TO UNDER WHICH CATEGORY OF THOSE MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES NOTE D IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WOULD HAVE BENEFITED THE CAUSE OF GENERAL PUBLIC. T HUS, SUBSTANTIALLY, THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE MEANT FOR PARTICULAR COMMUNITY ONLY AND REST OF THE OBJECTS HAVE NOT BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE SINCE ITS INCEPTION IN THE YEAR 1991. THE ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION IN JANUARY, 2013 DESPITE IT WAS IN EXISTENCE SINCE JANUARY, 1991. AS SUCH, THE ASSESSEE HAS NO INTENTI ON TO CARRY OUT ANY ACTIVITY FOR GENERAL PUBLIC AND ITS OBJECTS ARE MERELY ON PAPER. THEREFORE, IT COULD BE INFERRED THAT EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN CERTAIN OTH ER OBJECTS IN ITS MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, BUT THE SAME HAVE NEVER BEEN ACTED UPO N OR BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE TO TAKE CARE OF GENERAL PUBLIC. THE LD. CIT WAS, THERE FORE, JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT NONE OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE R ELATED TO ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. THE LD. CIT IS ALSO JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT NONE OF THE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED TOWARDS ACHIEVING THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY. IT IS ALSO ADMITTED FACT THAT NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES WERE FURNISHED E ITHER BEFORE THE LD. CIT OR ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 6 BEFORE US IN RESPECT OF THE ACTIVITIES OF GENERAL P UBLIC UTILITY. THE LD. CIT ALSO SPECIFICALLY NOTED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT IN OR DER TO ENQUIRE INTO THE GENUINENESS OF THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE IN REGISTRATIO N APPLICATION, ON THE SPOT ENQUIRY WAS GOT CONDUCTED THROUGH AO AND THE AO HAS SUBMITT ED THAT NEITHER THE WORK DONE BY THE SOCIETY COME UNDER THE PURVIEW OF CHARI TABLE ACTIVITIES NOR THE SAME COULD BE VERIFIED AS NO EVIDENCE IN THIS REGARD WAS MADE AVAILABLE. DURING THE COURSE OF ARGUMENTS, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESS EE ADMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL BEFORE THE LD. CI T TO CONTRADICT THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE AO AGAINST INTEREST OF ASSESSEE AT THE ENQUIRY STAGE OF REGISTRATION APPLICATION. THUS, ON THE SPOT ENQUIRY CONDUCTED TH ROUGH THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ALSO NOT REBUTTED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH ANY E VIDENCE OR MATERIAL ON RECORD AND AS SUCH, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THAT ITS OBJECTS WERE CHARITABLE IN NATURE OR THE ASSESSEE CARRIED OUT GENUINE ACTIVITIES IN ORDE R TO ACHIEVE ITS OBJECTS. 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT FRO M THE PAPER BOOK THE BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT AND SUBMITTE D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY ESTABLISHED DHARAMASHALA AND ONE MORE DHARA MASHALA IS ALSO IN PROCESS, ON WHICH HUGE AMOUNT HAS BEEN SPENT. THEREFORE, RUN NING OF DHARAMASHALA IS MEANT FOR GENERAL PUBLIC. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE, HOWEVER, ADMITTED THAT NO LIST OF OCCUPANTS IN ANY DHARAMASHALA WAS FURNIS HED BEFORE THE LD. CIT AND NO SUCH DETAILS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED IN THE PAPER BOOK. THEREFORE, IT IS DIFFICULT TO ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 7 BELIEVE WHETHER RUNNING OF DHARAMASHALA BY THE ASSE SSEE SOCIETY WAS MEANT FOR GENERAL PUBLIC. HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SHRI DHAKAD SAMAJ DHARAMSHALA BHAWAN TRUST VS. CIT, 212 CTR 148 (302 ITR 321) IN PARA 7 & 9 HELD AS UNDER : 7. WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT THE CIT IN DECLINING THE REGISTRATION HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT CERTAIN EXTRANEOUS CONSIDERATION SUCH AS DHAKAD CASTE ALSO EXISTS IN RAJASTHAN, MAHARASHTRA AND UTT AR PRADESH AND INCLUDES CERTAIN OTHER CASTES WHICH ARE NOT RECOGNI SED AS OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES WHICH HAS BEEN EXPLAINED BY THE LE ARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT THAT MERELY BECAUSE THE MEMBERS OF TH E SAMAJ SPREAD TO FAR-FLUNG AREAS FOR MAKING A LIVING, IT CANNOT BE S AID THAT THEY HAVE BECOME INHABITANTS OF OUTSIDE STATE AND HAVE CEASED TO THE MEMBERS OF DHAKAD COMMUNITY. HOWEVER, WE FIND FROM THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE TRUST HAS BEEN CREATED ONLY TO PR OVIDE DHARAMSHALA FOR THE STAY OF PILGRIMS WHO, AS ADMITTED BY THE LE ARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT NEED NOT NECESSARILY BE FROM DHAKAD C OMMUNITY. IT HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT MERELY BECAUSE DHARAMSHALA HA S BEEN CONSTRUCTED IN A RELIGIOUS PLACE NAMELY, UJJAIN, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT IT IS FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. 8. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, SINCE S. 11 OF THE ACT P ROVIDES FOR EXEMPTIONS TO THE TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE ACT, I T IS PRIMARILY THE PURPOSE OF S. 11 THAT WILL DOMINATE OR PREVAIL OVER OTHER CONSIDERATION. SEC. 11 PROVIDES FOR THIS EXEMPTION ONLY IF THE PROPERTY HELD IS FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. IT IS ONLY WHEN SUCH A PURPOSE IS SHOWN THAT REGISTRATION CAN BE GRANTED. IT IS IN THIS CONTEXT THAT IN THE CASE OF TRUST FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES O R CHARITABLE INSTITUTION CREATED OR ESTABLISHED AFTER THE COMMEN CEMENT OF THE ACT, THE INCOME THEREOF IF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION IS C REATED OR ESTABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNI TY OR CASTE, SHALL BE EXCLUDED. REFERENCE TO THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OR C ASTE WILL HAVE TO BE READ EJUSDEM GENERIS WITH THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE EXEMPTION IS TO BE GRANTED UNDER S. 11 WHICH IS CHARITABLE OR RE LIGIOUS PURPOSE. THUS, EVEN THOUGH THE BAR CONTAINED IN CL. (B) OF S UB-S. (1) OF SEC. 13 MAY NOT BE ATTRACTED IN VIEW OF THE EXPLN. 2 PROVID ING THAT IN CASE OF SCHEDULED CASTES, BACKWARD CLASSES, SCHEDULED TRIBE S OR WOMEN AND CHILDREN, IT WILL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE CREATED OR ES TABLISHED FOR THE ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 8 BENEFIT OF A RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OR CASTE, WITHIN T HE MEANING OF CL. (B) OF SUB-SEC. (1) OF S. 13, THE SAID PROVISION CANNOT BE CONSTRUED DE HORS THE PURPOSE CONTAINED IN S. 11. IT IS ONLY WHEN IT IS PROVED THAT THE PROPERTY IS CONSECRATED FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES THAT THE TRUST MAY BECOME ENTITLED TO REGISTRATION SUBJECT T O FULFILLMENT OF OTHER CONDITIONS. 9. IN THE APPLICATION OF THE APPELLANT, BEFORE THE CIT, THE PURPOSE SHOWN WAS TO PROVIDE DHARAMSHALA FOR PERSONS FROM T HE SAMAJ AND OUTSIDERS. IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THOUGH THE PROVI SION HAS BEEN MADE FOR CHARGING A TOKEN AMOUNT FROM THE PERSONS BELONG ING TO DHAKAD SAMAJ, THE CHARGES FOR STAY IN THE CASE OF PERSONS NOT BELONGING TO THE SAMAJ ARE MANY TIMES THE CHARGES FOR THE PERSONS BE LONGING TO THE SAMAJ. MERELY BECAUSE THE ACCOMMODATION CREATED IS IN A RELIGIOUS PLACE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT PROVIDING DHARAMSHALA IS FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING MORE TO SUGGEST ITS NEXUS WITH THE RELIGIOUS OR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. IT MAY NOT BE WITH AN INTENTION TO MAKE MONEY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME IT DOES NOT FULFIL L THE REQUIREMENT OF S. 11. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND THAT THE REGISTRATION DECLINED BY THE CIT AND AFFIRMED BY THE TRIBUNAL , DOES NOT SUFFER FROM ANY INFIRMITY, PATENT OR LATENT. THUS, WE ANSW ER THE QUESTION AGAINST THE APPELLANT AND IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDE NT AND THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6.1 SINCE HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT AND M.P. HIG H COURT ARE THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS OF AGRA BENCH OF TRIBUNA L, THEREFORE, WE ARE BOUND TO FOLLOW THE DECISION OF HONBLE M.P. HIGH COURT AS Q UOTED ABOVE. MERELY BECAUSE DHARAMSHALA IS CREATED IN RELIGIOUS PLACE AT MATHUR A, IT COULD NOT BE SAID THAT THE DHARAMSHALA WAS MEANT FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS P URPOSE. THERE SHOULD BE SOMETHING MORE TO SUGGEST ITS NEXUS WITH THE RELIGI OUS OR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. AS NOTED ABOVE, THE ASSESSEE AT THE STAGE OF SPOT INSP ECTION BY THE AO AND THE ENQUIRY BEFORE THE LD. CIT HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY EVIDENCE I N SUPPORT OF ITS ALLEGED ACTIVITIES ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 9 FOR GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THEREFORE, THE CONTENTI ON OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE ACCEPTED TO GRANT REGISTRATIO N FOR RUNNING OR CREATING DHARAMSHALA BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF AGARWAL MITRA MANDAL TRUST VS. DIT (EXEMPTION), 106 ITD 531, IN WHICH THE OBJECTS AND GENUINENESS OF THE AC TIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST BEING CHARITABLE WAS NOT DOUBTED. THEREFORE, IT WAS HELD THAT THE POWERS OF DIT (EXEMPTION) U/S. 12AA ARE LIMITED TO MAKE ENQUIRIES WITH A VIEW ONLY TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES AND OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. APPLICATION U/S. 13 FALLS WITHIN EXCLUSIVE DOMAIN OF THE AO AND REGISTRATION CANNOT BE REFUSED ON THE GROUND OF VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B). ON THE SIMILAR PROPOSITION, HE HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF ITA T DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF SHRI KRISHNA EDUCATION & WELFARE TRUST VS. CIT, 27 SOT 331 AND ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR BENCH IN THE CASE OF BHAGWAN MAHAVIR PURUSHA RTH PRERNA NIDHI NYAS VS. CIT, 144 TTJ 379. HE HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE JUDGM ENT OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PARAMHANS ASHRAM TRUST, 203 ITR 711, IN WHICH THE MAIN OBJECTS WERE FOR MAINTENANCE OF DHARAMSHAL AS, HELP OF AGARWAL AND OTHER WIDOWS AND CHILDREN, FEEDING OF MENDICANTS AN D CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DHARAMSHALAS AND SCHOOLS. ALL THE ABOVE DECISIONS WOULD NOT SUPPORT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE OF THE SPECIFIC FINDING OF FAC T RECORDED BY THE LD. CIT IN THE ITA NO. 317/AGRA/2013 10 IMPUGNED ORDER. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, W E DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT AT THIS STAGE. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NO MERIT AND IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. HOWEVER , THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE AT LIBERTY TO MOVE FRESH APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE THE LD. CIT IF IT IS ABLE TO SATISFY HIM THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y WERE CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS IN NATURE AND ITS ACTIVITIES WERE GENUINE. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY