Appan- Aisa Pacific Performing Arts Network, New Delhi V. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

ITA 3586/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 52808 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 30-09-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-07-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS ANUSHA KHURANA
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS PREM LATA BANSAL; SUDHIR CHATRATH
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Onus to prove; Condonation of delay
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: N.A APPAN ASIA PACIFIC PERFORMING DIREC TOR OF INCOME-TAX ARTS NETWORK, C-51, GULMOHAR VS. (EXEMPTI ONS), 3 RD FLOOR, PARK, NEW DELHI. AAYAKAR BHAWAN, DISTT. CENTRE PAN: AABAA6734D LA XMI NAGAR, DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPON DENT) APPELLANT BY : MRS. PREM LATA BANSAL, SR. AD VOCATE & SHRI SUDHIR CHATRATH, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY: MRS. ANUSHA KHURANA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 30.09.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.10.2011. ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE-S OCIETY AGAINST A CONSOLIDATED ORDER PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOM E-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), DELHI, IN WHICH HE REFUSED TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO IT U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT FOR SHORT) AND A PPROVAL U/S 80G OF THE ACT. INITIALLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ONLY ON E APPEAL BEARING ITA NO. 3586(DEL)/2011 CHALLENGING THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. DIT(E) UNDER BOTH THE SECTIONS. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FILED FRESH AP PEAL ON 22.09.2011 IN ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 2 RESPECT OF THE FINDING U/S 80G OF THE ACT. AS B OTH THE APPEALS INVOLVE COMMON GROUNDS, WE THINK IT FIT TO REPRODUCE TH EM AT THIS STAGE:- 1. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A(A) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY EX EMPTION U/S 80G OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT TO THE APPELLANT. 2. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE A PPLICATIONS IN CONTRAVENTION OF PROVISIONS OF PROVISO TO SECTION 12AA(1) OF THE ACT. 3. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE A PPLICATIONS WITHOUT AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND THUS HAS VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. HENCE, THE ORDER PASSED BY HIM IS BAD IN LAW AND, THEREFORE, TO BE QUASHED. 4. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ERRED IN OBSERVING THAT THE CONDITIONS FOR GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A HAVE NOT BEEN SA TISFIED. 5. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ERRED IN OBSERVING THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES AND BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE G ENUINENESS COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED, WHICH IS FACTUALLY WRONG PART ICULARLY WHEN NO BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE CALLED FOR. 6. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS ERRED IN NOT GRANTING R EGISTRATION TO THE APPELLANT SOCIETY IGNORING THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 12AA(1) OF THE ACT. 7. THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS REJECTED TO GRANT REGI STRATION IN AN ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS MANNER. 8. THAT THE APPELLANT SEEKS LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, A LTER, ABANDON OR SUBSTITUTE ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS DURING THE HEA RING OF THE APPEAL. ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 3 THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT SOCIETY ARE GENUINE AND ITS OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND, THEREFORE, RE GISTRATION U/S 12A HAS TO BE GRANTED TO THE APPELLANT. 1.1 THE FIRST APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE ORDER U/S 12AA, FILED ON 19.07.2011, WAS LATE BY 19 DAYS. IN VIEW THEREOF , THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND THE DECLARATION ON A PLAIN PAPER FROM SHANTA SARBJEET SINGH DATED 18.07. 2011. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY, MS. SHA NTA SARBJEET SINGH, WHO HAS BEEN LOOKING AFTER THE MATTER, WAS OUT OF DEL HI FROM 28.05.2011 TO 01.07.2011 ON ACCOUNT OF OFFICIAL WORK OF SANGEET NATAK ACADEMY, OF WHICH SHE IS THE VICE-CHAIRPERSON. A CERTIFICATE TO THIS EFFECT HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD ON PAGE NO. 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK . IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT MR. SUDHIR CHATRATH, THE COUNSEL, WHO WAS L OOKING AFTER THE TAXATION MATTERS OF THE SOCIETY, HAD PERSONAL PROBLEM, NAMEL Y, THAT HIS SISTER WAS SERIOUSLY ILL AND WAS ADMITTED TO GANGA RAM HOSP ITAL. SHE EXPIRED ON 03.07.2011. FOR THESE REASONS, THE APPEAL COULD NOT BE FILED IN TIME. THE DELAY IS ON ACCOUNT OF BONA FIDE REASONS. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT NEGLIGENT IN PURSUING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, IT HAS BEEN PRAY ED THAT THE DELAY MAY BE CONDONED. ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 4 1.2 IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THE CASE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HONBL E SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS. MST. KATIJI & OTHERS, (1987) 167 ITR 471. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR LEFT THE MATTER TO THE BENCH FOR TAKING APPROPRIATE DECISION IN THIS MATTER. WE H AVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT THE DELAY HAS OCCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF ABSENCE OF MS. SHANTA SARBJEET SINGH FROM DELHI AND SERIOU S ILLNESS IN THE FAMILY OF MR. SUDHIR CHATRATH. THE DELAY IS OF 19 DAYS ONLY, WHICH STANDS EXPLAINED SATISFACTORILY BY THE AFORESAID REASON S. IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION (SUPRA), IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT A JUSTICE ORIENTED APPROACH SHOULD BE TAKEN IN THE MATTER AND WHEN THE DELAY I S SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED, IT SHOULD BE CONDONED. RELYING ON THIS DECISION, THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IS CONDONED. 1.3 COMING TO THE APPEAL AGAINST ORDER U/S 80-G OF THE ACT, IT HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED BY US THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A CONSOLIDATED APPEAL WHICH NOW HAS BEEN HELD TO BE A VALID AP PEAL. THE SECOND APPEAL WAS FILED AS CAUSE OF ACTION WAS UNDER TWO DIFF ERENT PROVISIONS. HOWEVER, THE GROUNDS IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE THE SAME. THEREFORE, IT ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 5 FOLLOWS FROM THE ORDER ON THE FIRST APPEAL THAT T HE DELAY IN FILING THIS APPEAL SHOULD ALSO BE CONDONED. IT IS ORDERED ACCOR DINGLY. 2. COMING TO THE MERITS, THE LD. COUNSEL REFERRE D TO THE ORDER OF THE LD. DIT(EXEMPTIONS). IT IS MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESS EE FILED TWO APPLICATIONS ON 20.10.2010 IN FORM NOS. 10A AND 10G FOR SEEKIN G REGISTRATION U/S 12AA AND APPROVAL U/S 80G OF THE ACT. THE ASSESS EE WAS REQUIRED TO FURNISH DOCUMENTS AND EXPLANATION ON 10 POINTS, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH A WRITTEN REPLY WAS RECEIVED. ON PERUSAL THEREOF, IT HAS BEEN FOUND THAT IN THE PERIOD FROM 01.04.2009 TO 24.07.2010, THE ASS ESSEE SHOWED RECEIPTS OF RS. 13.50 LAKH FROM SANGEET NATAK ACADEMY AND RS. 42,000/- FROM OTHERS. THE PURPOSE OF RECEIPT OF MONEY HAS NOT BEEN MENTIO NED. EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED ON CULTURAL PROGRAMS- RS. 80,450/-, DOCUMENTATION- RS. 1,86,017/-, LODGING AND BOARDING- RS. 3,62,595/-, L UNCH AND SNACKS- RS. 65,560/-, PROFESSIONAL FEES TO ARTISTS- RS. 18,000 /-, SECRETARIAL SERVICES- RS. 3,96,701/-, TOUR AND TRAVEL- RS. 9,86,152/- AND VE HICLE RUNNING AND MAINTENANCE- RS. 17,834/-. THE DETAILS OF THE PUR POSE AND PLACE OF CULTURAL PROGRAMMES, DOCUMENTATION EXPENSES, LODGING AND BO ARDING EXPENSES, PROFESSIONAL FEES, SECRETARIAL SERVICES EXPENSES AND TOUR AND TRAVEL EXPENSES HAVE NOT BEEN FURNISHED. BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAVE ALSO NOT BEEN ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 6 PRODUCED. THEREFORE, THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIV ITIES ARE NOT ASCERTAINABLE. ACCORDINGLY, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT NONE OF THE CON DITIONS FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION HAS BEEN SATISFIED. THEREFORE, THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA HAS BEEN REJECTED. SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GRANTED THE REGISTRATION, APPROVAL U/S 80G HAS ALSO BEEN DEN IED. 2.1 AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT AFTER CALLING FOR DOCUMENTS AND EXPLANATION, WHICH WERE FURNISHED, THE LD. DIT(E) DID NOT FURNISH ANY FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE-S OCIETY FOR EXPLAINING VARIOUS MATTERS NARRATED IN THE ORDER. THE PROVI SION CONTAINED IN SECTION 12AA(1)(B) PRESCRIBES TWO CONDITIONS FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION, NAMELY,- (I) THE OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE; AND (II) THE AC TIVITIES ARE GENUINE. THE LD. DIT(E) HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY FINDING THAT THE OBJEC TS ARE NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE. THEREFORE, THE ONLY CONDITION TO BE SEE N IS WHETHER ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE, WHICH MEANS THAT THE ACTIVITIES ARE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OBJECTS. INSTEAD OF DOING SO, THE LD. DIT(E) RE FERRED TO VARIOUS EXPENSES AND THEREAFTER SUMMARILY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION TH AT NONE OF THE CONDITIONS HAS BEEN SATISFIED. HE HAS NOT GONE INTO THE ACTIVITIES AT ALL. ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 7 2.2 IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISION CON TAINED IN SECTION 11(1)(A) PERMITS THE DEDUCTION ONLY IN RESPECT OF THAT AMO UNT WHICH HAS BEEN APPLIED TOWARDS THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE. THEREFORE , IF THE EXPENDITURE OR PART THEREOF IS NOT INCURRED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOS ES, THE SAME IS NOT DEDUCTIBLE. HOWEVER, THIS IS A MATTER PERTAINI NG TO THE ASSESSMENT OF THE RELEVANT YEAR. THE SAME CANNOT BE EXAMINED AT THE TIME OF THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION. IN THIS VERY CONNECTION, IT HAS ALSO BEEN SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN AS INCOME AND, THEREFOR E, THERE WAS NO NEED TO GO INTO THE QUESTION OF THE PURPOSE OF THE DONATIO N RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS AGITATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 3. IN REPLY, THE LD. SR. DR REFERRED TO THE SPEC IFIC FINDING THAT NONE OF THE CONDITIONS FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION STANDS SATISFIED IN THIS CASE. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT VARIOUS EXPENSE S HAVE BEEN INCURRED ON CULTURAL PROGRAMS, DOCUMENTATION, BOARDING AND LO DGING, LUNCH AND SNACKS, SECRETARIAL SERVICES, TOUR AND TRAVEL EX PENSES ETC. THE WORD CHARITABLE PURPOSE INHERENTLY CONTAINS THE STI PULATION THAT THE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED FOR THE BENEFIT OF PUBLIC AT L ARGE. THIS CONDITION DOES NOT STAND SATISFIED IN ABSENCE OF THE DETAILS OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 8 THE ASSESSEE. THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES CAN BE SEEN ONLY ON EXAMINATION OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE AS SESSEE AS NO ACTIVITY CAN BE CARRIED OUT WITHOUT INCURRING THE EXPENDITURE . THEREFORE, THE LD. DIT(E) WAS RIGHT IN EXAMINING THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED B Y THE ASSESSEE. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE BURDEN TO PROVE THAT THE OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE AND ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE IN THE CONTEXT OF O BJECTS IS ON THE ASSESSEE. APART FROM FILING SOME DETAILS, NO ATTEMPT HAS B EEN MADE BEFORE THE LD. DIT(E) TO ESTABLISH EITHER OF THE TWO CONDITIONS . THEREFORE, IT IS STRONGLY AGITATED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. DIT(E) MAY BE UPHELD. 4. IN THE REJOINDER, THE LD. COUNSEL REITERATE THA T THE FINDING THAT NONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS SATISFIED IS NOT BASED ON ANY E VIDENCE OR ARGUMENT. THE FINDING HAS BEEN RECORDED IN VACUUM. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. WE HAVE EXAMINED THE CONTENTS OF THE P APER BOOK INCLUDING THE DETAILS OF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED UNDER VARIOU S HEADS. WE FIND THAT THE LD. DIT(E) HAS NOT REALLY EXAMINED WHETHER THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE-SOCIETY ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND WHI CH SUB-SERVE THE PUBLIC AT LARGE AND NOT MERELY THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 9 ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF EXPENDITURE IN TERMS OF DATE, BILL NUMBER, PERSON AND AMOUNT, NO ATTEMPT HAS BEEN MADE TO EXAMINE WHETHER MAJOR PART OF THE EXPENDITURE HA S BEEN INCURRED ON CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES CARRIED ON FOR THE PUBLIC A T LARGE. 5.1 IN THE CASE OF ACHARYA SEWA NIYAS, UTTRANCH AL VS. CIT, ITA NO. 5493(DEL)/2004 DATED 02.11.2006, A COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD, G BENCH OF DELHI TRIBUNAL HAS MENTIONE D THAT UNDER SECTION 12AA THE JURISDICTION IS CONFINED TO SATISFACTIO N ABOUT THE OBJECTS AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. THE CIT CAN MAKE SUCH ENQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM FIT FOR THIS PURPOSE. THE CIT HAS NOT RECO RDED ANY ADVERSE FINDING ABOUT THE OBJECTS. HE HAS MERELY RECORDED THAT NO CHARITABLE ACTIVITY HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT. ON THESE FACTS, IT HAS BEEN HEL D THAT THE FINDING IS UNTENABLE AS IT HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED AS T O HOW HE CONSIDERED ANY OR ALL OBJECTS AS NON-CHARITABLE. FURTHER, IN THE CASE OF SARDARI LAL OBERAI MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST VS. ITO, (2007) 106 T TJ (DEL) 468, IT HAS MENTIONED THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX HAS TO PASS AN ORDER IN WRITING AFTER SATISFYING HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJE CTS OF THE TRUST AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. NO ACTIVITY HAS BE EN CARRIED OUT AS IT WAS THE FIRST YEAR OF THE TRUST. HE HAD ONLY TO SEE THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. ON ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 10 THESE FACTS, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT HE WENT WRONG IN OBSERVING THAT THERE APPEARS TO BE NO INTENTION ON THE PART OF THE ASS ESSEE TO CARRY OUT CHARITABLE ACTIVITY AND ITS OBJECTS APPEAR ONLY TO COLLECT DONATIONS IN THE NAME OF CHARITY. IN THE CASE OF MODERN DEFENCE SHIKSHAN S ANSTHAN VS. CIT, (2007) 108 TTJ (JODHPUR) 732, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT THE P ROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 13(1)(C)(I)/(II) AND SECTION 13(3)(B) DO NOT COME INTO PICTURE WHILE DECIDING THE MATTER OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA. IN THE CASE OF DIT(E) VS. PRADAN PROPERTY HOLDING TRUST, (DEL) ITA NO. 361 O F 2007 DATED 16.08.2010, A COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED ON REC ORD, THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE WAS THAT THE DONAT ION OF RS. 5,000/- WOULD REMAIN WITH THE SETTLOR AND IN SUCH A CIRCUMSTAN CES IT WOULD NOT BE PERMISSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSEE TO SEEK EXEMPTION F ROM PAYMENT OF TAX, IN AS MUCH AS SECTION 11 OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT THE TA X IS NOT TO BE LEVIED ON THE INCOME ONLY IF IT IS DERIVED FROM THE PROPERTY HE LD UNDER TRUST. THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT NEGATED THIS ARGUMENT A ND HELD THAT THE ONLY QUESTION WHICH IS TO BE DETERMINED IS WHETHER THE TRUST IS CARRYING ON ANY CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY. IF THE TRUST CLAIMS DEDUCTION U/S 11, IT WILL BE FOR THE AO TO CONSIDER AS TO WHETHER THE AS SESSEE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO SUCH EXEMPTION OR NOT AS THE PROPERTY IS NOT HE LD BY THE ASSESSEE BUT BY PRADAN. IN RESPECT OF THESE CASES, IT HAS BEEN A RGUED BY THE LD. DR THAT ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 11 THE FACTS ARE DISTINGUISHABLE. THE ASSESSEE HA S INCURRED EXPENDITURE OF SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS AND IT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN WHET HER ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY INCURRING THE EXPENDITURE ARE IN PURSUANCE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND FOR THE BENEFIT OF PUBLIC AT L ARGE. 5.2 HAVING CONSIDERED ALL THESE MATTERS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DIT(E) IS ENTITLED TO EXAMINE WHETHER OBJECTS AR E CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE. ALTHOUGH A FINDING HAS BEEN RECORDED THAT THE OBJECTS ARE NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE, THE FINDING IS IN VACUUM, AS NO REASON WHATSOEVER HAS BEEN FURNISHED TO SUPPORT THE SAME. IN OTHER WORDS, THIS ISSUE HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED AT ALL. HE HAS E XAMINED THE EXPENSES AND CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT EVEN ACTIVITIES ARE N OT GENUINE. IN THIS CONNECTION, WE TEND TO AGREE WITH THE LD. DR THAT T HE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES CAN ONLY BE ASCERTAINED FROM THE EXP ENDITURE INCURRED AS NO ACTIVITY IS FEASIBLE WITHOUT EXPENDING MONEY. THEREFORE, APART FROM FILING DETAILS OF THE EXPENSES, IT WAS INCUMBENT O N THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW THAT THE BULK OF THE EXPENDITURE HAD BEEN INCURRED IN PURSUANCE OF OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. IT IS TRUE THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES MA Y OR MAY NOT BE DEDUCTIBLE U/S 11(1)(A). HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO US, IT IS EQ UALLY TRUE THAT A FINDING ABOUT GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES CAN BE RECOR DED ONLY IF MAJOR ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 12 EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED TOWARDS OBJECTS OF TH E SOCIETY. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT MAY BE CLARIFIED THAT IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE ACTIVITIES HAVE NOT STARTED AND, THEREFORE, THE QUESTION OF GENUI NENESS OF ACTIVITIES WILL HAVE TO BE GONE INTO. LOOKING TO THE AFORESAID D EFICIENCIES IN THE CASE OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEE, WE THINK IT FIT TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE DIT(E) WITH A DIRECTION THAT HE WI LL EXAMINE MATERIAL ON RECORD, INCLUDING ANY FURTHER MATERIAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE OR GATHERED BY HIM, AND FRAME A FRESH ORDER AFTER GRANTING DU E OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5.3 AS THE MATTER REGARDING REGISTRATION HAS BEEN R ESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE DIT(E), IT WILL BE APPROPRIATE TO RESTORE THE MATT ER REGARDING GRANT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G ALSO TO HIS FILE, TO BE DECIDED AFRESH AFTER DECIDING THE MATTER REGARDING REGISTRATION. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE TREATED A S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (I.P. BANSAL) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SP SATIA ITA NOS. 3586 & 4252(DEL)/2011 13 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- APPAN ASIA PACIFIC PERFORMING ARTS NETWORK, NEW D ELHI. DIT(E), NEW DELHI. AO CIT THE DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR.