M/s Vishwayatan Yogashram, Reasi (J & K) V. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Chandigarh

ITA 428/ASR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7705 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 14-06-2017
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P N ARORA
• Keywords: Gift; Depreciation; Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Question of law; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIA L MEMBER I.T.A NO.428(ASR)/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: M/S VISHWAYATAN YOGASHARAM OPP. SHALIMAR PARK, KATRA, VAISHNO DEVI, DISTT. REASI (J&K) PAN:AABAV-0210D VS. CIT, (EXEMPTION) CHANDIGARH. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. P.N. ARORA (ADV.) RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN (DR.) DATE OF HEARING: 18.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 13.12.20 17 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH, DATED 30.07.2016 REFUSI NG REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL , HOWEVER, THE CRUX OF GRIEVANCES IS THE REFUSAL OF LD. CIT(E) FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 2 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS NOTED IN THE ORD ER PASSED BY LD. CIT(E) IS THAT ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY WHICH WAS CREA TED ON 21.04.1997 AND IS REGISTERED BY THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, J&K GO VERNMENT. THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY INTER-ALIA INCLUDES: (I) TO PROMOTE UNIVERSAL PROSPERITY AND DEVELOP SOC IAL, PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL CONDITION OF ALL HUMAN BEINGS OF ALL CLASSES, CREEDS, RELIGIOUS RACES, COLOURS AND CASTES BY IMPA RTING LEARNING BASED ON YOGA AND VIDC, VEDANTIK AND ANCIENT INDIAN CULTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. (II) TO ESTABLISHE A VISHWA GURUKUL UNIVERSITY BY O PENING INSTRUCTION CENTERS ALL OVER INDIA, J&K AND ABROAD FOR IMPARTING INSTRUCTINS IN ALL LANGUAGES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE OF YOGA SCIENCES WHICH INCLUDE THE IMPARTING INSTRUCTION I N THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF YOGIC SADHAN, SHAT-KARMA YOGI SUKSH MA VIGYAN, YOGI STHUL VIGYAN, YOGI PRANAYAM ETC FOR THEIR TENT ION AND SPIRITURAL ENERGY, CURE OF DISEASES, CURE OF MENTAL & PHYSICAL WEAKNESS, CURE OF OBESITY AND OTHER PHYSICAL DEFORM ITIES OF BODIES. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPLICATION IN FROM NO.10A FOR R EGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(E) REJECTED THE APPLI CATION OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 5. ON 14.07.2016 SH. SAURAV MEHTA, CA & COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSES ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS. FILED WRITTEN REPLY TO QUERIES RAISED VIDE LETTER DATED 08.07.2016. IN ANSWER TO A SPECIFIC QUERY REGARDING CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES BEIN G CARRIED OUT BY THE SOCIETY IT HAS BEEN STATED VIDE RESPONSE DATED 14 JULY, 2016 THAT THE AP PLICANT SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN TEACHING AND PROMOTION OF YOGA AND HAS BEEN ORGANIZING YOGA CAMP S AT VARIOUS PLACES AND, THAT THE SAME IS INCLUDED AS ONE OF TIRE LIMBS OF CHARITABLE PURPOSES IN TIRE PROVISION OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 3 6. THE COUNSEL OF THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED COP Y OF AUDITED BALANCE SHEET COPIES OF ITR FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS. THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS NAVE BEEN, DRAWN .FROM THE INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT SUBMITTED BY FIRE APPLICANT SOC IETY:- F.Y. GROSS RECEIPT MAJOR HEADS OF EXPENDITURE 2012-13 10,45,716 (I) SALARY-RS. 1,95,365 (II) KITCHEN & BHANDARA- RS. 2,95,405 (III) GAUSHALA EXPENSE - RS. 2,13,052 1 TOTAL- RS. 7,03,462 2013-14 , 10,66,678 (I) SALARY - RS. 1,82,240 (II) KITCHEN & BHANDARA- RS. 4,02,391 (III) GAUSHALA EXPENSE - RS. 4,60,851 TOTAL- RS. 10,45,482 2014-15 10,42,409 (I) SALARY-RS. 2,56,500 (II) KITCHEN & BHANDARA- RS. 4,64,046 (III) GAUSHALA EXPENSE - RS. 4,25,855 TOTAL- RS. 11,46,401 THE GROSS RECEIPT & TOTAL EXPENDITURE CLAIMED (A FE W MAJOR EXPENSES NAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN TIRE TABLE). THERE ARE NO EXPENSES ATT RIBUTABLE TO PROPAGATION OF YOGA IN THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT ATTACHED WITH THE APPLICATI ON OR SUBSEQUENT SUBMISSIONS, NO EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO EXPLAIN HOW THE CHARITA BLE PURPOSE IN YOGA HAS BEEN ACHIEVED EITHER. THE EXPENSES CLAIMED FOR SALARY, BHANDARA AND GAUSHALA ALSO REMAIN UNCORROBORATED IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY BANK ST ATEMENT FILED DESPITE BEING SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR. THE APPLICANT FAILED TO FUR NISH RECEIPTS AND PAYMENTS ACCOUNTS FOR THREE YEARS THAT WERE ASKED FOR VIDE T IRE FINAL SHOW CAUSE. 7. IT HAS BEEN NOTICED FURTHER THAT THE APPLICA NT SOCIETY HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR TIRE A.Y. 2014-15 AND A.Y. 2015-16 AT 'NIL WITHOUT SHOWING ANY EVIDENCE FOR CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER ANY RELEVANT SECTION OF FIRE ACT. PAPERS FOR A.Y. 2013-14 HAVE ALSO BEEN APPENDED. NO EVIDENCE OF FILING RETURN FOR A.Y. 2013- 14 HOWEVER, HAS BEEN ATTACHED. EVEN FOR A.YS.2014- 15 AND 2015-16 IT IS EVIDENCED THAT RETURNS HAVE BEEN FILED ONLY ON 30.1 1.2015. IT IS CLEAR THAT BOTH RETURNS HAVE BEEN FILED BELATEDLY AND PRESUMABLY WI TH AN EYE ON SEEKING EXEMPTION THEREAFTER. 8. THE APPLICANT WAS ASKED TO PROVIDE DETAIL S OF LAND AND BUILDING PURCHASED DURING LAST THREE YEARS ALONG WITH COPIES OF REGIST RATION WIDE ABOVE REFERRED LETTER DATED 08.07.2016. IN RESPONSE TO IT THE APPLICANT I N HIS WRITTEN REPLY SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS NOT PURCHASED ANY LAND & BUILDING DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A COPY' OF JUDGMEN T OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR IN THE CASE OF APPLICANT ON ACQUISI TION OF LAND (MEASURING 328 KANAL 05 MARIA) BY J &K GOVERNMENT GOING THROUGH TH E SAID ORDER IT IS REVEALED THAT TIRE HONBLE COURT HAD DECIDED TIRE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE APPLICANT WHO HAD FILED A WRIT PETITION AGAINST ACQUISITION OF LAND B Y THE STATE GOVERNMENT ON THE GROUND THAT PROPER OPPORTUNITY' HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN. THE CASE WAS DECIDED IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER, 2000. NO PAPERS FOR THE PERIOD THERE AFTER HAVE BEEN ADDUCED BY THE APPLICANT TO PROVE ITS OWNERSHIP OF LAND EVEN AFTER 16 YEARS OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED BY TIRE HON'BLE COURT, LIRE SAI D PROPERTY IS ALSO NOT REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET FILED BY THE APPLICANT. NO PRO OF OF OTHER ASSETS REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET HAVE BEEN ADDUCED EITHER. IN FACT IN AN ANSWER TO A SPECIFIC QUERY THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE DATED 2016 CLEARLY STATES THAT APART FROM ASHRAM LAND ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 4 'TIRE ASSESSEE DOES NOT OWN ANY OTHER PROPERTY'. TH E OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY, INCOME FROM WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE EXEMPTED U/S 11 O F THE ACT REMAINS DOUBTFUL. (I) BASED ON THE OBSERVATIONS MENTIONED AT FOREGOING PA RAGRAPHS, THERE IS HO WAY THE' GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY C AN BE CORROBORATED WITH THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT WITH THE STATE D AIMS AND OBJECTS AND THEREFORE THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12AA FOR GRAN T OF REGISTRATION IS ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 4. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. AR NARRATED THE BRIEF FAC TS ABOUT THE SOCIETY AND FILED WRITTEN SYNOPSIS AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSES SEES SOCIETY WAS ENGAGED IN TEACHING AND PROMOTION OF YOGA AND APPLI CATION WAS FILED WITH LD. CIT(E) FOR THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT AND WHEREIN THE INCOME OF EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR FINANCIAL YEAR: 2 015-16 WAS DULY FILED AND ALSO OTHER DOCUMENTS AS REQUIRED BY LD. CIT(E) WERE FILED. IN THIS RESPECT OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO COPY OF SHOW C AUSE NOTICE AS PLACED AT (PB-36) AND REPLIES FILED BY ASSESSEE AS PLACED IN (PB 37 TO 39). IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT WHILE REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF A SSESSEE THE LD. CIT(E) HAD RAISED THE FOLLOWING OBJECTIONS. (I) THERE ARE NO EXPENSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO PROPAGATI ON OF YOGA IN FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. (II) NO RETURN RELATING TO ASST. YEAR 2013- 14 HAS BEEN FILED. (III) DETAILS REGARDING OWNERSHIP OF LAND NOT PROVI DED. (IV) THE SAID PROPERTY WAS NOT REFLECTED BY APPELLA NT IN THE BALANCE SHEET. THE LD. AR IN THIS RESPECT INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE NO.40 TO 62 & 87 TO 89 WHEREIN THE DETAILS OF BHANDARA EXPENSES AND SALARY EXPENSES WAS PLACED. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE KITCHEN EXPENSES ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 5 WERE INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF FREE FOOD & MILK PROVID ED TO YOGA TEACHERS, STUDENTS, SUPERVISORS, ASSISTANT YOGA GURUS, COOK, WHO WERE PROVIDING SERVICES FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCI ETY. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT YOGA TEACHERS ARE BRAHMCHARIES AND T HEY DO NOT CHARGE ANY REMUNERATION FOR IMPARTING YOGA TRAINING. IT WA S SUBMITTED THAT THESE EXPENSES CLEARLY RELATED TO PROPOGATION OF YO GA AND ASSESSING OFFICER DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR ASST. YEA R 2015-16 HAS ALLOWED THESE EXPENSES AND DID NOT FIND ANY DISCREP ANCY IN THESE EXPENSES. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT FREE FOOD & MILK PR OVIDED AND YOGA TEACHERS AND STUDENTS IS A PART OF PARCEL OF CHARIT ABLE ACTIVITIES AND THIS VIEW FINDS SUPPORT IN THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE ALLAH ABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT, AGRA VS. RADHA RAMAN NIWAS TRUST I N ITA NO.202 PLACED IN PB PAGE 73 TO 76. AS REGARDS THE SECOND OBJECTION THAT INCOME TAX RET URN RELATING TO ASST. YEAR: 2013-14 HAS NOT BEEN FILED, THE LD. AR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO (PB 20-25) WHERE COPIES OF BALANCE SHEET AND INC OME AND EXPENDITURE FOR ASST. YEAR: 2013-14 WAS PLACED AND IT WAS SUBMI TTED THAT NO SUCH QUERY WAS RAISED BY LD. CIT(A) IN THE SHOW CAUSE NO TICE AS PLACED AT (PB 34 TO 36). THE LD. AR IN THIS RESPECT INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO A RECENT JUDGMENT OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT(E) VS. SHIR SHIRDI SAI DARBAR CHARITABLE TRUST. THE LD . AR SUBMITTED THAT IN THIS CASE, THE HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COUR T HAS HELD THAT NON FILING OF INCOME TAX RETURN IN EARLIER YEAR CAN NOT LEAD TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ACTIVITIES ARE NOT GENUINE. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 6 AS REGARDS DETAILS REGARDING OWNERSHIP OF LAND, TH E LD. AR INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO (PB-121 TO 132) WHERE A COPY OF JU DGMENT OF HONBLE J&K HIGH COURT WAS PLACED AND WHERE THE HONBLE COU RT HAD HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS THE OWNER OF LAND. AS REGARDS THE OBJECTION OF LD. CIT(E) THAT THAT T HE SAID PROPERTY WAS NOT MENTIONED IN BALANCE SHEET, THE LD. AR SUBM ITTED THAT THE SAID VALUE WAS DULY REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET IN FI XED ASSETS UNDER THE HEAD ASAHRAM BUILDING AND THE LAND WAS DONATED TO A SSESSEE BY WAY OF GIFTS BY VARIOUS PERSONS, THEREFORE THE VALUE OF LA ND WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. 6. WITHOUT PREJUDICE HE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT AT T HE TIME OF REGISTRATION THE ONLY ASPECT THAT THE LD. CIT(E) IS REQUIRED TO EXAMINE IS THE OBJECTS OF SOCIETY AND GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIE S OF THE TRUST AND IT WAS NOT OPEN TO LD. CIT(A) TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION O F FUNDS AT THE TIME OF GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. RELIANCE IN THIS RESPECT WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS. (I) DECISION OF P&H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V S. B.K.K. MEMORIAL TRUST REPORTED IN 29 TAXMANN.COM 286. (II) DECISION OF P&H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. S URYA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST REPORTED IN 15 TAXMANN.COM 123. (III) DECISION OF ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CASE OF DI VINE HEALTH SERVICES VS. CIT-II, AMRITSAR IN ITA NO. 417(ASR)/2010, ORDE R DATED 07/06/2012 RELATING TO AY 2010-11. (IV) DECISION OF ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CASE OF D.N . MEMORIAL TRUST VS. CIT IN ITA NO. 617(ASR)/2011, ORDER DATED 11/07/201 2. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 7 (V) DECISION OF ITAT, AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CASE OF DRE AM LAND EDUCATIONAL TRUST VS. CIT REPORTED IN 109 TTJ 850. 7. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING OUT YOGA ACTIVITIES WHICH WAS APPARENT FROM THE ORDER OF HON BLE J&K HIGH COURT ITSELF WHEREIN THE HONBLE COURT HAD NOTED THAT ASS ESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN CARRYING OUT YOGA ACTIVITIES AND IN THIS RESPECT OU R ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAGE 123 OF PAPER BOOK WHERE COPY OF SUCH ORDER WAS PLACED. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED TO PB 125 WHERE THE HON BLE COURT HAD NOTED THAT ACTIVITIES OF ASHRAM WERE BEING DONE WITHOUT A NY PROFIT OR MARGIN. THE LD. AR ALSO TOOK US TO PAPER BOOK PAGES 27 TO 33 WHERE COPIES OF LETTERS WRITTEN BY VARIOUS INSTITUTIONS REQUESTI NG THE ASSESSEE TO HOLD YOGA CLASSES WAS PLACED. THE LD. AR ALSO FILED CERT AIN PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING CERTAIN ARMY MEN UNDERGOING YOGA TRAINING AT THE CAMPUS AND SUBMITTED THESE THAT THESE WERE ALSO FILED WITH THE LD. CIT(E) AND WHICH CLEARLY PROVES THAT YOGA ACTIVITIES WERE BEING CARR IED OUT. THE LD. AR ALSO PRESENTED SWAMI YOGANAND MAHARAJ SECRETARY OF THE A SSOCIATION WHO BRIEFED ABUT THE NATURE OF YOGA ACTIVITIES BEING CA RRIED OUT AND ALSO FILED COPIES OF YOG BOOKS BEING PUBLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE NAMELY YOG-IN , YOIG VIDYA & JIWAN TATAV SADHNA,. THE SECRETARY O F THE ASSOCIATION EXPLAINED THAT MANDIR IS A PART OF YOGIC ACTIVITIES AND KITCHEN IS RUN FOR PREACHERS, STUDENTS AND ON CERTAIN OCCASIONS FOR PU BLIC AT LARGE. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 8 THE LD. AR ALSO FILED COPIES OF ORDERS IN THE CASE OF PATANJALI YOGPEETH DECIDED BY HONBLE DELHI BENCHES OF TRIBUN AL FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT EVEN IF THERE ARE CERTAIN IRREGULA RITIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE EXEMPTION CANNOT BE DENIED. 8. THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT EXP ENSES INCURRED BY ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF BHANDARA EXPENSES WERE I N FACT EXPENSES WHICH HAD BEEN INCURRED FOR ORGANIZING BHANDARA IN THE FORM OF LANGAR AS BHANDARA IS GENERALLY ORGANIZED FOR THE PUBLIC A T LARGE. HE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF KITCHEN EXPENSES THER E ARE IRREGULAR AMOUNTS OF EXPENDITURE WHICH SHOWS THAT ON SOME SPE CIAL OCCASION HUGE KITCHEN EXPENSES WERE BOOKED WHICH PROVES THAT THER E WERE NOT INCURRED FOR STUDENTS OR PREACHERS. THE LD. DR IN THIS RESPECT FILED A MONTH WISE DETA IL OF KITCHEN EXPENSES FOR THE THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND SUBMITT ED THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF KITCHEN EXPENSES TO TOTAL EXPENSES DO NOT INDICATE THAT THEY WERE CONSISTENTLY INCURRED FOR STUDENTS AND YO GA TEACHERS. THE LD. DR IN THIS RESPECT SUBMITTED THAT IN AUGUS T AND SEP, 2013-14 AND 2014-15 THE PERCENTAGE OF KITCHEN EXPEN SES TO TOTAL EXPENSES WERE AS HIGH AS HIGH AS 19% WHEREAS IN THE OTHER MONTHS IT REMAINED BETWEEN 3 % TO 10%. INVITING OUR ATTENTIO N TO (PB 87-89), THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT NO SALARY HAS BEEN PAID TO YO GA GURUS AND THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE CONCLUDED THAT SALARY WAS P AID FOR ACHIEVEMENT OF MAIN OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 9 AS REGARDS THE CLAIM OF LD. AR THAT NO SPECIFIC QU ERY WAS RAISED BY LD. CIT(E) FOR RETURN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR:2013- 14, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE AS PLA CED AT (PB -36) IS INCOMPLETE AS THE COMPLETE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 08.07.2016 WAS OF TWO PAPERS AND IN THE SECOND PAPER VIDE PARA 8, THE LD. CIT(E) REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE COPIES OF INCOME TAX RETURNS F OR THE LAST THREE YEARS. THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT VIDE LETTER DATED 23 RD FEB. 2016, THE LD. CIT(E) VIDE PARA 4 HAD ALSO REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FILE COPIES OF LAST THREE YEARS INCOME TAX RETURNS AND THEREFORE, THE A RGUMENT OF LD. AR THAT NO SUCH QUERY WAS RAISED BY LD. CIT(E) IS NOT CORRECT. AS REGARDS THE DETAILS REGARDING OWNERSHIP OF LAND NOT PROVIDED TO LD. CIT(E), THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE BALANCE S HEET PLACED AT (PB - 22) DO NOT MATCH WITH THE BALANCE SHEET FILED DURIN GS THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(E) AND OUR SPECIFIC ATTENTION WA S INVITED TO (PB-20) WHERE UNDER THE HEADING FIXED ASSETS ASAHRAM LAND A ND BUILDING WAS MENTIONED AND WHEREAS IN THE BALANCE SHEET FILED DU RING PROCEEDINGS THERE WAS NO MENTION OF LAND. THE LD. DR FURTHER SUBMITTED DESPITE A LAPSE OF PE RIOD OF SIXTEEN YEARS FROM THE DATE OF JUDGMENT OF HONBLE J&K HIGH COURT, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE ANY OTHER DOCUMENT TO PROVE THE OWNERS HIP OF ENTIRE LAND. THE LD. DR, FILED CERTAIN COPIES OF PHOTOS OBTAINED FROM THE RECORD OF LD. CIT(E) AND SUBMITTED THAT THESE PHOTOS DO NOT INDIC ATE ANY ACTIVITY OF ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 10 IMPARTING YOGA AND RATHER THESE PHOTOS INDICATE THA T ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN CERTAIN RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES. AS REGARDS THE RELIANCE PLACED BY THE AR ON THE CA SE LAW, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THESE CASE LAWS ARE DISTINGUI SHABLE ON THE FACTS AS IN THE CASE LAWS RELIED ON BY LD. AR THE H ONBLE COURTS HAS HELD THAT SOCIETIES WERE IN THE INITIAL STAGE OF IT S EXISTENCE AND THEREFORE, THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES COULD NOT BE VERIFIED AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CARRIED OUT ANY ACTIVITY, WHEREAS IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE SOCIETY IS QUITE OLD AS HAS BEEN NOTED IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(E) AND THEREFORE, IN THIS CASE, THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES HAD TO BE VERIFIED TO ARRIVE AT THE CONCLUSION AS TO WHETH ER THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 9. THE LD. AR IN HIS REJOINDER SUBMITTED THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHS, LETTERS OF VARIOUS INSTITUTIONS AND BOOKS BEING PUBLISHED B Y SOCIETY CLEARLY SHOWS THAT ASSESSEE WAS ACTUALLY ENGAGED IN PROVIDI NG YOGIC TRAINING. THE LD. AR FURTHER FILED A COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY A.O. IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE FOR ASST. YEAR 2015-16 AND SUB MITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT FIND ANY DISCREPANCY DURI NG ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ASSESSING OFFICER HIMSELF HAS HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS A CHARITABLE SOCIETY AND THE OBJECTIVE OF SOCIETY A RE TO DEVELOP SOCIAL, PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL CONDITION AND ALSO T O IMPART LEARNING OF YOGIC. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 11 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT IT IS AN UN DISPUTED FACT THAT ASSESSEE IS REGISTERED UNDER SOCIETIES ACT AND THE AIMS AND OBJECTS AS NOTED IN THE ORDER U/S 12AA ARE CHARITABLE IN NATUR E AS WITH EFFECT FROM FINANCE ACT, 2015. THE SECTION 2(15) OF THE AC T HAS BEEN AMENDED AND YOGA HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITIO N OF CHARITABLE PURPOSES AMENDED SECTION 2(15) READS AS UNDER: 'CHARITABLE PURPOSE' INCLUDES RELIEF OF THE POOR, E DUCATION, [YOGA,] MEDICAL RELIEF, PRESERVATION OF ENVIRONMENT (INCLUDING WATE RSHEDS, FORESTS AND WILDLIFE) AND PRESERVATION OF MONUMENTS OR PLACES O R OBJECTS OF ARTISTIC OR HISTORIC INTEREST, AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY: [ PROVIDED THAT THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERA L PUBLIC UTILITY SHALL NOT BE A CHARITABLE PURPOSE, IF IT INVOLVES T HE CARRYING ON OF ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINE SS, OR ANY ACTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COM MERCE OR BUSINESS, FOR A CESS OR FEE OR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION, IRRESPECTIV E OF THE NATURE OF USE OR APPLICATION, OR RETENTION, OF THE INCOME FROM SUCH ACTIVITY, UNLESS ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 12 (I) SUCH ACTIVITY IS UNDERTAKEN IN THE COURSE OF ACTUAL CARRYING OUT OF SUCH ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC U TILITY; AND (IV) THE AGGREGATE RECEIPTS FROM SUCH ACTIVITY OR ACTIVI TIES DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR, DO NOT EXCEED TWENTY PER CENT OF THE TOTAL RECEIPTS, OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION UNDERTAKING SUCH ACTIVITY OR A CTIVITIES, OF THAT PREVIOUS YEAR;] THE PROCEDURE LAID DOWN FOR REGISTRATION OF SOCIETI ES U/S 12AA IS CONTAINED IN PROVISIONS OF SEC.12AA WHICH FOR THE S AKE OF COMPLETENESS ARE REPRODUCED BELOW. THE PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION OF A TRUST OR INSTI TUTION, IS AS FOLLOWS: (1) ON RECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTR ATION OF A TRUST OR INSTITUTION; THE COMMISSIONER SHALL (A) CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION F ROM THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUT ION AND MAY ALSO MAKE SUCH ENQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN THI S BEHALF AND (B) AFTER SATISFYING HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECT S OF THE TRUST OF INSTITUTION, HE SHALL PASS AN ORDER IN WRITING REGISTERING THE TRUS T OR INSTITUTION; AND IF HE IS NOT SO SATISFIED, PASS AN ORDER IN WRITING REFUSING TO REGISTER THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION, AND A COPY OF SUCH ORDER SHALL BE SENT TO THE APPLICANT PROVIDED NO ORDER SHALL BE PASSED UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN GIVEN A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE ANALYSIS OF THE ABOVE PROVISIONS RELATING TO PR OCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION INDICATES THAT THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIO NER OR COMMISSIONER OF RECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF TR UST OR INSTITUTION U/S 12A OF THE ACT WILL CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS OR INFORMAT ION AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GEN UINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND HE IS ALSO REQUIRED TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND IF HE I S SATISFIED WITH THE ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 13 OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION HE SHALL PASS AN ORDER IN WRIT ING REGISTERING THE SAID TRUST OR INSTITUTION. AS REGARDS THE SATISFACTION REGARDING OBJECTS OF T RUST OR INSTITUTION, THE LD. CIT(E) HAD NO OBJECTION. HE HAD ONLY OBJECT ION WITH RESPECT TO GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST. ON THE BASI S OF BALANCE SHEET AND OTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED BY ASSESSEE, THE LD. CIT (E) HAS HELD THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY WERE NOT GENUINE AS IN HI S OPINION THERE WAS NO EXPENSES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PROPAGATION OF YOGA AN D NO RETURN FOR ASST. YEAR: 2013-14 WAS FILED AND FURTHER DETAILS REGARDI NG OWNERSHIP OF LAND WAS NOT PROVIDED AND THE SAID PROPERTY WAS NOT REFL ECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEET. IN THIS RESPECT, WE FIND THAT THESE OBJECTIO NS OF THE LD. CIT(E) CANNOT BE SAID TO BE CONCLUSIVE TO INDICATE THAT AC TIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT GENUINE. THE LD. AR HAD EXPLAINED THAT TH E SALARY TO MAIN YOGA TEACHERS WAS NOT PAID AS THEY WERE RENDERING T HE SERVICES WITHOUT ANY SALARY AND WHICH TO OUR MIND IS ALSO CORRECT AS IN THE DETAILS OF SALARY PAID AS CONTAINED IN (PB 87 TO 89), THE SALA RIES MENTIONED AGAINST THE NAMES OF SAWAMI SURYANA, SWAMI YOGANA & SWAMI K UMARI IN THE THREE YEARS IS NIL WHEREAS SALARY HAS BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN PAID TO ASSISTANT YOGA TEACHERS, SANDEEP SHARMA IN FINANCIA L YEAR:2014-15. THE CONTENTION OF LD. DR THAT KITCHEN EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR BHANDARA FOR PUBLIC CAN ALSO NOT LEAD TO THE CONCLU SION THAT ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST WERE NOT GENUINE AND EVEN IF WE ASSUME TH AT EXPENSES INCURRED ON KITCHEN EXPENSES IN THE FORM OF BHANDARA EXPENSE S WERE FOR PUBLIC AT ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 14 LARGE EVEN THAT CANNOT AMOUNT TO HOLDING THAT ACTIV ITIES OF THE SOCIETY WERE NOT GENUINE. THE EXPLANATION OF THE LD. AR THA T THESE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR ALL STUDENTS OR TEACHERS OF THE S OCIETY AND SOME TIMES FOR PUBLIC IS A PLAUSIBLE EXPLANATION AND WHICH CAN NOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE TO HELD THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INSTITUTION WERE NOT GENUINE. THE HOLDING OF BHANDARA CAN NOT BE GROUND TO REJECT THE REGISTRATI ON UNLESS IT WAS PROVED THAT IT WAS FOR ANY PARTICULARS COMMUNITY OR GROUPS OF PERSONS. THIS VIEW HAS BEEN HELD BY HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT, AGRA VS. SRI RADHA RAMAN NIWAS TRUST. THE FIND INGS OF THE HONBLE COURT ARE PLACED IN (PB-76) FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLET ENESS THE FINDINGS OF THE COURT ARE REPRODUCED BELOW. WE FIND THAT AT THE TIME OF GRANTING THE REGISTRAT ION UNDER SECTION 12AA. THE COMMISSIONER HAS LIMITED POWER ONLY TO EXAMINE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. THE LAW REQUIRES THAT HE SHOULD PASS A SPEAKING ORDER. IN THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION, WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL THE REQUIRED DETAILS BEF ORE THE CIT. AS REGARDS THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST; WE NOTICE THAT THESE ARE CHARITABLE OBJECTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2 (15) OF THE ACT. TO CANY SEWA PUJA OF SRI GIRDHAH JI AND CARRY AKHAND NAAM SANKIRTAN UNINTERR UPTEDLY IN AASHRAM IS ONE TYPE OF MEDITATION AND YOGA THE TRUST CARRIE S SUCH MEDITATION AND YOGA SINCE ITS INCEPTION, MORE THAN LAST 50 YEARS. SUCH TYPES OF MEDITAI ON ACCEPTED NOT ONLY IN INDIA BUT ARE ACCEPTED IN WEST ERN COUNTRY ALSO AS A GREAT SOURCE FOR PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH AND SPI RITUAL ATTAINMENT. WHEN A LARGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE FEEL THAT MEDITATION IS A GREAT SOURCE FOR PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL WELL BEING, IT MUST BE HELD THAT THESE ACTIVITIES ARE FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF GENERAL PUBI C UTILITY. MAINTAINING SAMADHI OF GURU IS ALSO CHARITABLE PURPOSE IN ACCOR DANCE WITH SECTION 2 (15) O THE ACT AND POOJA OF SUCH SAMADHI REMINDS PE OPLE OF IDEOLOGY OF GURU, IN WHOSE MEMORY POOJA IS CARRIED OUT. ORGANIZ ING BHANDARA IS AN ACTIVITY OF PROVIDING FOODS TO PERSONS IRRESPECTIVE OF ANY COST OR RELIGIOUS SUCH BHANDARA ACTIVITIES ARE LIKE DAY MEAL FOOD SCH EME OF THE GOVERNMENT. WHEN THE GOVERNMENT IS RUNNING SUCH SCHEME, UNDER T HOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE NOT CHARITABLE. RUNNING GAUSHALA, PIAAU AND PROVIDING DANA TO BIRDS IS ALSO CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGED THE BURDEN IN THIS REGARD B Y FURNISHING ALL NECESSARY DETAILS OF COPY OF TRUST DEED POINTING OU T VARIOUS CHARITABLE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND EXPENDITURES INCURRED ON C HARITABLE ACTIVITIES.' ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 15 WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR OF LAW IN THE FINDINGS REC ORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL. FROM THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHMENT OF TRUST WAS NOT GENUINE AND THAT ACT IVITIES AS DELINEATED IN THE OBJECT WERE NOT CARRIED OUT BY THE TRUST. THE F INDINGS THAT AKHAND NAAM SANKIRTAN IS ONE TYPE OF MEDITATION AND YOGA W ITH ORGANIZING BHANDARA UNLESS IT WAS PROVED THAT IT WAS FOR ANY P ARTICULAR COMMUNITY OR GROUP OF PERSONS AND THAT FOOD WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE PERSONS IRRESPECTIVE OF CASTE AND RELIGION COULD NOT BE A G ROUND TO REJECT THE REGISTRATION. AS REGARDS NON FILING OF RETURN FOR ASST. YEAR 201 3-14, WE FIND THAT THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THIS YEAR IS PLACED AT (PB-24-25) AND IN THIS YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED A LOSS O F RS.5 LAC AND IF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FILE THE RETURN FOR THE ASST. YEAR 2013-14 BEING LOSS THAT ITSELF IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO INDICATE THAT ACTIVITIE S OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT GENUINE. THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT(E) VS. SHRI SHIRDI SAI DARBAR CHARITABLE TRUST IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES HAS HELD AS UNDER: 3. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT -REVENUE. 4. THE MATTER HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY THE TRIBUNAL AFT ER PERUSING THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS. IT HAS BEEN CATE GORICALLY RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE CIT(E) HAS TO SATISFY TOW CONDITIONS WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT . FIRSTLY, WHETHER THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATUR E AND THUS, THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE. IT CANNOT BE CONCLUDED ON T HE BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ITS INCOME TAX RETURNS IN EA RLIER YEARS THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER RECORDED THAT SECTION 13 OF THE ACT COMES INTO PLAY AT THE TIME OF GRANTING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND NOT AT THE TIME OF GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. NO ADVERSE REMARKS HAVE BEEN RECORDED BY THE CIT (E) WITH REGA RD TO THE OBJECTS CONTAINED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF THE ASSESSEE -TRUST TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ITS ACTIVITIES ARE NOT GENUI NE. THUS, IT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DIRECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE CIT (E ) TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT AS REGARDS THE DETAILS OF OWNERSHIP OF LAND, THE A SSESSEE HAD FILED A COPY OF JUDGMENT OF HONBLE HIGH COURT PLACED IN (PB 121 TO 132) ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 16 WHERE THE HONBLE J&K HIGH COURT CLEARLY HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS THE OWNER OF THE LAND THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF J&K IN HIS FINDINGS HAS FURTHER HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS IMPARTING EDUCATION IN YOGA AND SPIRITUALISM AND WHICH ITSELF WAS A PUBLIC PURPOSE AND THEREFORE, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAD ALSO HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS IMPARTING THE EDUCATION IN YOGA. THE ORDER WAS PASSED BY HONBLE HIGH COURT ON 10 TH NOV. 2000 AND WHICH WAS AVAILABLE WITH LD. CIT(E) D URING THE PROCEEDINGS. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE OF LAND IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND HAS ALSO HELD THAT ASSES SEE WAS USING THIS LAND FOR IMPARTING EDUCATION IN YOGA. FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE HONBLE COURT ARE REPRODUC ED BELOW. THE NEXT ARGUMENT OF MR. WAZIR, LEARNED 'COUNSEL F OR THE PETITIONERS IS THAT THE ACQUISITION OF THE LAND IS COLORFUL EXERCISE OF POWERS AND MALAFIDE THE ASHRARN AND THE LAND, SUBJECT-MATTER OF THE DISPUTE IS BEING USED BY THE PETITIONER FOR IMPARTING EDUCATION IN YOGA AND SPIRITUALISM WHICH ITSELF IS A PUBLIC PURPOSE. THE CREATION OF FACILITIES FOR PILGRIMS HAVE NOT BEEN DEFINED IN THE ACT UNDER SECTION 3(G) AS A PUBLIC PURPOSE. THE RESPONDENTS HAVE ALSO NOT STATED, AA T O WHAT FACILITIES WILL BE CREATED WHICH WOULD BE MORE USEF UL TO THE PUBLIC TO THAT OF THE ACTIVITIES RUN-BY THE ASHRAM FOR THE PUBLIC. THE CREATION OF FACILITIES FOR PILGRIMS MAY NOT BE MORE USEFUL TO THE PUBLIC RATHER TO THE WORK BEING DONE BY THE ASHRAM WHICH ITSELF IS A PUBLIC PURPOSE. THIS HAS N OT BEEN REBUTTED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN THEIR OBJECTIONS. ANOTHER ARGUMENT OF MR. WAZLR L/C' FOR PETITIONER I S THAT THE LAND IS TO BE ACQUIRED BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR MATA V AISHNO DEVI SHRINE BOARD WHICH IS A BODY CORPORATE /LOCAL AUTHO RITY. BEFORE THE LAND IS ACQUIRED, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 39 TO 42 ARE TO BE COMPLIED WITH. SECTION 39 PROVIDES THAT THE COMPANY OR THE LOCAL AUTHORITY FOR WHOM THE LAND IS BEING ACQUIRED, HAS TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF > PROVISIONS OF SNOT IONS 40 AND 41 OF THE ACT. SECTION 42 ENVISAGES THE PUBLICATION OF THE SA ID AGREEMENT IN THE GOVT. GAZETTE SECTION 42-A MAKES THE PROVISION S OF SECTIONS 39 TO 42 APPLICABLE TO THE ACQUISITION OF THE LAND BY THE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSFERRING IT ON LEASE TO ANY CORPORAT ION OR LOCAL AUTHORITY . ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 17 THE RESPONDENTS HAVE NOT CONTROVERTER THIS PLEA OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER OR SHOWN FROM THE RECORD THAT THERE MANDATORY PROVISIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER HAS NEXT SUB MITTED THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 5-A OF THE ACT HAVE RIOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH BY AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY TO THE PETITIONERS OBJECTO R, DESPITE OBJECTIONS FILED OBJECTING THE ACQUISITION OF THE PROPERTY AS THE LAND AND THE STRUCTURES STANDING THEREON ARE BEING UTILIZED BY T HE PETITIONER FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF SECTION 5-A(2) IS REPRODUCED WHICH READS BELOW EVERY OBJECTION UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) SHALL BE MADE TO THE COLLECTOR IN WRITING AND THE COLLECTOR SHALL GIVE T HE OBJECTOR AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD EITHER IN PERSON ( OR BY PLEADER OR BY A PERSON AUTHORIZED BY HIM) AND SHALL , AFTER HEARING ALL SUCH OBJECTIONS AND AFTER MAKING SUCH F URTHER INQUIRY, IF ANY, AS HE THINKS NECESSARY, SUBMIT TH E CASE FOR THE DECISION OF THE GOVERNMENT \ TOGETHER WITH THE RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS HELD BY HIM AND A REPORT CONTAIN ING HIS RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE OBJECTIONS . THE DEALS ION O F THE GOVERNMENT ON THO OBJNOTLONO SHALL BE FINAL'. THIS PROVISION OF LAW PLACES OBLIGATION UPON TEA TH E COLLECTOR TO AFFORD AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE OBJECTO R AS THE VIOLATION OF THIS MANDATORY PROVISION RECORDSTHE--SUBSEQUENT AC QUISITION PROCEEDINGS VITIATED. THE SUPREME COURT WHILE DEALI NG WITH SUCH A PROPOSITION IN FARID AHMED VS. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPALI TY AIR 1976 SC 2085 HAS HELD AS UNDER: 'THE HEART OF SECTION 5A OF THE BAND ACQUISITION AC T IS THE HEARING OF OBJECTIONS AND UNDER SUB-SECTION (2) OF THAT SEC TION A PERSONAL HEARING IS MANDATORILYY PROVIDED FOR. WHEN THEREFOR E/SECTION 5A OF THE BAND ACQUISITION ACT IS APPLICABLE UNDER APP ENDIX I OF THE BOMBAY ACT AND THERE IS NOTHING TO SHOW EXPRESSLY O R BY NECESSARY IMPLICATION THAT THE SAID SECTION OR ANY PART OF IT IS EXCLUDED UNDER SECTION 284N OR UNDER ANY OTHER PROV ISION IN CHAPTER XVI AS A WHOLE THE RIGHT TO PERSONAL , HEAR ING UNDER THE BOMBAY ACT CANNOT VANISH OR BE DEFEATED. THIS COURT IN ONKAR NATH VS. STATE, REPORTED IN 198 3 KUT 122, RELYING UPON AIR 1974 SC 1380 AND FOLLOWING THE MANDATE OF THE JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED IN FARID AHMED VS. AHMEDABAD MUNICIPALIT Y AIR 1976 SC 2095(SUPRA) HAS RECORDED IN THE COURSE OF THE JUDGM ENT AS UNDER ; 'IT IS A WELL SETTLED THAT FAILURE ON PART OF THE BAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR TO COMPLY WITH ITS PROVISIONS BY NOT GIVI NG A HEARING TO THE OWNER IN SUPPORT OF HIS OBJECTIONS RENDERS ALL PROC EEDINGS TAKEN SUBSEQUENT THERETO. INCLUDING NOTIFICATION U/S 6 WI THOUT JURISDICTION, AIR 1974 SC 1360. AIR 1976 SC 2095 FOLLOWED. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 18 SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN EXPRESSED BY THE LETTERS PATE NT BENCH OF THIS COURT IN OH. MOHD. ZARGAR AND ORS. VU. 3'TR ATE F J&K AND ORS. ( 1990 KLJ 68) HOLDING THAT HENCE DEFECT OF THE PROCEEDINGS PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ACQUISITION IS FOR THE COMPANY AND THE PURPOSE HAS T BE INVESTIGATED UNDER SECTION 5(A) & 3. 40 NECESSARILY AFTER THE NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 4. IN MST. DWARK & ORS. V. THE STATE OF J&K AND ANR. (1990 SLJ 186 ) IT HAS BEEN HOLD THAT RIGHT OF PERS ONAL BEARING OF PARTY UNDER SECTION 5A OF THE ACT IS MA NDATORY, IF OBJECTIONS ARE FILED. DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 6 SHALL BE INVALID IF PROVISION OF SECTION 5A ARE NOT COMPLIE D WITH. THE RESPONDENTS AFTER RECEIVING THE OBJECTIONS HAVE NOT PROVIDED EITHER IN PERSON OR THROUGH AGENT WHICH AM OUNTS A BREACH OF THE MANDATORY PROVISION OF SECTION 5A (2 ) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE NOTIFICATION DATED 17.11.1995 I SSUED UNDER SECTION 6 AND NOTIFICATIONS ISSUED SUBSEQUENT THERETO CANNOT BE MAINTAINED. FOR THE AFORESAID REASONS, THE WRIT PETITION IS ALL OWED. THE IMPUGNED NOTIFICATIONS ARE QUASHED. NO ORDER AS TO COSTS. FROM THE ABOVE ORDER IT ALSO BECOMES AMPLY CLEAR TH AT ASSESSEE IS THE OWNER OF LAND. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS HIMSELF HE LD THAT ASSESSEE WAS OWNER OF LAND MEASURING 51 CANALS AND THE REST OF L AND IS IN THE NAME OF OTHER PERSONS. THE LD. CIT(E) HAS HELD THAT OWNERSH IP OF LAND FROM WHICH INCOME IS SOUGHT TO BE EXEMPT U/S 11 REMAINS DOUBTFUL. HOWEVER, IN OUR OPINION THE ORDER OF HONBLE J&K HIGH COURT IS SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THAT ASSESSEE WAS OWNER OF LAND. EVEN IF SOME PART OF LAND WAS NOT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE EVEN THEN THAT CAN NOT USED AS A T OOL TO DENY THE EXEMPTION AS THE ACTIVITIES OF IMPARTING YOGA CAN B E CARRIED OUT EVEN ON A RENTED LAND OR ON LAND BELONGING TO OTHERS. MOREO VER 51 KANALS OF LAND WHICH THE LD. CIT(E) HAS HELD TO BE BELONGING TO AS SESSEE IS QUITE SUFFICIENT FOR IMPARTING YOGA TRAINING. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 19 AS REGARDS THE OBJECTION OF LD. DR THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD NOT DISCLOSED THE VALUE OF LAND IN THE BALANCE SHEET, W E FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DECLARE THE VALUE OF LAND IN THE B ALANCE SHEET AS IS APPARENT FROM (PB- 20 TO 25) WHERE THE COPIES OF BA LANCE SHEET FOR THE THREE YEARS ARE PLACED. THE VALUE OF LAND WAS NOT D ECLARED AS THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT INCURRED ANY COST TO ACQUIRE IT AS THE LAND WAS DONATED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE BALANCE SHEETS CLEARLY SHOWED THE VALUE OF BUILDINGS ONLY ON WHICH ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEPRECIATION. TH E OBJECTION OF LD. DR THAT THE BALANCE SHEET FILED DURING THE APPELLAT E PROCEEDINGS AND BALANCE SHEET IN THE PAPER BOOK ARE DIFFERENT SEEMS TO BE INADVERTENT MISTAKE BECAUSE THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN ANY OF TH E FIGURES AND ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEPRECATION @ 10% WHICH IS APPLICABLE F OR BUILDING AND THE CLAIM OF DEPRECATION ON BUILDING ON THE ENTIRE W.D. V ITSELF PROVES THAT THE FIXED ASSETS DECLARED IN THE BALANCE SHEET REFL ECTED ONLY INVESTMENT TOWARDS BUILDING THE ASSESSEE BEING ENGAGED IN THE IMPARTING OF TEAC HING OF YOGA IS ALSO QUITE APPARENT FROM THE LETTER DATED 14.07.201 6 FILED BY ASSESSEE WITH LD. CIT(E) PLACED AT (PB 37 TO 39) WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE VIDE PARA 14 HAD SUBMITTED AS UNDER: '14. THE MAIN OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS TO PROMOTE AND TEACH YOGA TO GENERAL PUBLIC. THE SOCIETY HAS BEEN WORKING FOR PROMOTION OF YOGA FOR THE LAST MANY YEARS. THE SOCIETY HAS BEEN ORGANIZIN G YOGA CAMPS AT VARIOUS PLACES. BESIDES THE SOCIETY IS ALSO HELPING MANY ORGANIZATIONS/ INSTITUTIONS BY ALLOWING THEM TO CONDUCT YOGA CAMPS AT THEIR PREMISES. THE YOGA CAMPS ARE CONDUCTED UNDER THE EXPERT GUIDANCE/ SUPERVISION OF THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY. EVIDENCE OF CONDUCTING SUCH CAMPS HAS ALREADY ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 20 BEEN SUBMITTED. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE ENCLOSED. FINANCE ACT 2015 HAS AMENDED SECTION 2(15) HAS AMENDED SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TO INCLUDE YOGA IN THE DEFINITION OF CH ARITABLE PURPOSE. AMENDED SECTION 2(15) READS AS UNDER:- CHARITABLE PURPOSE' INCLUDES RELIEF OF THE POOR, E DUCATION, [YOGA,] MEDICAL RELIEF, PRESERVATION OF ENVIRONMENT (INCLUDING WATE RSHEDS, FORESTS AND WILDLIFE) AND PRESERVATION OF MONUMENTS OR PLACES O R OBJECTS OF ARTISTIC OR HISTORIC INTEREST, AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY: [ PROVIDED THAT THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERA L PUBLIC UTILITY SHALL NOT BE A CHARITABLE PURPOSE, IF IT INVOLVES T HE CARRYING ON OF ANY ACTIVITY IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR BUSINE SS, OR ANY ACTIVITY OF RENDERING ANY SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, COM MERCE OR BUSINESS, FOR A CESS OR FEE OR ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION, IRRESPECTIV E OF THE NATURE OF USE OR APPLICATION, OR RETENTION, OF THE INCOME FROM SUCH ACTIVITY, UNLESS (I) SUCH ACTIVITY IS UNDERTAKEN IN THE COURSE OF ACTUAL CARRYING OUT OF SUCH ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC U TILITY; AND THE AGGREGATE RECEIPTS FROM SUCH ACTIVITY OR ACTIVITIES DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR, DO NOT EXCEED TWENTY PER CENT OF THE TOTAL RECEIPTS , OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION UNDERTAKING SUCH ACTIVITY OR ACTIVITIES, OF THAT PR EVIOUS YEAR;] THE ABOVE DEFINITION CLEARLY SHOWS THAT GOVERNMENT HAS GIVEN MUCH IMPORTANCE TO YOGA AND THE WORD YOGA HAS BEEN ENTER ED EVEN BEFORE MEDICAL RELIEF IN THE DEFINITION OF CHARITABLE PURP OSE. TODAY WITH THE EFFORTS OF OUR HONBLE PRIME MINISTER, YOGA HAS BEEN RECOGN IZED THE WORLD OVER THIS SHOWS THE INTENTION OF THE GOVERNMENT REGARDIN G PROMOTION OF YOGA. SINCE THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IN ENGAGED IN TEACHING, PROMOTION, PROPAGATION OF YOGA WHICH DIRECTLY FALLS UNDER THE DEFINITION O F CHARITABLE PURPOSE, IT IS PRAYED THAT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BE GRANTED. IN THE FIRST PARA ITSELF THE ASSESSEE HAS MENTIONED THAT SOCIETY HAS BEEN WORKING FOR PROMOTION OF YOGA FOR THE LAST MANY YEA RS. THE ASSESSEE VIDE THIS LETTER HAD ALSO FILED EVIDENCE OF CONDUCTING SUCH C OMPS, BUT THE LD. CIT(E) HAS NOT MENTIONED OR DISCUSSED ANY OF SUCH EVIDENCES. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 21 THE LD. CIT(E) HAS NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED THE FA CTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. WHILE CONSIDERING REGISTRATION THE LD. CIT(E) WAS REQUIRED ONLY TO EXAMINE THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY WHICH UNDOUBTEDL Y ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. THE OTHER ASPECT WAS TO EXAMINE THE GENUINE NESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY. THE ASSESSEE DURING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE HIM HAD FILED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCES REGARDING YOGA ACTIVITIES BEIN G CARRIED OUT AND HAD FILED SUPPORTING EVIDENCES VIDE LETTER DATED 14.07. 2016 BUT THE LD. CIT(E) CARRIED HIMSELF TO ANOTHER DIRECTION, WHEREIN HE OB JECTED ABOUT NON FILING OF PAPERS FOR LAND AND OBJECTIONS RELATING TO BHAND ARA EXPENSES ETC. EVEN IF WE ASSUME THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN IRREGULAR ITIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, THE SAME CANNOT BE USED TO DENY THE EXEMP TION TO ASSESSEE SPECIFICALLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAD CLARIFIED THE OBJECTIONS OF LD. CIT(E). THE CASE LAWS RELIED ON BY LD. DR ARE DISTINGUISHAB LE ON THE FACTS AS IN THOSE CASES THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SATISFY TH AT CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES WERE BEING CARRIED OUT WHEREAS IN THE PRESENT CASE VIDE LETTER DATED 14.07.2016 THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED EVIDENCE OF Y OGI ACTIVITIES BEING CARRIED OUT BUT LD. CIT(E) DID NOT COMMENT ON THOSE EVIDENCES AND NEITHER HE REBUTTED THE SAME. MOREOVER, IN THE PRES ENT CASE, THE HONBLE J&K HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING OUT YOGIC ACTIVITIES. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE ORDER OF HONBLE HIGH COUR T HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE PART OF THIS ORDER. THE LD. DR HAD ARGUED THAT CASE LAWS RELIED ON BY A SSESSEE ARE DISTINGUISHABLE AS IN THESE CASES THE TRUSTS WE RE NEWLY FORMED AND ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 22 COULD NOT HAVE CARRIED OUT ANY ACTIVITIES AND THERE FORE, IN THESE CASES REGISTRATION WAS RIGHTLY ALLOWED. IN THIS RESPECT, WE FIND THAT THOUGH THE TRUST IS QUITE OLD BUT YOGA HAD BEEN INCLUDED AS CH ARITABLE ACTIVITY ONLY WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2016 AND THEREFORE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT FOR YOGA ACTIVITIES THE TRUST C AN BE CONSIDERED TO BE NEW TRUST AS BEFORE 01.04.2016 THE YOGA WAS NOT A C HARITABLE ACTIVITY. MOREOVER, IN OUR OPINION, THE RATIO OF THESE DECISI ONS IS THAT AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION THE LD. CIT(E) IS TO EXAMINE THE OB JECTS OF THE SOCIETY AND GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST ONLY. THE OB JECTIONS RAISED BY LD. CIT(E) DO NOT IN ANY WAY SUGGEST THAT THE ACTIVITIE S OF TRUST WERE NOT GENUINE. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE S TO PROVE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES RELATING TO IMPARTING OF YOGA AND WHICH WE HAVE ALSO OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE WAS PROVIDING YOGA TRAI NING FREE OF COST AND IT WAS STARTED BY SWAMI DHIRENDER BRAHMCHARI WHO WA S A WELL KNOWN FIGURE IN IMPARTING EDUCATION IN YOGIC SCIENCES. TH E HONBLE J&K HIGH COURT HAS ALSO OBSERVED THIS IN ITS ORDER. THE RELE VANT FINDINGS ARE REPRODUCED HEREIN. IT IS FURTHER AVERRED THAT IN THE YEAR 1952 SH. DHI RU BHAI CHOUDHARY CAME TO LEARN YOGA FROM THE PETITIONER NO .1. WHO WAS TAUGHT AND MADE PERFECT COACH BY COACHING AND TRAINING. HE WAS GIVEN THE NAME AS SWAMI DHIRENDER BRAHAMCHARI BY THE PETITIONER. P ETITIONER NO.1 IS ABSOLUTE OWNER OF THE LAND SUBJECT MATTER OF DISPUT E DONATED BY THE PEOPLE AND SOME PIECES OF LAND PURCHASED BY THE PETITIONER AND BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTED THEREON. THE PETITIONER HAS DEVELOPED T HE LAND AND CONSTRUCTED BUILDINGS THEREON IN THE SHAPE OF AN AS HARAM. THE ASHARAM HAS BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE REGISTRATION OF SOCIE TIES ACT BY THE REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, UNDER NO.8 . 1221 IN THE YEAR 1957-58 . PETITIONER NO.1 IS THE FOUNDER OF THE ASHARAM AND HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPOINT THE MANAGING COMMITTEE. THE OB JECT OF THE ASHARAM OF THE SOCIETY IS TO PROMOTE UNIVERSAL PROSPERITY AND TO DEVELOP SOCIAL, ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 23 PHYSICAL, MENTAL AND SPIRITUAL CONDITIONS FOR ALL H UMAN BEINGS OF ALL CLASSES, CREEDS, RELIGIONS, RACES, COLOURS AND CAST ES BY IMPARTING LEARNING BASED ON YOGA, VEDIC, VEDANTIC AND ANCIENT INDIAN C ULTURE AND PHILOSOPHY. TO ESTABLISH A VISHAV GURUKUL UNIVERSIT Y BY OPENING INSTRUCTION CENTERS ALL OVER INDIA AND ABROAD FOR I MPARTING INSTRUCTIONS IN ALL LANGUAGES IN THEORY AND PRACTICE OF YOGA SCIEN CE INCLUDING IMPARTING INSTRUCTIONS OF YOGIC SADHANA, SHAT KARMA, YOGIC SU KSHMA VIGYAN, YOGIC STHUL VIGYAN YOGIC PRANAYAM ETC. TO ESTABLISHE AYUR DEVEDIC RESEARCH CENTERS FOR IMPARTING STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF ANCIENT AYURDEVIC METHODS OF HEALING WITH REFERENCE TO MODERN METHODS. THE PETITIONER IS IMPARTING YOGA AND SPIRITUAL EDUC ATION IN THIS ASHARAM WHICH HAS THE CAPACITY TO PROVIDE ALL FACIL ITIES TO THE PERSONS SECURING SUCH EDUCATION IN THE ASHARAM. THE LAND UN DER THE ASHARMA IS BEING USED FOR THE WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC AND ALL TH OSE PERSONS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN LEARNING YOGA AND SPIRITUAL EDUCATION . THESE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASHARAM ARE BEING DONE WITHOUT ANY PROFIT OR GAIN. AS REGARDS OBJECTS OF SOCIETY THERE IS NO DISPUTE T HAT THOSE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE. THEREFORE, ASSESSEE HAD FULFI LLED BOTH CONDITIONS. WE FURTHER FIND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS FOR ASST. YEAR 2015-16 VIDE ORDER DATED 24.11.2016 HAS MADE A FINDING OF FACT THAT ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN IMPARTING TRAI NING OF YOGA. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO DID NOT FIND ANY DISCREPANCY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE HONBLE PUBJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF CIT-II, CHANDIGARH VS. SURYA EDUCATIONAL & CHARITABLE TRUST VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 5.10.2011 HAS HELD THAT AT THE TIME OF REGIST RATION U/S 12AA, THE LD. CIT(E) IS EMPOWERED TO EXAMINE GENUINENESS OF A CTIVITIES AND OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY BUT IS NOT EMPOWERED TO EXAMINE APPL ICATION OF INCOME. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE HONBLE COURT ARE REPR ODUCED BELOW. 8. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLA NT, BUT FIND NO MERIT IN THE PRESENT APPEALS. AS PER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT , AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST AND INSTITUTION IS REQUIR ED TO BE MADE WITHIN ONE ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 24 YEAR FROM THE DATE OF CREATION OF THE TRUST OR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SUCH INSTITUTION. THE PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION IS PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. IN TERMS OF CLAUSE (A) OF SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, THE COMMISSIONER IS TO SATISFY HIM SELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST ON SUCH INQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY. SUB-SECTION (1A) AND (2) OF SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, ARE PROCEDURAL IN NATURE, WHEREAS SUB-SECTION (3) OF SE CTION 12AA OF THE ACT, EMPOWERS THE COMMISSIONER TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATIO N OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION, IF HE IS SATISFIED THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION ARE NOT GENUINE OR ARE NOT CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANC E WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION. 9. SECTION 11 OF THE ACT CONTEMPLATES THAT THE IN COME AS SPECIFIED THEREIN SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PR EVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME DERIVED FROM THE PROPERTY HELD UNDER THE TRUST WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES, WHEREA S SECTION 12 OF THE ACT, DEALS WITH THE CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED BY THE TRUST OR AN INSTITUTION, ESTABLISHED FOR CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS PURPOSES, RECEIVING CONTRIBUTION, SHALL NOT BE AN INCOME IN TERMS OF SECTION 11 OF TH E ACT. THE BENEFIT OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT, ARE AVAILABLE ONLY I F SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION IS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. 10. ON THE OTHER HAND, SECTION 10(23C) OF THE A CT ARE THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IN SUBSTITUTION OF THE EARLIER PROVISIONS O F SECTION 10(22) OF THE ACT AS TO WHICH INCOME SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN COMPUTI NG THE TOTAL INCOME OF ANY PERSON. THEREFORE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 1 1, 12 OR SECTION (23C) OF THE ACT, DEAL WITH THE INCOME OF A TRUST OR OF THE INSTITUTION AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES AS TO WHEN SUCH INCOME IS TO BE EXCLU DED FOR COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME, BUT THE BASIS OF SUCH BENEFIT IS THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. UNLESS A TRUST OR INSTITUTION IS R EGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION SHALL NO T BE ENTITLED TO EXCLUDE FROM ITS TOTAL INCOME, DEDUCTIONS OR CONTRIBUTIONS OR FROM OTHER SOURCES. THEREFORE, THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN FOR EXCLUDING T HE INCOME FROM CONSIDERATION UNDER SECTION 10(22) NOW 10(23)(C) OR SECTIONS 11 AND 12 ARE NOT APPLICABLE WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATIO N FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. THE APPLICATION FOR REGIST RATION IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE CREATION OF THE TRUST. SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, REQUIRES SATISFACTION IN RESPECT OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST, WHICH INCLUDES THE ACTIVITIES WHICH THE TRUS T IS UNDERTAKING AT PRESENT AND ALSO WHICH IT MAY CONTEMPLATE TO UNDERT AKE. THE INSERTION OF SUB-SECTION (3) TO SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, CLARIFI ES THE SAID FACT, WHEN IT EMPOWERS THE COMMISSIONER TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATIO N IF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST ARE NOT CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SU CH OBJECTS. 11. THEREFORE, THE OBJECT OF SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, I S TO EXAMINE THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, BUT NOT TH E INCOME OF THE TRUST FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES. THE STAGE FOR APP LICATION OF INCOME IS YET TO ARRIVE I.E. WHEN SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION FILES ITS RETURN. THEREFORE, WE FIND THAT THE JUDGMENTS REFERRED TO BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARISING OUT OF THE QUESTION OF REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST AND NOT OF AS SESSMENT. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 25 12 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND THAT ANY SUBST ANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE PRESENT APPEALS . HENCE, THE SAME ARE DISMISSED. THE ABOVE CASE LAW HAS BEEN APPLIED BY THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE FOLLOWING CASES. (I) CIT-I, LUDHIANA VS. BABA KARTAR SINGH DUKKI EDUCATI ONAL TRUST 42 TAXMAN. 17 (P&H) (II) CIT, ROHTAK VS. B.K.K. MEMORIAL TRUST 29 TAXMAN 286 (P&H) (III) CIT, BATHINDA VS. BABA DEEP SINGH EDUCATIONAL SOCIE TY, 21 TAXMAN 38 (P&H) ABOVE ALL, THE LATEST JUDGMENT OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EX EMPTIONS) VS. SHRI SHIRDI SAI DARBAR CHARITABLE TRUST VIDE ITS DECISIO N DATED 27.03.2017 WITH RESPECT TO GRANTING OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA H AS HELD AS UNDER: 3. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT -REVENUE. 4. THE MATTER HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY THE TRIBUNAL AFT ER PERUSING THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS. IT HAS BEEN CATEGORI CALLY RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE CIT(E) HAS TO SATISFY TOW CONDITI ONS WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. FIRSTLY , WHETHER THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND THUS, THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE. IT CANNOT BE CONCLUDED ON THE BASIS THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT FILED ITS INCOME TAX RETURNS IN EARLIER YEARS THAT THE ACTIVI TIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE. IT HAS BEEN FURTHER RECORDED THAT SECT ION 13 OF THE ACT COMES INTO PLAY AT THE TIME OF GRANTING EXEMPTION UNDER S ECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND NOT AT THE TIME OF GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECT ION 12AA OF THE ACT. NO ADVERSE REMARKS HAVE BEEN RECORDED BY THE CIT (E) W ITH REGARD TO THE OBJECTS CONTAINED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF THE ASSESSEE -TRUST TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ITS ACTIVITIES ARE NOT GENUINE. THU S, IT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DIRECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE CIT (E) TO GRANT RE GISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT OBSERVATIONS RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL READ THUS:- WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CONSIDERE D THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FIRST REASON ON THE BASIS OF WHICH T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS REFUSED TO GRANT REGIST RATION TO THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN FILING ITS INCOME -TAX RETURNS IN THE EARLIER YEARS. WE DO NOT FIND THAT IT IS A GOOD REASON TO R EJECT THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION SINCE THE TWO CONDITIONS WHICH THE COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS TO SATISFY WHILE GRANTING THE REGISTRATION UNDER ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 26 SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, ARE THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE. JUST BECA USE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ITS INCOME TAX RETURNS IN EARLIER YEARS, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE. RELIANC E PLACED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE ALL AHABAD HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE CHENNAI BENCH OF THE TRIBU NAL ARE NOT OUT OF PLACE, WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT NON-FILING OF RETURN CANNOT BE ONE OF THE REASONS FOR DENYING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. WITH REGARD TO THE SECOND OBJECTION RAISED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) THAT AS PER CLAUSE-12 OF THE MEMORANDU M OF TRUST, THE TRUSTEES HAVE BEEN GIVEN ABSOLUTE POWERS TO MANAGE THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE PERUSED THE CLAUSE-12 OF THE MEMORANDUM OF THE TRUST, WHEREBY THE TRUSTEES ARE AUTHORIZED TO DEMISE THE IMMOVABLE PRO PERTY OR PROPERTIES OF THE TRUST EITHER FROM YEAR TO YEAR OR FOR ANY FIXED TERM OR FOR ANY TERM OF YEARS OR ON MONTHLY BASIS AT SUCH RENT AND SUBJECT TO SUCH CONDITIONS AS THEY DEEM FIT AND PROPER AND ALSO ACCEPT SURRENDER OF LEASE AND MAY MANAGE THE PROPERTY AS THEY THINK PROPER. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THIS CLAUSE, WE OBSERVE THAT THE TRUSTEES HAVE BEEN GIVEN POWERS TO GIVE PROPERTY OF THE TRUST ON LEASE OR ON RENT. WE DO NOT FIND ANYTH ING WRONG IN THIS CLAUSE SO AS TO DENY THE ASSESSEE THE REGISTRA TION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. AS REGARDS THE APPREHENSION OF THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) THAT HIS CLAUSE MAY ATTRACT THE PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 13 (L)(C) OF THE ACT, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CONDITIONS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 13 OR ELSEWHERE ARE TO BE SEEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON YEARLY BASIS AND NOT BY T HE CIT (APPEALS) WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF TH E ACT. 8. SECTIONS 13 COMES INTO PLAY AT THE TIME OF GRANT ING EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND NOT AT THE TIME OF GRANTI NG REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. THE ONLY TWO REQUIREMENTS A S STATED HEREINABOVE WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF TH E ACT, ARE WITH RESPECT TO THE CHARITABLE NATURE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSE SSEE AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. SINCE WE OBSERVE THAT NO ADVERSE RE MARKS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) WITH REGARD TO THE OBJECTS CONTAINED IN MEMORANDUM AND AS STATED HEREINABOVE T HAT THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXE MPTIONS) DO NOT LEAD TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESS EE ARE NOT GENUINE, WE HEREBY DIRECT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP TIONS) TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT TO THE AS SESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT APPEAL AND IN VIEW OF THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS, WE DIRECT T HE LD. CIT(E) TO GRANT EXEMPTION U/S 12AA TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO .428(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR: 27 11. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.12. 2017 . SD/- SD/- (N.K.CHOUDHRY) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:13.12.2017. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER