BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN, Jaipur V. ACIT(EXEMPTION), Jaipur

ITA 463/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2113 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 02-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: B P MUNDRA
• Section: 143(3); 12A; 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR ] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 463/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN, 47/12 VARUN PATH MANSAROVAR, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAATB 5146 Q VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI B.P. MUNDRA (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 28/04/2017 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15/05/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FR OM THE ORDER DATED 11/01/2016 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A)-3, JAIPUR FOR THE A.Y. 2012-13, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. SELECTION OF CASE FOR SCRUTINY IS BAD IN LAW AN D FACTS. 2. TREATING THAT ASSESSEE IS HAVING NO REGISTRATION U/S 12A IS BAD IN LAW AND FACTS. 3. NOT ALLOWING THE BENEFIT OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 AND REJECTION OF CLAIM OF EXEMPTION OF RS. 35,75,410/- U/S 11 AND ITA 463/JP/2016_ M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN VS ACIT 2 TREATING INCOME EARNED FROM PROVIDING EDUCATION TO BOUGHT TO TAX AS APO IS BAD IN LAW AND FACTS. 4. HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE THAT A NY APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION WAS FILED IS BAD IN LAW AND FACTS. 2. ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE INTERLINKED AND TH E MAIN ISSUE INVOLVED IS REGARDING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). BEFORE US, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SANSTHAN WAS CREATED ON 16/01/1999 AND IT WAS REGISTERED WITH REGISTRAR OF SOCIETIES, JAIPUR VIDE CERTIFICATE NO. 508/1998-99 ON 25/2/2015. THE ASSESS EE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT BEF ORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JODHPUR ON 03/3/2000 ALONGWITH FORM NO. 1 0A AND CERTIFIED COPY OF THE TRUST DEEDS. THIS ENTRY IS EVIDENT FROM DAK REGISTER, WHICH IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 7 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND THE ENTR Y IS AT SL. NO. 159 AND 160. THE COPY OF THE APPLICATION AND FORM NO. 10A IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 5 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE ITO, WARD 2, JODHPUR VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 22/6/2000 ASKED THE INFORMATION FOR REGISTRATION NO . 12A OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE COMPLIED THE REQUIREMENT OF THE LETTER VID E ITS LETTER DATE 10/7/2000. COPY PLACED AT PAGE NO. 8 OF THE PAPER B OOK. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED AN AFFIDAVIT IN THIS REGARD BY STATI NG THE FACTUAL POSITION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE FINALIZING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11, ENQUIRE D ABOUT CERTIFICATE OF ITA 463/JP/2016_ M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN VS ACIT 3 REGISTRATION NO. 12A OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE SU BMITTED BEFORE HIM THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS APPLIED FOR CERTIFICATE ON 03/3/20 00 BEFORE THE CIT, JODHPUR. ALL THE NECESSARY EVIDENCES WERE SUBMITTED AND AFTER VERIFICATION AND SATISFACTION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER GAVE A FIND ING THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS REGISTERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT, AT THE RELEVANT TIME OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12AA (2) OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT EVERY ORDER GRANTING OR REFUSING REGISTRATION UNDER CLAUSE (B) OF SUBSECTION (1) SHALL BE PASSED BEFORE EXPIRY OF SIX MONTHS FRO M THE END OF THE MONTHS IN WHICH THE APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED UNDER CLAUSE (A ). HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT AS PER CIRCULAR NO. 762 DATED 18/2/1998, IT IS CLEAR THAT WHERE THE COMMISSIONER DOES NOT PASS ORDER, GRANTING OR REFUS ING REGISTRATION OF TRUST WITHIN THE PERIOD LAID DOWN IN SECTION 12AA(2) I .E. SIX MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE MONTH IN WHICH THE APPLICATION FOR R EGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT IS FILED THEN REGISTRATION WOULD BE DEEMED T O HAVE BEEN GRANTED TO THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AUTOMATICALLY ON EXPIRY OF PERIOD SPECIFIED IN SECTION 12AA(2) OF THE ACT. AFTER ENQUIRING ALL THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE PASSING ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 ACCEPTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS REGIS TERED U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING DECIS IONS: (I) UCO BANK VS. CIT (1999) 23 ITR 889 (SC) ITA 463/JP/2016_ M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN VS ACIT 4 (II) CATHOLIC SYRIAN BANK LTD. VS. CIT (2012) 343 2 70. (III) 82 ITR 913 (SC) (IV) ACIT VS RAJOO ENGINEERS LTD. (2006) 248 ITR (A. T.) 0118. HE ALSO RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPRE ME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SOCIETY FOR THE PROMN OF EDN (2016) 95 CCH 00 49 ISCC, WHEREIN THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 3. THE SHORT ISSUE IS WITH REGARD TO THE DEEMED RE GISTRATION OF AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX AC T. THE HIGH COURT HAS TAKEN THE VIEW THAT ONCE AN APPLICATION IS MADE UNDER THE SAID PROVISION AND IN CASE THE SAME IS NOT RESPONDED TO WITHIN SIX MONTHS, IT WOULD BE TAKEN THAT THE APPLICATION IS REGISTERED U NDER THE PROVISION. 4. THE LEARNED ADDITIONAL SOLICITOR GENERAL APPEARI NG FOR THE APPELLANTS, HAS RAISED AN APPREHENSION THAT IN THE CASE OF THE RESP ONDENT, SINCE THE DATE OF APPLICATION WAS OF 24/2/2003, AT THE WORST, THE SAME WOULD OPERATE ONLY AFTER SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF THE APPLICAT ION. 5. WE SEE NO BASIS FOR SUCH AN APPREHENSION SINCE T HAT IS THE ONLY LOGICAL SENSE IN WHICH THE JUDGMENT COULD BE UNDERSTOOD. TH EREFORE, IN ORDER TO DISABUSE ANY APPREHENSION, WE MAKE IT CLEAR THAT TH E REGISTRATION OF THE APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX AC T IN THE CASE OF THE RESPONDENT SHALL TAKE EFFECT FROM 24/8/2003. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD SR. DR RELIED ON THE O RDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES ON THIS ISSUE. THE ASSESSEE WAS REGISTERED WITH THE SOCIETY OF REGIST RATION, JAIPUR ON 16/1/1999 VIDE CERTIFICATE NO. 508/98-99. THE ASSESS EE APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT ON 03/3/2000 ALONGI WTH FORM NO. 10A AND ITA 463/JP/2016_ M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN VS ACIT 5 CERTIFIED COPY OF TRUST DEED. THIS FACT IS EVIDENT F ROM THE INWARD REGISTER MAINTAINED IN THE OFFICE OF ITO. THE COPY OF THE SA ME IS PLACED AT PAGE NO. 7 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE RELEVANT ENTRIES WERE AT SL . NO. 159 AND 160. THE ASSESSEE GOT A LETTER DATED 22/6/2000 FROM THE ITO, WARD-2, JODHPUR, IN THIS REGARD. THE ASSESSEE REPLIED TO THE SAME ON 10/ 7/2000, WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM PAGE NO. 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THUS, THE ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT HE HAS APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ALONGWITH NECESSARY DOCUMENTS IS WELL ESTABLISHED. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO COMPLIED WITH THE QUERIES RAISED BY THE AUTHORITIES. THEREFORE, THE L D. CIT HAS FAILED IN MAKING ANY ORDER EITHER REGISTERING THE ASSESSEE TRUST UNDE R 12A OR REFUSING THE SAME WITHIN SIX MONTHS. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEES CA SE IS CLEARLY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS SOCIETY FOR THE PROMN OF EDN. (SUPRA). WHILE MAKING ORDER U /S 143(3) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE STATUS OF TH E ASSESSEE AS REGISTERED U/S 12A. THE ASSESSING OFFICER RECORDS THAT THE ASSE SSEE ENGAGED IN THE CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSE AT JO DHPUR, PALI, MARWAR AND BARMER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO HELD THAT THE INC OME OF ASSESSEE IS EXEMPTED U/S 11 OF THE ACT. CONSIDERING ALL THESE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY SHALL BE ENTITLED FOR ALL THE BENEFITS AVAILABLE FOR ASSESSEE REGISTERED U/S 12A OF THE AC T. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE ITA 463/JP/2016_ M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN VS ACIT 6 ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15/5/2017. SD/- SD/- DQY HKKJR HKKXPAN (KUL BHARAT) (BHAGCHAND) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 15 TH MAY, 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- M/S BHOPAT RAM BIRLA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA N, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 463/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR