Late Shiv Shankar Memorial Educational Society, Bulandshahr V. CIT, Meerut

ITA 4698/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 58876 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K MISHRADR
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHWANI TANEJA; ANKIT GUPTA ARS
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI G BENC H BEFORE SMT. DIVI SINGH, JM & SHRI A.N. PAHUJA, AM ITA NO.4698/DEL/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR:NA LATE SHIV SHANKAR MEMORIAL EDUCATION SOCIETY C/O RENAISSANCE SCHOOL, NEAR CHAR YAAR, D.M. ROAD, BULANDSHAHR V/S . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICE, BHAINSALI GROUND, MEERUT [PAN : AAATL 3164 E] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY S/SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA & ANKIT GUPTA, ARS REVENUE BY SHRI D.K. MISHRA,DR DATE OF HEARING 07-03-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 16-03-2012 O R D E R A.N.PAHUJA:- THIS APPEAL FILED ON 11.12.2009 BY THE ASSESSEE AGA INST AN ORDER DATED 6 TH NOVEMBER, 2009 OF THE LEARNED CIT, MEERUT, RAISES THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. FOR THAT THE LEARNED CIT MEERUT HAS ERRED IN REJECTING THE REGISTRATION, RENEWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5) OF INCOME-TAX ACT. 2. FOR THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT, MEERUT IS ILLEGAL AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. 3. FOR THAT THE APPELLANT SEEKS THE LEAVE TO TAKE UP SUCH FURTHER GROUNDS, WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF APPEAL. I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 2 2. FACTS, IN BRIEF, AS PER RELEVANT ORDERS ARE THA T THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION ON 15.5.2009, SEEKING EXTE NSION OF APPROVAL GRANTED U/S 80G OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR THE PERIOD AFTER 31.3.2009. THE ASSESSEE WAS ,EARLIER, ALLOWED APPROVAL U/S 80G FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.2008 TO 31.03.2009 VIDE ORDER DATED 15 .10.2008. THE ASEESSEE SOCIETY WAS REGISTERED U/S 12A OF THE ACT ON 18.1.2 007 IN TERMS OF THEIR APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION FILED ON 7.7.2006. DUR ING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL U/S 80G, THE LD. CIT NOTI CED THAT THE APPLICANT SOCIETY RUNNING A SCHOOL, HAD REFLECTED BUILDING WORTH ` 1,57,80,444/- IN THEIR BALANCESHEET, WHICH WAS CONSTRUCTED ON THE LAND TA KEN ON LEASE FROM THE PERSONS COVERED U/S 13(3) OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESS EE PAID ONLY RENT OF ` `3,000/- PA IN ALL @1,000/- PER ANNUM TO THE LESSORS I.E. , SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SHRI BRIJ BHUSHAN SHARMA AND JAG MOHAN SHARMA, ALL BROTH ERS OF CHAIRMAN & MRS.SANTOSH SHARMA WIFE OF SON OF SHRI ANIL KUMAR S HARMA, &MRS. INDRA SHARMA. THE SAID LEASE WAS FOR 30 YEARS AND IN TH E EVENT OF VACATION OF THE LAND BY THE SOCIETY, IT WAS ENTITLED TO DEMOLISH TH E PROPERTY AND TAKE THE MALBA OF THE SAME ALONG . SINCE THE EXPLANATION FURNISHED B Y THE SOCIETY WAS IN VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND ACCORDING TO THE CIT, THE SOCIETY PASSED ON HUGE INCOME IN FAVOUR OF THE FOUNDER TRUSTEES, SECRETARY AND THE OTHER INTERESTED PERSONS , THE LD. CIT DENIED THE CLAIM FOR APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT WHILE OBSERVING THAT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA WAS BEING CANC ELLED SEPARATELY.. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE AFORESAID FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.AR ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE WHILE CARRYING US THROUGH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND COPY OF THE LEASE-DEED PLACED AT PAGE NO.5 TO 17 OF THE PAPER BOOK, SUBMITTED THAT T HE LD. CIT HAD NOT CANCELLED REGISTRATION OF THE SOCIETY U/S 12A OF THE ACT SO FAR. SINCE THE SOCIETY WAS ONLY A BENEFICIARY HAVING TAKEN THE LAND ON LEASE @`1,000/ - PER ANNUM FROM THE AFORESAID THREE PERSONS, THE LD. AR ARGUED THAT THE RE WAS NO VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. WHILE CARRYING US THROUGH T HE PROVISIONS ACT U/S 80G(5) OF THE ACT, THE LD. AR ARGUED THAT NONE OF THE CONDIT IONS STIPULATED THEREIN HAVE I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 3 BEEN VIOLATED. INTER ALIA, THE LD. AR RELIED UPON THE DECISIONS IN NN DESAI CHARITABLE TRUST VS. CIT, 246 ITR 452 (GUJ); KALYAN AM KAROTI VS. CIT,124 TTJ 825 (LUCKNOW); SHIKSHAN PRASARK MANDALI VS. CIT,117 TTJ 337 (PUNE), AGARWAL METAL WORKS VS. CIT,125 TTJ 400(DEL.)& SKYLARK EDUC ATIONAL SOCIETY VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX,24 DTR 226 (BANG).ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR WHILE RELYING UPON THE DECISION IN SUBHARAM TRUST VS. DIT(E),126 ITD 33(BANG.) SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND GONE TH ROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS ALSO THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY BOTH SIDES. INDIS PUTABLY, THE APPLICANT EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, REGISTERED U/S 12A OF THE ACT ON 18.1.2007 AND RUNNING A SCHOOL BY THE NAME RENAISSANCE SCHOOL IN BULANDSHAH R, IS FILING RETURN OF INCOME SINCE THE AY 2000-01,CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE AY 2000-01 WAS COMPLETED VIDE OR DER DATED 24.3.2003 ON A LOSS OF ` 2,60,660/- AND CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIA D) OF THE ACT WAS DENIED. HOWEVER, ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION. FOR THE AY 2001-02, THE AO HIMSELF ACCEPTED THE CLAIM F OR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAD) OF THE ACT. FOR THE AYS 2002-03 TO 2 009-10, THE RETURNS FILED BY THE SOCIETY APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED . INTER ALIA, THE SOCIETY WAS APPROVED U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT FOR THE PERIOD 9.2.2007 TO 31 .3.2009. THUS, NOWHERE THE CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION U/S 10(23C)(IIIAD) HAS BEEN DEN IED . EVEN WHEN THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT HAS NOT BEEN WITHDR AWN, THE LD. CIT DECLINED TO RENEW THE APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT FOR TH E PERIOD AFTER 31.3.2009 ON THE GROUND THAT LAND ON WHICH BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE SOCIETY ,BELONGED TO PERSONS COVERED U/S 13(3) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER THE A LLEGED BENEFIT GRANTED BY THE SOCIETY TO THE AFORESAID PERSONS I.E. SHRI ANIL KU MAR SHARMA & MRS.SANTOSH SHARMA WIFE OF SON OF SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SHRI BRIJ BHUSHAN SHARMA,MRS. INDRA SHARMA AND JAG MOHAN SHARMA, HAS NOT BEEN QUA NTIFIED NOR EVER APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO TAX IN ANY OF THE AYS 2000 -01 TO 2009-10 . THE LD. AR ,ON THE OTHER HAND, CONTENDED BEFORE US, THAT IN FA CT SOCIETY HAS BENEFITED FROM THE LAND LEASED OUT BY THE AFORESAID PERSONS ON A N OMINAL RENT. BEFORE I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 4 PROCEEDING FURTHER, WE MAY HAVE A LOOK AT THE RELEV ANT PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80G(5) OF THE ACT, WHICH READ AS UNDER: (5) THIS SECTION APPLIES TO DONATIONS TO ANY INSTITUTIO N OR FUND REFERRED TO IN SUB-CLAUSE (IV) OF CLAUSE (A) OF SUB-SECTION (2), ONLY IF IT IS ESTABLISHED IN INDIA FOR A CHARITABLE PU RPOSE AND IF IT FULFILS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, NAMELY:- (I) WHERE THE INSTITUTION OR FUND DERIVES ANY INCOME, SUCH INCOME WOULD NOT BE LIABLE TO INCLUSION IN ITS TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OR CLAUSE (23AA) OR CLAUSE (23C) OF SECTION 10: PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN INSTITUTION OR FUND DERIVES ANY INCOME, BEING PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS, THE CONDITION THAT SUCH INCOME WOULD NOT BE LIABLE TO INCLUSION IN ITS TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO SUCH INCOME, IF- (A) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND MAINTAINS SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF SUCH BUSINESS; (B) THE DONATIONS MADE TO THE INSTITUTION OR FUND ARE NOT USED BY IT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUCH BUSINESS; AND (C) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND ISSUES TO A PERSON MAKING THE DONATION A CERTIFICATE TO THE EFFECT THAT IT MAINTAINS SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF SUCH BUSINESS AND THAT THE DONATIONS RECEIVED BY IT WILL NOT BE USED, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUCH BUSINESS; (II) THE INSTRUMENT UNDER WHICH THE INSTITUTION OR F UND IS CONSTITUTED DOES NOT, OR THE RULES GOVERNING THE INSTITU TION OR FUND DO NOT, CONTAIN ANY PROVISION FOR THE TRANSFER OR APPLICATION AT ANY TIME OF THE WHOLE OR ANY PART OF THE INCOME OR ASSETS OF THE INSTITUTION OR FUND FOR ANY PUR POSE OTHER THAN A CHARITABLE PURPOSE; I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 5 (III) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND IS NOT EXPRESSED TO BE F OR THE BENEFIT OF ANY PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OR CASTE ; (IV) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND MAINTAINS REGULAR ACCOUNT S OF ITS RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURE; (V) THE INSTITUTION OR FUND IS EITHER CONSTITUTED AS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST OR IS REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 (21 OF 1860), OR UNDER ANY LA W CORRESPONDING TO THAT ACT IN FORCE IN ANY PART OF INDI A OR UNDER SECTION 25 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 (1 OF 1956) , OR IS A UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY LAW, OR IS ANY OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION RECOGNISED BY THE GOVERNMENT OR BY A UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY LAW, OR AFFILIATED TO ANY UNIVERSITY ESTABLISHED BY LAW, OR IS AN INSTITUTION FIN ANCED WHOLLY OR IN PART BY THE GOVERNMENT OR A LOCAL AUTHO RITY; (VI) IN RELATION TO DONATIONS MADE AFTER THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 1992, THE INSTITUTION OR FUND IS FOR THE TIME B EING APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES MADE IN THIS BEHALF; AND (VII) WHERE ANY INSTITUTION OR FUND HAD BEEN APPROVE D UNDER CLAUSE (VI) FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR BEGINNING ON T HE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2007 AND ENDING ON THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2008, SUCH INSTITUTION OR FUND SHALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION AND NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE PROVISO TO CLAUSE (15) OF SECTION 2, BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN, (A) ESTABLISHED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2008 AND ENDING ON THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2009; AND (B) APPROVED UNDER THE SAID CLAUSE (VI) FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR BEGINNING ON THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2008 AND ENDING ON THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2009. 4.1 THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF RULE 11AA READ AS UNDER: (1) THE APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF ANY INSTITUTION OR FUND UNDER CLAUSE (VI) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80G SHALL BE IN FORM NO.10G AND SHALL BE MADE IN TRIPLICATE. I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 6 (2) THE APPLICATION SHALL BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE FOLLOWI NG DOCUMENTS, NAMELY:- (I) COPY OF REGISTRATION GRANTED UNDER SECTION 12A OR COPY OF NOTIFICATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 10(23) OR 10(23C); (II) NOTES ON ACTIVITIES OF INSTITUTION OR FUND SINCE IT S INCEPTION OR DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS, WHICHEVER IS LESS; (III) COPIES OF ACCOUNTS OF THE INSTITUTION OR FUND SINCE ITS INCEPTION OR DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS, WHICHEVER IS LESS. (3) THE COMMISIONER MAY CALL FOR SUCH FURTHER DOCUMENTS O R INFORMATION FROM THE INSTITUTION OR FUND OR CAUSE SUCH I NQUIRES TO BE MADE AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSE LF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF SUCH INSTITUTIO N OR FUND. (4) WHERE THE COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED THAT ALL THE CON DITIONS LAID DOWN IN CLAUSES (I) TO (V) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTI ON 80G ARE FULFILLED BY THE INSTITUTION OR FUND, HE SHALL RE CORD SUCH SATISFACTION IN WRITING AND GRANT APPROVAL TO THE INS TITUTION OR FUND SPECIFYING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS FOR WHICH THE APPROVAL IS VALID. (5) WHERE THE COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED THAT ONE OR MOR E OF THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN CLAUSES (I) TO (V) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80G ARE NOT FULFILLED, HE SHALL REJECT THE APPL ICATION FOR APPROVAL, AFTER RECORDING THE REASONS FOR SUCH REJECTION IN WRITING: PROVIDED THAT NO ORDER OF REJECTION OF AN APPLICATION SHALL BE PASSED WITHOUT GIVING THE INSTITUTION OR FUND AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. (6) THE TIME LIMIT WITHIN WHICH THE COMMISSIONER SHALL PASS AN ORDER EITHER GRANTING THE APPROVAL OR REJECTING THE APPLICATION SHALL NOT EXCEED SIX MONTHS FROM THE DATE ON WHICH SUCH APPLICATION WAS MADE: PROVIDED THAT IN COMPUTING THE PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS, ANY TIME TAKEN BY THE APPLICANT IN NOT COMPLYING WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SUB-RULE (3) SHALL BE EXCLUDED. I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 7 4.2 FOR GRANTING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G(5)( VI ) OF THE ACT, THE SOCIETY HAS TO SATISFY THAT, IT IS ESTABLISHED IN INDIA FOR A C HARITABLE PURPOSE AND THE CONDITIONS STIPULATED UNDER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80G(5)(I) TO (VI ) ARE TO BE ADDITIONALLY FULFILLED. IF ON ENQUIRY, IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT TH E ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY ARE NOT CONFINED AND LIMITED TO THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AND HAS VIOLATED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80G(5)( I ) TO ( VI ) OF THE ACT, THE RENEWAL OF RECOGNITION UNDER SECT ION 80G CAN BE DENIED THE REVENUE HAVE NOT PLACED BEFORE US ANY MATERIAL, SUGGESTING THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY DID NOT FULFILL THE CONDI TIONS STIPULATED UNDER THE AFORESAID SECTION 80G(5) AND RULE 11AA THEREUNDER. THERE IS NOTHING TO SUGGEST THAT ANY PART OF INCOME OR PROPERTY OF THE SOCIETY WAS USED OR APPLIED DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY PERSON REFERRED T O IN SECTION 13(3) OF THE ACT. HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF N.N. DESA I CHARITABLE TRUST (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE LD. CIT CANNOT ACT AS ASSESSING OFFIC ER. THE ENQUIRY SHOULD BE CONFINED TO FIND OUT IF THE INSTITUTION SATISFIES T HE PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS AND THE ACTUAL ASSESSMENT OF THE INSTITUTION WOULD NOT AFFE CT THE CLAIM FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 80G OF THE ACT. A CO-ORDINATE BENCH I N THE CASE OF KALYANAM KAROTI V. CIT [2010] 123 ITD 317(LUCKNOW) HELD THAT WHILE GRANTI NG RECOGNITION UNDER SECTION 80G(5) OR CONTINUATION THEREOF, THE C OMMISSIONER HAS ONLY TO SEEK WHETHER THE SOCIETY FULFILS CONDITIONS LAID DOWN IN CLAUSES ( I ) TO ( V ) OF SECTION 80G(5) AND NOT WHETHER CERTAIN RECEIPTS, I.E., VOLUNTARILY DONATIONS ARE PROPERLY EXPLAINED OR NOT. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE R EGISTRATION OF A CHARITABLE TRUST OR SOCIETY UNDER SECTION 12A(A) OF THE ACT IS NOT AN IDLE OR EMPTY FORMALITY. ONCE THE REGISTRATION UNDER S. 12A(A) OF THE ACT IS GRAN TED, THE GRANT OF BENEFIT CANNOT BE DENIED, ESPECIALLY WHEN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES ARE THE SAME AS IN EARLIER YEARS SINCE GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A O F THE ACT. EVEN OTHERWISE, REGISTRATION GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AS A CHARITABL E SOCIETY IS SUBSISTING AND NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE US THAT THE SAME HA S BEEN OR IS INTENDED TO BE WITHDRAWN. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, RENEWAL OF APPROV AL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 8 COULD NOT BE DENIED TO THE ASSESSEE AS HELD BY A CO -ORDINATE BENCH IN MAYO COLLEGE OLD BOYS ASSOCIATION VS. DIT (E): (I.T.A. N O.2010/D/2010) .FOLLOWING THIS DECISION, SIMILAR VIEW WAS TAKEN IN ANOTHER DE CISION DATED 20.4.2011 BY A CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN I.T.A. NO.218/D/09 IN THE CASE OF MAHARISHI DAYANAND EDUCATION SOCIETY AND DECISION DATED 25.2.2011 IN I.T.A. NO.4456/D/09 IN THE CASE OF AGGARWAL SABHA. THE DECISION RELIED UPON BY THE LD. DR, IN OUR OPINION WAS RENDERED ON DIFFERENT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES A ND THE REVENUE HAVE NOT ESTABLISHED BEFORE US AS TO HOW THIS DECISION HELPS THEM. MOREOVER, HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF RADHASOAMI SATSANG VS CIT, 193 ITR 321 HELD THAT THAT IF CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE REMAINED THE SAME AS IN EARLIER YEARS AND THERE IS NO MATERIAL EVIDENCE AVAILABLE WITH THE AU THORITIES TO TAKE A DIFFERENT VIEW, THEN THE DECISION TAKEN IN EARLIER YEARS HAS TO BE FOLLOWED. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE SOCIETY CONTINUES TO BE REGISTERED U/S 12 A OF THE ACT SINCE 18.1.2007 AND HAD BEEN ALLOWED APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT UNTIL 31.3.2009. AS ALREADY OBSERVED, THE REVENUE HAVE NOT PLACED BEFOR E US ANY MATERIAL THAT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING IN THE PERIOD PRIOR TO 31.3.2009 HAVE CHANGED MATERIALLY THEREAFTER, THE LEASE AGREEMENTS HAVING BEEN ENTERED MUCH EARLIER ON 12.5.1998 & 22.1.2003. 5. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, ESPECIALLY WHEN T HE LD. DR DID NOT BRING TO OUR NOTICE ANY CONTRARY DECISION OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL, JUSTIFYING DENIAL OF APPROVAL, WE HAVE NO HESITATION IN CONCLUDING THAT THE LD. C IT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING RENEWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT. THER EFORE, GROUND NOS.1 & 2 IN THE APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. 6. NO ADDITIONAL GROUND HAVING BEEN RAISED BEFORE US IN TERMS OF RESIDUARY GROUND NO.3 IN THE APPEAL , ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUN D IS DISMISSED. 7. NO OTHER SUBMISSION OR ARGUMENT WAS MADE BEFOR E US. I.T.A. NO.4698/DEL./2009 9 8.. IN RESULT, APPEAL IS ALLOWED. SD/- SD /- (DIVA SINGH) (A.N. PAHUJA) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) NS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. LATE SHIV SHANKAR MEMORIAL EDUCATION SOCIETY C/ O RENAISSANCE SCHOO, NEAR CHAR YAAR,D.M. ROAD, BULAND SHAHR. 2. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, INCOME TAX OFFICE , BHAINSALI GROUND, MEERUT. 3. DR, ITAT,G BENCH, NEW DELHI 4. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, DELHI ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT