Delhi Yarn Merchant Charitable Trust, New Delhi V. DIT (Exemptions), New Delhi

ITA 4744/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 58930 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK SINGH SENIOR
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80G; 12A; 12AA; 12; 10

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH B : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 DELHI YARN MERCHANT CHARITABLE TRUST, VS. DIT (EXEM PTIONS), 4461, VISHNU BAZAR, CLOTH MARKET, DELHI. DELHI 110 006. (PAN : AAATD3421A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PRATAP GUPTA, CA REVENUE BY : SHRI ALOK SINGH, SENIOR DR ORDER PER B.C. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FROM TH E ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), DELHI DATED 01.09.2011. T HE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE READ AS UNDER :- 1. THAT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) BY L D. DIT IS NULL AND VOID AB-INITIO IN VIEW OF AMENDMENT MADE UNDER SECTION 80G(5)(VI) AND CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 3.6.2010 AND ACC ORDINGLY SAME IS LIABLE TO BE QUASHED AND EXEMPTION GRANTED UP TO 31.03.2011 WOULD CONTINUE IN PERPETUITY UNLESS WITHDRAWN. 2. THE LD. DIT (EXEMPTION) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN LAW AND FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN REJECTING THE APPLICAT ION FILED BY THE APPELLANT TRUST FOR RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION UNDER S ECTION 80G(5)(VI) OF THE I.T. ACT WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF B EING HEARD AND ISSUING ANY SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 2 3. THE LD. DIT (EXEMPTION) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN LAW AND FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDI NG THAT APPELLANT TRUST WAS ENGAGED IN COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WITHOUT EXAMINING TH E CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE APPELLANT TRUST AND APPRECIATING THE CORRECT FACTS OF THE CASE. 4. ASSESSEE HAS EVERY RIGHT TO MAKE, ADD, DELETE, M ODIFY OR ALTER ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF THE HEARING, THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE GROUNDS INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL ARE COVERED BY THE D ECISION OF THE ITAT, BENCH C, NEW DELHI IN ITA NO.4876/DEL/2011 IN THE CASE OF IN DIAN PLUMBING ASSOCIATION VS. DIT (EXEMPTION) DATED 09.01.2012. HE, THEREFOR E, PRAYED THAT THE APPEAL MAY BE ALLOWED. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND GONE THROUGH TH E AFORESAID ORDER OF THE ITAT. IN THE ASSESSEES CASE, THE APPROVAL UNDER S ECTION 80G(5)(VI) WAS GRANTED IN A RENEWAL ORDER DATED 4.2.2008 IN WHICH EXEMPTION W AS GRANTED FROM 01.04.2008 TO 31.03.2011. FOR SEEKING THE RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION U /S 80G, AN APPLICATION WAS FILED ON 29.03.2011 UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS) REJECTED THE APPLICATION. THE LD. AR CLAIMED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH C, CITED SUPRA. FR OM THE ORDER OF THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS), WE ALSO FIND THAT THE CASE WAS ADJOUR NED TO 25.08.2011 AND ON THAT DATE, NONE ATTENDED. ASSESSEE HAD ALSO PRAYED THAT APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION HAD BEEN REJECTED WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND WITHOUT ISSUING SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. THEREFORE, THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS) FINALIZED THE ORDER ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. ITAT IN THE CASE OF INDIAN PLUMBING ASSOCIATION, CITED SUPRA, RELIED UPON BY THE LD. AR , HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE AS FOLLOWS :- ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 3 6. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT TH E PRESENT ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CAS E OF EDUCATE INDIA SOCIETY VS. DIT (E), ORDER DATED 28TH OCTOBER, 2011 IN ITA NO.3895/DEL/2011 IN WHICH SIMILAR ISSUE WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE APPEAL WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE E. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE SAID ORDER IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXE MPTIONS) [DIT (E)] U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (T HE ACT) READ WITH RULE 11AA OF INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962 (THE RULES). THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE REJECTION ORDERS PASSED U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT, ARE AGAINST THE LAW AND TO THE FACTS OF THE CA SE. 2. THAT THE LD. DIT (EXEMPTIONS) FAILED TO APPRECIA TE THAT AS PER THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF LAW AFTER 1ST OCTO BER, 09 THE EXEMPTION ALREADY ALLOWED/GRANTED UP TILL 31.03.10 SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN AS CONTAINED IN BOARDS CIRC ULAR NO.7/2010 (F.NO.197/21/2010 ITA I) DATED 27.10.201 0. 3. THAT THE LD. DI (EXEMPTION) WAS FURTHER WRONG FO R NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE APPELLANT SOCIETY IS ALREADY REGISTERED U/S 12A(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, FOR DOING CHARI TABLE ACTIVITIES AND ALSO FULFILL THE CONDITIONS LAID DOW N U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT, AND GRANTED EXEMPTION U/S 80 G FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.04.07 TO 31.03.10 VIDE ORDERS DATED 26.04.2007. 4. THAT THE LD. DI (EXEMPTION) FURTHER FAILED TO CO NSIDER THE INFORMATION GIVEN AND THE DOCUMENTS FILED WHICH WERE ACKNOWLEDGED ON 10.03.11 PRIOR TO PASS THE REJECTIO N ORDERS, FOR THE RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION TO THE APPELLANT SOCIE TY. 5. THAT THE REJECTION OF RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION IS FU RTHER BAD IN LAW, AS NO REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY IF ANY WAS EVER AFFORDED TO THE APPELLANT SOCIETY TO PRESENT T HEIR CASE BEFORE THE DI (EXEMPTION),BECAUSE THE NOTICE ALLEGE D TO BE ISSUED WERE NOT RECEIVED/SERVED UPON TO THEM. 6. THAT APPELLANT SOCIETY ASSAILS THEIR RIGHTS TO A MEND, ALTER OR CHANGE ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF ANY TIME EVEN DU RING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF INSTANT APPEAL. ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 4 2. THE ASSESSEE BEING A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION FILE D AN APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G(5) ON 1 0 TH MARCH, 2011. THE ASSESSEE WAS ENJOYING APPROVAL U/S 80G VI DE ORDER DATED 26TH APRIL, 2007 PASSED U/S 80G(5)(VI) OF THE ACT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2007 TO 31ST MARCH, 2010. SUCH APPL ICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN REJECTED BY LD. DIT (E). COPY OF THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILED IN THE PAPER BOOK AT PAGES 67 ONWARDS. ON THE COVERING LETTER, WHICH IS FILED ON 10TH MARCH, 2011 TO SEEK RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G, SUBJECT HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS BELOW :- REF: RENEWAL OF EXEMPTION U/S 80G OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961 OF EDUCATE INDIA SOCIETY. 3. ALONG WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED COVERING LETTER, V ARIOUS DOCUMENTS WERE ALSO FILED WHICH, INTER ALIA, CONTAI NED COPY OF APPLICATION IN FORM 10G; PHOTO COPY OF 80G CERTIFIC ATE; PHOTO COPY OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A(A) OF THE ACT; PHOTO C OPY OF ITR FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS; COPY OF AUDITED BALANCE S HEETS FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS, ETC. FROM THE ORDER OF LD. DIT (E ), IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT APPEAR IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY HIM. THEREFORE, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE N ON- APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE, LD. DIT (E) HAS REJECTE D THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING THAT IN TH E ABSENCE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE OF CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AND A LSO MISUSE OF CORPUS DONATION RECEIVED FROM DONORS FOR A PARTI CULAR PURPOSE, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT SATISFY THE CONDITION S LAID DOWN U/S 80G(5) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY SUCH ORDER PASSED BY LD. DIT (E) AND, HENCE, HAS FILED THE AFO REMENTIONED APPEAL. 4. AT THE OUTSET, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED A R THAT BY OMISSION OF THE PROVISO TO SECTION 80G(5) (VI), THE ASSESSEES OBLIGATION TO SEEK SUCH RENEWAL HAS BEEN DONE AWAY WITH AND THIS POSITION OF LAW HAS BEEN MADE CL EAR BY THE CBDT VIDE ITS CIRCULAR NO.7/2010 (F.NO.197/21/2 010- ITA-I DATED 27TH OCTOBER, 2010). HE HAS PLACED ON O UR RECORD A COPY THEREOF WHEREIN THE BOARD HAS ISSUED CERTAIN CLARIFICATION WITH REGARD TO PERIOD OF VALIDITY OF APPROVALS INTER ALIA INCLUDING U/S 80G (5). IN PARA 5OF THE S AID CIRCULAR IT HAS BEEN STATED AS UNDER:- 5. AS REGARDS APPROVALS GRANTED UPTO 1-10-2009 UND ER SECTION 80G BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX/DIRE CTORS OF ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 5 INCOME-TAX, PROVISO TO SECTION 80G(5)(VI) CLARIFIED THAT ANY APPROVAL SHALL HAVE EFFECT FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS NOT EXCEEDING FIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS AS MAY BE SPECI FIED IN THE APPROVAL. THE ABOVE PROVISO WAS DELETED BY THE FIN ANCE (NO. 2) ACT, 2009. THE INTENT BEHIND THE DELETION OF ABO VE PROVISO AS EXPLAINED IN THE EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM TO FINAN CE (NO. 2) BILL, 2009 WAS AS UNDER : FURTHER AS PER CLAUSE (VI) OF SUB-SECTION (5)OF SE CTION 80G OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, THE INSTITUTIONS O R FUNDS TO WHICH THE DONATIONS ARE MADE HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES PRESCRIBED IN RULE 11AA O F THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. THE PROVISO TO THIS CLA USE PROVIDES THAT ANY APPROVAL GRANTED UNDER THIS CLAUS E SHALL HAVE EFFECT FOR SUCH ASSESSMENT YEAR OR YEARS , NOT EXCEEDING FIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS, AS MAY BE SPECIFIE D IN THE APPROVAL. DUE TO THIS LIMITATION IMPOSED ON THE VALIDITY OF SUCH APPROVALS, THE APPROVED INSTITUTIO NS OR FUNDS HAVE TO BEAR THE HARDSHIP OF GETTING THEIR APPROVALS RENEWED FROM TIME TO TIME. THIS IS ITA UNDULY BURDENSOME FOR THE BONA FIDE INSTITUTIONS OR FUNDS AND ALSO LEADS TO WASTAGE OF TIME AND RESOURC ES OF THE TAX ADMINISTRATION IN RENEWING SUCH APPROVAL S IN A ROUTINE MANNER. THEREFORE, IT IS PROPOSED TO OMI T THE PROVISO TO CLAUSE (VI) OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTIO N 80G TO PROVIDE THAT THE APPROVAL ONCE GRANTED SHALL CON TINUE TO BE VALID IN PERPETUITY. FURTHER, THE COMMISSIONE R WILL ALSO HAVE THE POWER OF WITHDRAW THE APPROVAL I F THE COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED THAT THE ACTIVITIES O F SUCH INSTITUTION OR FUND ARE NOT GENUINE OR ARE NOT BEIN G CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE INSTITUTION OR FUND. THIS AMENDMENT WILL TAKE EFFEC T FROM 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009. ACCORDINGLY, EXISTIN G APPROVALS EXPIRING ON OR AFTER 1 ST OCTOBER, 2009 SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY UNLES S SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN. IT APPEARS THAT SOME DOUBTS STILL PREVAIL ABOUT THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY OF APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G SUBSEQUENT T O 1.10.2009, ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT NO CORRESPONDIN G CHANGE HAS BEEN MADE IN RULE 11A(4). TO REMOVE ANY DOUBTS IN T HIS REGARD, IT IS REITERATED THAT ANY APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80 G(5) ON OR AFTER 1-10-2009 WOULD BE A ONE TIME APPROVAL WHICH WOULD BE VALID TILL IT IS WITHDRAWN. ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 6 5. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT INTERPRETING THE STATU TORY PROVISIONS IN THE LIGHT OF THE OMISSION OF PROVISO TO SECTION 80G (5)(VI), HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE O F BABU HARGOVIND DAYAL TRUST VS. ITAT (2011) 199 TAXMAN 13 8 (ALL) HAS RULED THAT 80G EXEMPTION SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE CONTINUED IN PERPETUITY AND IT WILL CONTINUE SO LONG AS IT IS NOT WITHDRAWN AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF IT ACT. IN THAT CASE THE A PPLICATION FOR RENEWAL WAS MADE ON 31ST MARCH, 2010 AS SAID EXEMPT ION WAS EXPIRING AFTER 1ST OCTOBER, 2009. IT WAS HELD THAT THE DIRECTIONS OF CIT (A) FOR REJECTION OF RENEWAL APPLICATION WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED AS BY VIRTUE OF OPERATION OF LAW T HE EXEMPTION SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE CONTINUED IN PERPETUITY AND I T WILL CONTINUE SO LONG AS IT IS NOT WITHDRAWN AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. HE HAS ALSO PLACED A COPY OF THE SAID DECI SION ON OUR RECORD AND A COPY WAS ALSO GIVEN TO THE LEARNED DR. THEREFORE, IT IS THE CASE OF THE LEARNED AR THAT DIRECTIONS OF DIT (E) REGARDING REJECTION OF RENEWAL APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE AND SHOULD BE VACATED AS THE A SSESSEE BY VIRTUE OF PROVISIONS OF LAW WILL ENJOY THE APPROVAL U/S 80G IN PERPETUITY AS IT HAS BEEN ALREADY GRANTED WITH APPR OVAL WHICH FALL BEYOND 1ST OCTOBER, 2009 AND IS UPTO 31ST MARC H, 2010. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, RELYING UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIT (E), IT IS THE CASE OF THE LEARNED DR THAT THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION HAS RIGHTLY BEEN REJECTED AS THE ASSESS EE DID NOT APPEAR TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF THE APPROVAL. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. WE HAVE ALSO CAR EFULLY GONE THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80G(5). CLAUSE (V I) OF SUB- SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80G STIPULATES FOR THE NON-T AXABILITY OF DONATIONS RECEIVED BY AN INSTITUTION WHICH INTER AL IA INCLUDES CHARITABLE INSTITUTION REGISTERED U/S 12 OF THE ACT . THE FUNDAMENTALS OF SUB-SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80G IS T HAT 80G APPROVAL WILL BE GRANTED TO THE CHARITABLE INSTITUT IONS ON THE SAME LINE AS THE REGISTRATION TO A CHARITABLE INSTI TUTION IS GRANTED U/S 12A. THE ASSESSEE IS ALREADY ENJOYING BENEFIT O F REGISTRATION AS CHARITABLE INSTITUTION WHICH IS NOT SHOWN TO BE WITHDRAWN. IT APPLIED FOR RENEWAL U/S 80G(5)(VI) AS THE VALIDITY PERIOD OF ALREADY GRANTED APPROVAL HAD EXPIRED. BEFORE OMISSI ON OF THE PROVISO TO SECTION 80G(5) (VI) BY THE FINANCE (NO.2 ) ACT, 2009, W.E.F. 1.10.2009, IT WAS THE REQUIREMENT OF LAW THA T APPROVAL GRANTED U/S 80G SHALL HAVE EFFECT FOR SUCH ASSESSME NT YEAR OR YEARS, NOT EXCEEDING FIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS WHICH WA S TO BE SPECIFIED IN THE APPROVAL ITSELF. ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 7 8. AS PER PROVISIONS APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF GRAN T OF APPROVAL, LD. DIT (E) VIDE ORDER DATED 26TH APRIL, 2007 HAD GRANTED APPROVAL FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.4.2007 TO 31 ST MARCH, 2010. IT IS ALREADY MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENJOYING REGISTRATION U/S 12A (A) OF THE IT ACT, 1961, THE C OPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD AT PAGE 15 OF THE PAPER B OOK. THE SAID REGISTRATION HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN TO BE WITHDRAW N AND, THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALWAYS BEEN TREATED AS CHARITABLE INSTITUTION REGISTERED U/S 12A(A) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE, AS ITS APPROVAL WAS EXPIRED ON 31 ST MARCH, 2010, HAD FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING THE RENEWAL ON 10TH MARCH, 2011. FIRSTLY, I T HAS TO BE SEEN THAT WHETHER OR NOT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNDER ANY OBLIGATION TO SEEK SUCH RENEWAL. THE AFOREMENTIONED PROVISO HA S BEEN OMITTED FROM 1.10.2009 AND SUCH OMISSION OF PROVISO HAS BEEN INTERPRETED BY THE CBDT IN AFOREMENTIONED CIRCULAR NO.7/2010 AND IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THE CIRCULAR THAT VARI OUS REFERENCES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE BOARD FROM THE FIELD FORM ATIONS AS WELL AS FROM THE MEMBERS OF PUBLIC ABOUT THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY OF APPROVALS GRANTED U/S 80G (5) OF THE ACT AND IN VIEW TO RESOLVE SUCH REFERENCES THE BOARD HAS CLARIFIED THE OMISSION OF AFOREMENTIONED PROVISO IS INTERPRETED TO MEAN THAT THE APPROVAL ONCE GRANTED SHALL CONTINUE TO BE VALID IN PERPETUI TY. AT THE SAME TIME IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT THE COMMISSION ER WILL ALSO HAVE THE POWER TO WITHDRAW THE APPROVAL IF THE COMMISSIONER IS SATISFIED THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF SU CH INSTITUTION OR FUND ARE NON-GENUINE OR ARE NOT BEING CARRIED OUT I N ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE INSTITUTION OR FUND. NO MAT ERIAL WHATSOEVER HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SUGGEST TH AT THE APPROVAL GRANTED BY THE DEPARTMENT TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80G HAS EVER BEEN WITHDRAWN. WHAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY TH E LD. DIT (E) IN HIS ORDER IS THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE AS SESSEE FOR RENEWAL OF APPROVAL WHICH CANNOT IN ANY MANNER BE I NTERPRETED AS WITHDRAWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G. NOW, THE QUESTIO N WILL BE THAT WHETHER BY MERE FILING THE APPLICATION FOR REN EWAL OF APPROVAL U/S 80G THE ASSESSEE CAN BE HELD TO BE NOT ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF APPROVAL U/S 80G. IN OUR OPINION, WH ERE THERE IS NO STATUTORY OBLIGATION ON THE ASSESSEE TO SEEK REN EWAL OF THE APPROVAL, THEN, THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESS EE HAS NO MEANING AS THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS WILL PREVAIL. T HE INTERPRETATION OF THE STATUTORY PROVISION AS WELL A S THE AFOREMENTIONED CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT CLEARLY STATES THAT THE EXISTING APPROVALS EXPIRING ON OR AFTER 1ST OCT OBER, 2009 SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN. ALL THE AUTHORITIES WORKING UNDER THE ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 8 CONTROL OF CBDT ARE BOUND TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTION S ISSUED BY THE CBDT. THEREFORE, IT HAS TO BE HELD THAT AS ASSE SSEES EXISTING APPROVAL WAS EXPIRING ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2009, THE SAME SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEE N EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY UNLESS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN. WE HAV E ALREADY MENTIONED THAT THERE IS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD ACCOR DING TO WHICH IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE APPROVAL GRANTED TO THE ASS ESSEE U/S 80G (5) WAS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN AND WHAT IS REJECTED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS THE RENEWAL APPLICATION OF THE AS SESSEE WHICH DOES NOT HAVE ANY MEANING IN LAW AS THE ASSESSEE WA S NOT UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO SEEK RENEWAL AS APPROVAL GRANTED T O IT SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN EXTENDED IN PERPETUITY. THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF BABU HARGOVIND DAYAL TRUST (SUPRA) ALSO SUPPORT THIS PROPOSITION. THEREFORE, WE VACATE THE ORDER OF LD. DIT (E) VIDE WHICH THE RENEWAL APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE FOR APPROVAL U/S 80G HAS BEEN REJECTED. IT IS HELD THAT THE APPROVAL GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE U/S 80G WILL ACT IN PERPETU ITY UNLESS IT IS SPECIFICALLY WITHDRAWN BY THE LD. DIT (E). THE APPE AL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN THE MANNER AFORESAID. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.10.201 1. 7. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOT H THE PARTIES, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION IN WHICH BOTH OF US ARE PARTIES, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL FILED BY THE AS SESSEE. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE EXEMPTION GRANTED WOULD CONTINUE IN PERPETUITY TILL THE REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12AA IS WITHDRAWN OR CANCE LLED. KEEPING THESE FACTS IN VIEW, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE DIT (EXEMPTIONS ). 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THIS 23 RD DAY OF MARCH, 2012. SD/- SD/- (I.P. BANSAL) (B.C. MEENA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED THE 23 RD DAY OF MARCH, 2012 TS ITA NO.4744/DEL./2011 9 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1.APPELLANT 2.RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.DIT (EXEMPTIONS), DELHI. 5.CIT(ITAT), NEW DELHI AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.