MESERS SHRI SWAMI SHANKARNATH PARVAT CHARITABLE AND WELFARE TRUST , KAPURTHALA V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 602/ASR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5124 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Charitable institution; Benefit of exemption; Set aside
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 201; 13; 10(23C); 11; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR. BEFORE SH. LALIET KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 602/ASR/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: N.A. M/S SH. SWAMI SHANKARNATH PARVAT CHARITABLE AND WELFARE TRUST, NAKODAR ROAD, HADIABAD, PHAGWARA, KAPURTHALA. [PAN: AAUTS 4845H] (APPELLANT) VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH (RESPENDENT) APPELLANT BY WRITTEN SUBMISSION RESPONDENT BY SH. SANJAY DHARIWAL, CIT-DR DATE OF HEARING 13.09.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 21.09.2021 ORDER PER LALIET KUMAR, J.M. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 29.09.2018 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION S), CHANDIGARH. 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTI ON), CHANDIGARH HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN REFUSING TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA (1)(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 2 2. THAT THE REASONS GIVEN FOR REFUSAL CONTAIN FACTS WHICH ARE NOT BORNE OUT FROM THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE HIM. 3. THAT THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EX EMPTION) REFUSING TO GRANT REGISTRATION MAY BE SET ASIDE AND REGISTRATION GRANTED U/S 12AA OF INCOME TAX ACT. 3. BRIEF FACTS: KINDLY REFER TO THE ABOVE NOTED APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH REJECTING THE A SSESSEES APPLICATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR A.Y. 2018-19. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THAT THE UNDERSIGNED HAS BEEN ADVISED BY THE DOCTORS TO STAY AT HOME DUE TO INDIFFERENT HEALTH. IT IS THEREFORE HUMBLY R EQUESTED THAT THE FOLLOWING WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE UNDERSIGNED MAY KINDLY BE C ONSIDERED WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:- THE ABOVE NOTED APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 2 9/09/2018 PASSED BY WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPT IONS), CHANDIGARH REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED REPLIED TO THE QUERIES RAISED BY WORTHY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) AS PER THE FOLLOWING LETTER S, THE COPIES OF WHICH ARE ENCLOSED:- (I) COPY OF LETTER DATED 18.08.2018 SEEKING ADJOURNME NT AFTER 06.09.2018- ANNEXURE A. (II) COPY OF LETTER DATED 01.09.2018 FILED WITH THE DEP UTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) GIVING REPLIES TO 24 QUERIES- ANNEXURE B. (III) COPY OF AFFIDAVIT OF SH. BRIJ BHUSHAN JALOTA AS REQ UIRED- ANNEXURE C. (IV) COPY OF LETTER DATED 11.09.2018 FOR FILING EXPENSE VOUCHERS, RECEIPTS OF DONATIONS, RECEIPTS OF AGRICULTURE PRODUCE AND J- F ORMS- ANNEXURE D. (V) COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.09.2018 REPLYING TO ADDITIO NAL QUERIES RAISED AND FILED REPLIES TO 8 QUERIES REGARDING DETAIL OF AGRICULTUR E PRODUCE IN WHOSE NAME THE AGRICULTURE LAND STANDS, DETAILS OF AGRICULTURE EXP ENSES, DETAIL OF EXPENSES ON CHARITY, AMOUNT PAID FOR MEDICAL EXPENSE REFUNDED, DETAILS OF ADVANCE RECEIVED, ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 3 LEDGER ACCOUNT OF KACHA AARTIYA TO SHOW J-FORMS OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE, DETAILS OF AGRICULTURE EXPENSES OF RS. 3,02,209/- AND COPIE S OF CONSTRUCTION BILLS ALONGWITH ANNEXURE-I, ANNEXURE-LL AND ANNEXURE-LLL FORMING PART OF THIS LETTER ARE ALSO ENCLOSED VIDE ANNEXURE E. THE OBSERVATIONS OF WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (EXEMPTIONS) ARE GIVEN IN PARA 7.1 TO 7.3 AND PARA 8. THE OBSERVATIONS OF COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH IN PARA 7.1 ARE MENTIONED AS UNDER:- '7.1. IN RESPONSE TO THE ADDITIONAL QUERIES THE APP LICANT TRUST SUBMITTED THE REPLY VIDE LETTER DATED 24.09.2018. IN ITS REPLY APPLICANT TRUST STAT ED THAT ONLY TOOR DAL IS PRODUCED AS AGRICULTURE CROP WHICH IS SOLD IN CASH ON RETAIL BA SIS AND SUBMITTED SOME OF THE COPIES OF CASH RECEIPTS ISSUED AGAINST SALE OF AGRICULTURE PR ODUCE. THE APPLICANT TRUST WAS ALSO ASKED TO PROVIDE THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND ON WHICH THESE AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES WERE UNDERTAKEN. IN RESPONSE TO THIS THE APPLICANT TRUST STATED THAT THE PROPERTY IS AGRICULTURE LAND HAVING AREA OF 35 KILLAS AND TEMPLE AREA ABOUT 4 KILLAS. NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FILED BY THE APPLICANT IN SUPPORT OF THE C LAIMS OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND. WITH REGARDS TO AGRICULTURE PRODUCE IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE TRUST HAS AGRICULTURE RECEIPTS OF RS. 19,36,111-45/- OUT OF WHICH RS. 17,00,506.25/- IS F ROM BHARDWAJ TRADING COMPANY AND BALANCE OF RS. 2,35,605/- AGAINST AGRICULTURE PRODU CE SOLD IN CASH DURING THE YEAR. THE DETAILS OF VOUCHERS OF THE BHARDWAJ TRADING COMPANY ARE PRODUCED HEREUNDER: VOUCHER NO. AMOUNT (IN RS.) DATE FORM NO. 34 1,98,218/- 18.11.2017 FORM NO. 40 7,43,576/- 20.10.2017 FORM NO. 46 3,07,650/- 28.04.2017 FORM NO. 17 2,81,264/- 27.04.2017 FORM NO. 12 2,69,796/- 18.04.2017 TOTAL 18,00,504/- FROM THE ABOVE TABLE IT IS NOTICED THAT THE SERIAL NO. OF THE FORM 'J' IS NOT AS PER DATES, VOUCHERS NUMBERS ARE DECREASING WITH RESPECT TO LAT ER DATES. ALSO THE AMOUNT SHOWN IN INCOME & EXPENDITURE RECEIPTS IS RS. 17,00,506/- WH EREAS TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE VOUCHERS IS RS. 18,00,504/- WHICH CREATES SUSPICIOUS ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE VOUCHERS.' THE AGRICULTURE INTOME HAS BEEN CORRECTLY SHOWN AT RS. 19,36,111/- OUT OF WHICH RS. 17,00,506/- IS FROM BHARDWAJ TRADING CO. AND CASH R ECEIPTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN AT RS. ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 4 2,35,605. THE COPY OF ACCOUNT OF KACHA AARTIYA APPE ARS AT PAGE 60 OF THE PAPER BOOK AT RS. 17,00,506/-. THE DETAILS OF CASH SALES APPEARS AT A NNEXURE-LL TO LETTER DATED 24/09/2018. THE DETAILS GIVEN BY WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH IN THE ORDER SHOWS J-FORM DETAIL AT RS. 18,00,504/-. THE F IRST ITEM DATED 18/11/2017 IS RS. 98,218/- BUT HAS BEEN SHOWN AT RS. 1,98,218/- WHICH IS A MIS TAKE. THAT IS WHY THERE IS A DIFFERENCE OF RS. 1,00,000/-. NOTHING IS WRONG WITH FIGURES PROVI DED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE COPIES OF J- FORMS APPEAR AT PAGES 61 TO 65. THE J-FORMS FOR NEX T YEAR ARE AT PAGES 66 TO 69. THE J- FORM DATED 18/11/2017 IS FOR RS. 98,218/- AND NOT R S. 1,98,218/-. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDI GARH HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT J- FORMS NUMBERS ARE NOT AS PER DATES. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT J-FORMS ARE ISSUED OUT OF BOOKS OF J-FORMS. IT IS OBVIOUS THAT BOOK NO. IS DIFFERENT F OR EACH J-FORM. THIS IS VERIFIABLE FROM PHOTO COPIES OF J-FORMS. IN PARA 7.2 THE WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH HAS OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THE PROPERTIE S OF SHRI SWAMI SHANKAR NATH PARVAT MONASTERY & MATA SHRI JAWALA JI MANDIR HAVING BEEN VESTED/ MANAGED BY THE APPLICANT TRUST. YOUR KIND ATTENTION IS INVITED TO THE ENGLISH TRANS LATION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE APPLICANT TRUST DEED PARTICULARLY AT PAGE 8 WHERE IN THE PREA MBLE ITSELF IT IS CLEARLY MENTIONED THAT THIS TRUST HAS BEEN FORMED FOR MANAGEMENT AND PROTE CTION OF PROPERTY OF SHRI SWAMI SHANKARNATH PARVAT MONASTERY AND MATA SHRI JAWALA J I MANDIR AND THE ENTIRE TRUST DEED DEALS WITH THE MANAGEMENT OF THESE TWO INSTITUTIONS . AGAIN THE DETAILS OF AGRICULTURE LAND ARE GIVEN AT PAGE 30 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE COPIES OF JAMABANDIS OF AGRICULTURE LAND ARE PLACED AT PAGES 31 TO 51 AND THEIR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS ARE AT PAGES 52 TO 59 OF THE PAPER BOOK. IT IS THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE OBSERVATIONS OF WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH ARE NOT CORRECT AND OPPOSE D TO THE FACTS ON RECORD. IN PARA 7.3 THE WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH HAS OBSERVED THAT THE APPLICANT TRUST HAS SPENT ONLY RS . 1,90,718/- UNDER CHARITY EXPENSE FOR A.V: 2015/17 AND RS. 1,68,816/- IN F.Y: 2017/18. TH ESE ARE MEAGER EXPENSES. NO ADVERSE OPINION HAS BEEN DRAWN BY HIM ON THIS OBSERVATION. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT F OR F.Y: 2016-17 APPEARS AT PAGE 20 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND FOR F.Y: 2017-18 AT PAGE 23 OF T HE PAPER BOOK. THE DETAILS OF VARIOUS EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE SOCIETY ARE MENTIONED IN T HE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT AND SURPLUS IN F.Y: 2016-17 IS ONLY RS. 1,10,895/- AND IN F.Y: 2017-18 IS ONLY RS. RS. 9,37,036/-. ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 5 THE ABOVE OBSERVATION THEREFORE NEEDS TO BE IGNORED FOR PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE OBSERVATIONS OF WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH IN PARA 8 HAVE BEEN DULY EXPLAINED IN REPLY TO OBSERVATIONS MADE BY HIM IN PARA 7.2 ABOVE. THE AGRICULTURE LANDS DULY STAND VESTED/ UNDER MANAGEME NT IN THE APPLICANT TRUST BY VIRTUE OF THE TRUST DEED OF THE APPLICANT TRUST PLACED AT PAG ES 7 TO 14 OF PAPER BOOK. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSI ONS YOUR HONOURS ARE REQUESTED TO KINDLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF WORTHY COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH AND GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA TO THE APPLICANT. 4. PER CONTRA DR FOR THE REVENUE HAD VEHEMENTLY RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITY. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, INCLUDING THE JUDGMEN TS CITED AT BAR DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING BY BOTH THE PARTIES. UNDOUBTE DLY THE STATED OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST AS MENTIONED BY THE CIT EXEMP TION IN THE ORDER OF THE AS UNDER THE STATED AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE IN MO NASTERY AND MATA MANDIR, PROMOTING SPIRITUAL VALUES, SPREADING TRADITIONS, CELEBRATES FESTIVALS, PROMOTION OF INDIAN CULTURE AND PROMOTION OF SANSKRIT LANGUAGE, GRANTS OF THE T RUST SHOULD BE SPENT AS PER REQUIREMENT. OPEN THE SEWING CENTRE, MARRIAGE OF PO OR GIRLS, BLOOD CAMP, MEDICINE TO POOR AND NEEDY PEOPLE, AMBULANCE AND ORGANISE MEDIC AL CAMPS. 6. UNDOUBTEDLY AT THE STAGE OF GRANT OF REGISTRATIO N, THE CIT EXEMPTION IS REQUIRED TO EXAMINE THE TWIN CONDITIONS PROVIDED BY THE ACT NAMELY WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE GENUINE IN NATURE AN D WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES OF CHARITABLE IN NATURE OR NOT. THE CIT EXEMPTION VIDE LETTER DATED 6.8. 2018 AND 20 JUNE 2018 AND ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PROVIDE VARIOUS INFORMATION. FURTHER INFORMATION WAS SOUGHT FROM THE ASSESSEE BY NOTICE DATED 20.9.2018. ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 6 7. THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT THE DETAILED REPLY OF ALL THE NOTICES RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE CIT EXEMPTION IN PARAGRAPH 7.1 AND 7 .2 MENTIONED AS UNDER:- 7.1 IN RESPONSE TO THE ADDITIONAL QUERIES THE APPL ICANT TRUST SUBMITTED THE REPLY VIDE LETTER DATED 24.09.2018. IN ITS REPLY APPLICANT TRUST STAT ED THAT ONLY TOOR DAL IS PRODUCED AS AGRICULTURE CROP WHICH IS SOLD IN CASH ON RETAIL BA SIS AND SUBMITTED SOME OF THE COPIES OF CASH RECEIPTS ISSUED AGAINST SALE OF AGRICULTURE PR ODUCE. THE APPLICANT TRUST WAS ALSO ASKED TO PROVIDE THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND ON WHICH THESE AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES WERE UNDERTAKEN. IN RESPONSE TO THIS THE APPLICANT TRUST STATED THAT THE PROPERTY IS AGRICULTURE LAND HAVING AREA OF 35 KILLAS AND TEMPLE AREA ABOUT 4 KILLAS. NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FILED BY THE APPLICANT IN SUPPORT OF THE C LAIMS OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND. WITH REGARDS TO AGRICULTURE PRODUCE IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE TRUST HAS AGRICULTURE RECEIPTS OF RS. 19,36,111-45/- OUT OF WHICH RS. 17,00,506.25/- IS FROM BHARDWAJ TRADING COMPANY AND BALANCE OF RS. 2,35,605/- AGAINST AGRICULTURE P RODUCE SOLD IN CASH DURING THE YEAR. THE DETAILS OF VOUCHERS OF THE BHARDWAJ TRADING COM PANY ARE PRODUCED HEREUNDER:- VOUCHER NO. AMOUNT DATE FORM NO. 34 1,98,218/- 18.11.2017 FORM NO. 40 7,43.576/- 20.10.2017 FORM NO. 46 3,07,650/- 28.04.2017 FORM NO. 17 2,81,264/- 27.04.2017 FORM NO. 12 2,69,796/- 18.04.2017 TOTAL 18,00,504/- FROM THE ABOVE TABLE IT IS NOTICED THAT THE SERIAL NO. OF THE FORM 'J' IS NOT AS PER DATES, VOUCHERS NUMBERS ARE DECREASING WITH RESPECT TO LAT ER DATES. ALSO THE AMOUNT SHOWN IN INCOME & EXPENDITURE RECEIPTS IS RS. 17,00,506/- WH EREAS TOTAL AMOUNT OF THE VOUCHERS IS RS. 18,00,504/- WHICH CREATES SUSPICIONS ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE VOUCHERS. 7.2 THE APPLICANT TRUST MERELY STATED THAT THE P ROPERTY IS IN THE NAME OF SHRI SWAMI SHANKARNATH PARVAT MONASTERY & MATA SHRI JWALA JI M ANDIR. THE TRUST IS CREATED FOR THE MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION OF THE PROPERTY. THE APPL ICANT TRUST HAS GIVEN ONLY DETAIL ABOUT THE LAND. FURTHER, THE APPLICANT TRUST DIDN'T SUBMI T THE PROOF OF THE OWNERSHIP OF LAND WITH THE MANDIR AND THE TRUST DESPITE SPECIFICALLY BEING ASK ED. IN THE ABSENCE OF THE PROOF OF OWNERSHIP OF LAND IT CAN BE PRESUMED FROM THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO PROPERTY VESTED WITH THE TRUST INCOME FROM WHICH COULD BE SOUGHT AS EXEMPT. IT'S PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT BOTH THE ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 7 MONASTERY AND THE TEMPLE ARE SEPARATE ENTITIES. THE RE IS NO EVIDENCE OF THE SAID ENTITIES ALLOWING THE APPLICANT TRUST TO MANAGE THEIR PROPER TIES. 8. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RECORD FROM THE RECORD IT IS DISCERNIBLE THAT THE OWNERSHIP DOCUMENT PER DULY PLACED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT EXEMPTION AND ALSO BEFORE US (PAPER BOOK PAGE 31 TO 51) , WHI CH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE OWNERSHIP OF THE LAND VESTED IN THE ASSESSEE. FURTH ER, THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO PLACED ON RECORD THE SALE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE B Y FILING THE FORM J, AT PAGE 61 ONWARD. THE DOCUMENTS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE FINDIN G RECORDED BY THE CIT EXEMPTION WAS AGAINST THE RECORD. IN ANY CASE AT TH E TIME OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12 AA OF THE OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WH AT IS REQUIRED TO BE SEEN IS WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE GENUINE, AND THE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE OR NOT. NO COMMENTS WERE M ADE BY THE CIT EXEMPTION IN RESPECT OF ABOVE SAID TWO ASPECT AND THE WHOLE P REMISE OF REJECTION ORDER OF THE REGISTRATION WAS BASED ON UTILIZATION OF THE FU ND AND RECEIPT THEREOF FROM THE AGRICULTURE ACTIVITIES. IN OUR VIEW THE SAME IS NOT PERMITTED IN VIEW OF THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE MATTE R OF ANAND SOCIAL , DAWOODI BOHARA JAMAT [2014]43 TAXMANN.COM 243 (SC). A ND OTHER DECISIONS. 9. RECENTLY IN THE MATTER OF, SARASWATI EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIETY ITA NO 157/2020 , WE HAVE HELD AS UNDER ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 8 18. IN OUR VIEW, THE ABOVE SAID WRONG TREATMENT OF THE ADMISSION FEES UNDER THE HEAD RESERVE AND SURPLUS, WOULD NOT DISENTITLE THE ASSESSEE FROM GETTING THE REGISTRATION 12AA OF THE IT ACT. AS IT IS NOT THE C ASE OF THE CIT(E) THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE CEASED TO BE CHARITABLE ON ACCOUNT OF THE ABOVE SAID WRONG DIVERSION OF ADMISSION FEES IN THE BALANCE SHEET. 19. FOR THE PURPOSES OF REGISTRATION, U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT IT IS ESSENTIAL FOR THE REGISTRATION AUTHORITIES TO EXAMINE THAT THE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE CHARITABLE AND THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE G ENUINE. IN OUR VIEW, IN THE PRESENT CASE THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE AND FURTHER THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE GENUINE. 20. THE WRONG TREATMENT OF THE ASSESSEE OF THE ADMISSIO N FEES UNDER THE HEAD RESERVE AND SURPLUS, UNDOUBTEDLY AN ISSUE WHICH THE AO WAS REQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED. IT HAS A DIRECT BEARING ON THE ELIGIBILIT Y OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 10(23C) (IIIAD). THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2016-17 TO 2018-19, ARE ON RECOR D WHICH SHOWS THAT EVEN IF THE ADMISSION FEES IS TAKEN INTO THE PROFIT AND LOSS AC COUNT INSTEAD OF BALANCE SHEET, THEN ALSO THE TOTAL AGGREGATE RECEIPT FOR THE FINAN CIAL YEAR 2016-17 AND 2017-18 WOULD BELOW RS. 1 CRORE. FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 201 8-19 THE ADMISSION FEES DURING THE YEAR WAS RS.506910/- AND THE TOTAL INCOME FOR T HE YEAR WAS 9240017/- THUS THE TOTAL AGGREGATE ANNUAL RECEIPT WAS RS.97,46927/-. ( PAGE-22 AND 23 OF THE PAPER BOOK) THUS EVEN FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2018-19 RELE VANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE WAS ELIGIBLE FOR U /S 10(23C)(IIIAD). 21. WE MAY LIKE TO REPRODUCE THE DECISION OF IN THE CAS E OF DR. MADAN LAL ATRI CHARITABLE VS. CIT(E) WHEREIN THE COORDINATE BENCH IN PARAGRAPH 17 TO 20 AND PARAGRAPH 25 AND 26 HAD HELD AS UNDER:- 17. THAT IT'S A WELL SETTLED LAW, THAT AT THE TIME OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER CLAUSE(AA) OF SUB SECTION(1) OF SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, THE CIT(E) HAS TO SEE WHETHER THE OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE, WHICH HAS BEE N WELL DEFINED IN THE ACT AND ALSO TO SEE WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE OR NOT. I N THE CASE OF ANANDA SOCIAL & EDUCATIONAL TRUST V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, [2 020] 272 TAXMAN 7 (SC) THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HELD AS UNDER: '9. SECTION 12AA UNDOUBTEDLY REQUIRES THE COMMISSIO NER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND GENUINE NESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES AND GRANT A REGISTRATION ONLY IF HE IS SO SATISFIED. THE SAID S ECTION REQUIRES THE COMMISSIONER TO BE SO SATISFIED IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST AND ITS ACTIVITIES ARE CHARITABLE SINCE THE CONSEQUENCE OF SUCH REGISTRATI ON IS THAT THE TRUST IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM BENEFITS UNDER SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. IN OTHER WORDS, IF IT APPEARS THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND ITS ACTIVITIES ARE NOT GENUINE THAT IS TO SAY NOT CHARITABLE THE COMMISSIONER IS ENTITLED TO REFUSE AND IN FACT, BOUND TO REFUSE SUCH REGISTRATION 12. SINCE SECTION 12AA PERTAINS TO THE REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST AND NOT TO ASSESS OF WHAT A TRUST HAS ACTUALLY DONE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE TERM 'ACTIVITIES' IN THE PROVISION INCLUDES 'PROPOSED ACTIVITIES'. THAT IS T O SAY, A COMMISSIONER IS BOUND TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE GENUI NELY CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 9 WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES WHICH THE TRUST PROPOSED TO CARRY ON ARE GENUINE IN THE SENSE THAT THEY ARE IN LINE WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. IN CONTRAST, THE POSITION WOULD BE DIFFERENT WHERE THE COMMISSIONER PROPOSES TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATION OF A TRUST UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. THERE THE COMMISSIONER WOULD BE BOUND TO RECORD THE FINDING THAT AN ACTIVI TY OR ACTIVITIES ACTUALLY CARRIED ON BY THE TRUST ARE NOT GENUINE BEING NOT IN ACCORDANC E WITH THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. SIMILARLY, THE SITUATION WOULD BE DIFFERENT WHERE T HE TRUST HAS BEFORE APPLYING FOR REGISTRATION FOUND TO HAVE UNDERTAKEN ACTIVITIES CO NTRARY TO THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST.' 18. THAT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTION)V. ASSOCIATION OF THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATORS [2020] 114 TAXMANN.COM 5 34 (DELHI), THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT OBSERVED THE FOLLOWING, '4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE RECORD AND GIVEN DUE CONSIDERATION TO THE CONTENTIONS URGED BY MR. MARATHA. AT THE INITIAL ST AGE OF REGISTRATION, WE HAVE TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE PROPOSED ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSE SSEE CAN BE CONSIDERED CHARITABLE WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(15) OF T HE ACT. ON AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF A TRUST OR INSTITUTION MADE UNDER S ECTION 12AA, THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER SHALL CALL FOR SUCH DO CUMENTS OR INFORMATION FROM THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTI ON; AND THE COMPLIANCE OF SUCH REQUIREMENTS OF ANY OTHER LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE BY THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION, AS ARE MATERIALS FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACHIEVING ITS O BJECTS, AND HE MAY ALSO MAKE SUCH INQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN THIS BEHALF. ONCE HE IS SATISFIED ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION, AND GENUINENES S OF ITS ACTIVITIES, HE SHALL PASS AN ORDER UNDER THE SAID PROVISION...' 19. THAT IN THE CASE OF FATEH CHAND TRUST & COLLEGE COMMITTEE V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW [2019] 101 TAXMANN. COM 364 (AGRA - TRIB.), THE HON'BLE ITAT, AGRA BENCH OBSERVED THE FOLLOWING: '1 9. WE FIND THAT LEARNED CIT, WHILE PASSING IMPUGNED ORDER SEEMS TO BE UNDER GROS S MISCONCEPTION THAT IT IS HIS SATISFACTION AND DEFINITION OF 'CHARITABLE ACTIVITI ES' DEHORS REQUIREMENT OF LAW WOULD ONLY ENABLE AN INSTITUTION TO BE GRANTED REGISTRATI ON UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT AS ONCE REGISTRATION IS GRANTED, THE ENTIRE INCOME OF THE INSTITUTION WOULD BECOME EXEMPT. THE SAID VIEW, IN THE LIGHT OF PRECEDENTS R EFERRED ABOVE IS WHOLLY OPPOSED TO LAW. UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, THE COMMISSI ONER IS ENTITLED TO SEE THAT WHETHER THE OBJECTS ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE, WHICH TERM HAS BEEN WELL DEFINED IN THE ACT AND ALSO TO SEE WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE OR NOT. THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES WOULD MEAN TO SEE THAT ACTIVITIES ARE NOT CAMOUFLAGE, BOGUS, ARTIFICIAL AND WHETHER THESE ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE OBJECT S OF THE INSTITUTION. THE SCOPE OF ENQUIRY DOES NOT EXTEND BEYOND THAT PINT....' 20. THAT THE HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF CIT V RED ROSE SCHOOL [2007] 163 TAXMAN 19 (ALLAHABAD) HELD THAT: 'SECTIO N 12AA, WHICH LAYS DOWN THE ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 10 PROCEDURE FOR REGISTRATION, DOES NOT SPEAK ANYWHERE THAT THE COMMISSIONER, WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION, SHALL ALSO SEE THAT THE INCOME DERIVED BY THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION IS EITHER NOT BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE OR SUCH INSTITUTION IS EARNING PROFIT. THE LANGUAGE US ED IN THE SECTION ONLY REQUIRES THAT ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR THE INSTITUTION MUST BE GENUINE, WHICH ACCORDINGLY WOULD MEAN THAT THEY ARE IN CONSONANCE WITH THE OBJECTS O F THE TRUST/INSTITUTION, AND ARE NOT MERE CAMOUFLAGE BUT ARE REAL, PURE AND SINCERE AND NOT AGAINST THE PROPOSED OBJECTS. THE PROFIT EARNING OR MISUSE OF THE INCOME DERIVED BY CHARITABLE INSTITUTION FROM ITS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES MAY BE A GROUND FOR REFUSING EXEMPTION ONLY WITH RESPECT TO THAT PART OF THE INCOME BUT CANNOT BE TA KEN TO BE A SYNONYM TO THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR THE I NSTITUTION. [PARA 34]' THAT SIMILARLY JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. BAB U RAM EDUCATION SOCIETY [2018] 96 TAXMANN.COM 606 (ALL.) WHEREIN AT THE INSTANCE OF T HE DEPARTMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE AGRA BENCH OF THE ITAT WAS PUT UP FOR JUDICIAL SCRUTINY BEFORE THE HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT. THE HON'BLE COURT HELD AS UND ER: 'SECTION 12A OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 - CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST - REG ISTRATION OF (GENERAL) - WHETHER REGISTRATION OF TRUST DOES NOT INVOLVE ENQUIRY INTO ACTUAL ACTIVITIES OR APPLICATION OF FUNDS, ETC. AND AT THAT STAGE, ONLY ENQUIRY REQUIRE D TO BE CONDUCTED IS WITH RESPECT TO OBJECT OF TRUST ALONE AND IF ASSESSEE IS FOUND T O HAVE BEEN ACTUALLY ENGAGED IN ANY NON-CHARITABLE ACTIVITY, BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION M AY BE DENIED IN MANNER PROVIDED BY ACT - HELD, YES - [PARA 7] [IN FAVOUR O F ASSESSEE] (HEAD NOTE)' THAT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. SPRING DALE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY [2011] 16 TAXMANN.COM 282/[2012] 204 TAXMAN 11 (MAG.) THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT HELD AS UNDER: 'SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 - CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TRUST - REGISTRATION PROCEDURE - ASSESSMENT YEAR 201011 - W HETHER WHILE EXAMINING APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA , MANNER OF APPLICATION OF FUNDS OF TRUST DO NOT FALL WITHIN PURVIEW OF COMMISSIONER ; COMMISSIONER SHOULD ONLY SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT GENUINENESS OF AIMS AND OBJEC TS OF TRUST/INSTITUTION AND GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES AS ENUMERATED IN CLAU SE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 12AA - HELD, YES' THAT IN THE CASE OF VIGYADAYANI S HIKSH SAMITI V. CIT (EXEMPTION) [IT APPEAL NO. 309 (DELHI) OF 2016, DATED 14-12-201 7] WHEREIN WHILE ADDRESSING THE IDENTICAL OBJECTION RAISED BY THE LD. CIT(E), THE H ON'BLE LUCKNOW ITAT HELD AS UNDER: 'NOW, COMING TO THE POWERS OF THE COMMISSIONER AS T O WHETHER WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A HE IS REQUIRED TO EXAMINE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ETC. OR HE IS ONLY TO SATISFY HIMSELF REGARDING THE OBJECTS OF TH E ITA NO. 3/AGRA/2021 13 TRUST AND GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST, WE FIND VARIOUS COURTS HAVE HELD THAT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A THE LD. CIT IS REQUIRED TO SEE ONLY THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST/SOCIETY AND NOT TO EXAMINE THE A PPLICATION OF INCOME. HE IS NOT REQUIRED TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE INCOME DERIVED BY T HE TRUST IS BEING SPENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES OR THE TRUST IS EARNING PROFIT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION. HE IS ONLY REQUIRED TO EXAMINE THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. WE FIND IDENTICAL ISSUE HAD COME UP BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF BHARTIYA KISA N SANGH SEWA NIKETAN (SUPRA). IN THE SAID CASE ALSO THE ASSESSEE TRUST DID NOT PRODU CE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, BILLS AND VOUCHERS ETC. FOR VERIFICATION OF THE LD. CIT FOR W HICH THE LD. CIT HELD THAT THE ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 11 ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. DUE TO NON-COMPLIANCE OF ASSESSEE SOCIETY, THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVIT IES COULD NOT BE VERIFIED. THE LD. CIT, THEREFORE, RELYING ON VARIOUS DECISIONS INCLUD ING THE DECISIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN RELIED ON BY THE LD. CIT IN THE PRESENT CASE, REJEC TED THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A(1) OF THE I.T. ACT. WHEN THE MATTER TRAVELLED T O THE TRIBUNAL, THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF REGISTRATION BY HOLDING THAT A T THIS STAGE ON GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A THE LD. CIT IS REQUIRED TO SEE THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AND NOT REQUIRED TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION OF INCOME WHICH WILL HAVE TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON A YEAR TO YEAR BASIS AFTER THE ASSESSEE FILES THE RETURN OF INCOME CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT.' THE SAID VIEW HAS ALSO BEEN ADOPTED BY THIS BENCH IN THE CASE OF RASEE EDUCATIO NAL INSTITUTE V. CIT (EXEMPTION) LUCKNOW IN [IT APPEAL NO. 462/AGRA/2017 WHEREIN VID E ORDER DATED 30.07.2008] SIMILAR VIEW WAS ADOPTED WHERE IDENTICAL OBJECTIONS WERE RAISED BY THE LD.CIT(E ).THAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M/S. REHAM FOUNDATION KANDHARI LANE LAL BAGH LUCKNOW (HIGH COURT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH), INCOME TAX A PPEAL NO. 37 OF 2017, DATED 26.09.2019, THE HON'BLE FULL BENCH OF ALLAHABAD HIG H COURT, HELD THAT, '31. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE ANSWER TO QUESTIONS REFERRED ARE A NSWERED AS UNDER:- THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WHILE HEARING AN APPEAL UNDE R SECTION 254(1) IN A MATTER WHERE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12(AA) HAS BEEN DE NIED BY COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX CAN ITSELF PASS AN ORDER DIRECTING COMMISSIONER ITA NO. 3/AGRA/2021 14 TO GRANT REGISTRATION IN CASE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBU NAL DISAGREES WITH THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMMISSIONER ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ALREAD Y ON RECORD BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER THE POWER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AR E CO-EXTENSIVE WITH THE POWER OF THE COMMISSIONER UNDER SECTION 12 (AA) OF THE AC T, 1961 SUBJECT TO WHAT HAS BEEN INDICATED HEREIN ABOVE IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAI D THE REFERENCE IS ANSWERED.' . .. 25. IF WE LOOK INTO THE AMENDED PROVISION OF SECTIO N 12AA, , WHICH WAS INSERTED IN THE ACT ON 1.9.2019, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE LOWER AUT HORITY SHALL CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION FROM THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT, A. THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION; AND B. THE COMPLIANCE OF SUCH REQUIREMENTS OF ANY OTHER LA W FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE BY THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AS ARE MATERIAL FOR THE PU RPOSE OF ACHIEVING ITS OBJECTS, AND MAY ALSO MAKE SUCH INQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSA RY IN THIS BEHALF; AND] 26. SO FAR AS THE FIRST RESPECT OF SATISFACTION OF THE LOW ER AUTHORITY PERTAINING TO GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST IS CONCE RNED, THE LAW IS FAIRLY SETTLED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE MATTER OF ANAND SOCIAL (SUPRA), WHICH REQUIRES THE LOWER AUTHORITIES TO EXAMINE THE MEMOR ANDUM OF ASSOCIATION/OR OBJECTS OF THE TRUST FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMING TO T HE CONCLUSION WHETHER THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE GENUINE OR NOT. UNDO UBTEDLY IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE GENUINE AS IS CLEAR FROM THE CHART OF THE ACTIVITIES REPRODUCED HEREIN ABOVE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE IS AL SO CLAIMING EXEMPTION UNDER ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 12 SECTION 10(23) OF THE ACT FROM THE RESPONDENT FOR T HE LAST THREE YEARS I.E 2017-18 TO 2019-20 , WHICH WERE GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR TH E PURPOSES OF IMPARTING THE EDUCATION ONLY( PAGES 36 TO 40 PB) . THUS THE FIRST CONDITION AS STIPULATED UNDER SECTION 12AA , REGARDING THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACT IVITY HAVE DULY BEEN PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER EXEMPTION. WE HAVE NO DOUBT ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE I.E T HE ASSESSEE WAS/IS IMPARTING EDUCATION AND IMPARTING OF EDUCATION IS A CHARITABL E ACTIVITIES UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. THUS WE HOLD THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE AS SESSEE ARE CHARITABLE WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 12AA (1) (I) READ WITH 2(15). 22. FURTHER IN THE MATTER OF SANATAN DHARM CHARITABLE E DUCATION SOCIETY IN ITA NO. 600/ASR/2018 VIDE ORDER DATED 05.04.2019 HAD HELD A S UNDER: 7. WE SHALL NOW IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID S ETTLED POSITION OF LAW ADVERT TO THE OBSERVATIONS DRAWN BY THE CIT(E) FOR DECLINING THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY UNDER SEC. 12A A OF THE IT ACT. INSOFAR THE ADVERSE INFERENCE DRAWN BY THE CIT(E) THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAD IN THE LAST THREE PRECEDING YEARS BY ACCOUNTING FOR THE ADVANCE FEES ON THE CURRENT LIABILITY SIDE OF ITS BALANCE SHEET HAD MANOEUVRED AND MANA GED TO KEEP ITS GROSS RECEIPTS BELOW RS. 1 CRORE IS CONCERNED, WE ARE UNA BLE TO PERSUADE OURSELVES TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE SAID VIEW SO ARRIVED AT BY HIM. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE AFORESAID ASPECT OF ACCOUNTING OF THE GROSS RECEIPT S BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WILL HAVE NO BEARING FOR ADJUDICATING THE GENUINENE SS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. APART THERE FROM, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW AS THE ADVANCE FEE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY DURING THE YEAR WOULD NOT FORM PAR T OF ITS TOTAL INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEREFORE, NO INFIRMI TY CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHICH IS MAINTAINING ITS ACCOUNTS AS PER THE MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTANCY FOR THE REASON THAT IT HAD SH OWN THE SAME UNDER THE HEAD CURRENT LIABILITY IN ITS RESPECTIVE BALANCE SHEETS FOR THE SAID PRECEDING YEARS. AS REGARDS THE ADVERSE INFERENCE DRAWN BY TH E CIT(E) IN RESPECT OF THE SECURITY DEPOSIT OF RS. 14 LACS RECEIVED BY THE A SSESSEE FROM ITS TENANTS I.E. S/SH. RAJIV JAIN AND RAJ KUMAR NAYYAR FOR THE SHOPS SITUATED AT GURU NANAK MARKET, PHAGWARA WHICH HAD BEEN LET OUT TO THEM, WE ARE UNABLE TO ENDORSE THE SAME. BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, WE MAY HEREIN RECORD OUR OBSERVATIONS IN CONTEXT OF THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS AS ARE DISCERNIBLE FROM THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AS ON 31.03.2016 VIZ. (I) THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY DURING THE F.Y. 2015-16 WAS IN RECEIPT OF AN AMOUNT AGGREGATING TO RS. 13,87,000/- FROM ITS TENA NTS (I.E. SH. RAJIV JAIN : RS. 3,87,000/- AND SH. RAJ KUMAR NAYYAR : RS. 10,00 ,000/-) AND NOT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 14 LAC AS STATED BY THE CIT(E) IN HIS ORDER PASSED UNDER SEC. 12AA(1)(B)(II); (II) THAT THE AFORESAID AMOUNT OF R S. 13,87,000/- WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AS A SECURITY DEPOSIT FRO M ITS TENANTS S/SH. RAJIV JAIN ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 13 AND RAJ KUMAR NAYYAR, AND NOT TOWARDS ADVANCE RENT AS FIND MENTIONED IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(E) UNDER SEC. 12AA(1)(B )(II). AS OBSERVED BY US HEREINABOVE, THE CIT(E) HAD TRAVERSED BEYOND THE SC OPE OF HIS JURISDICTION AND INSTEAD OF CONFINING HIMSELF TO THE ASPECT OF T HE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, HAD RATHER EMBA RKED UPON THE ISSUES WHICH THOUGH WOULD BE RELEVANT AT THE STAGE OF FRAMING OF ASSESSMENT BUT WOULD HAVE NO BEARING TO THE EXTENT JUDGING OF THE GENUIN ENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ARE CONCERNED. BE THAT AS IT M AY, EVEN OTHERWISE AS THE SECURITY DEPOSIT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FROM S/SH. RAJIV JAIN AND RAJ KUMAR NAYYAR IN THE F.Y. 2015-16 COULD NOT BE I NCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE F.Y. 2015-16, THUS NO INFIRMITY AS REGARDS THE MANNER IN WHICH THE AFORESAID AMOUNT HAS BEEN REFLE CTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS FINAL ACCOUNTS FOR SAID YEAR IS LIABLE TO BE DR AWN. INSOFAR THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(E) THAT THE INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE AN NUAL RENTAL INCOME OF RS. 10,000/- AND RS. 14,000/- SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN F.Y. 2015-16 AND F.Y. 2016-17 ON THE ONE HAND AND THE ADVANCE RENT OF RS. 14 LACS IS CONCERNED, WE ARE UNABLE TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE SAID OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(E), WHICH AS OBSERVED BY US HEREINABOVE IS BASED ON MISCONCEIVED FACTS. AS OBSERVED BY US HEREINABOVE, AS THE AMOUNT OF RS. 13,87,000/- (S IC RS. 14 LAC) IS THE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AS A SECUR ITY DEPOSIT FROM ITS TENANTS, THEREFORE, NO FEASIBLE COMPARISON BETWEEN THE RENT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY AND THE SAID SECURITY DEPOSIT CAN BE DRAWN. BE THAT AS IT MAY, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE QUANTUM OF RENT REC EIVED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FROM ITS TENANTS WOULD NOT HAVE ANY BEARING FOR VERIFYING THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIE TY. AS REGARDS THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(E) THAT AS TO WHAT NECESSIT ATED THE PURCHASE OF ADDITIONAL LAND BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IN F.Y. 201 5-16, AND THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AS TO WHETHER THE SAME WAS FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, WE FIND IT BEYOND OUR COMPREHENSION AS TO HOW THE SAME WOULD H AVE ANY BEARING FOR VERIFYING THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IF SUBSEQUENTLY THE SAID LAND WHIC H HAD BEEN PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IN FURTHERANCE OF ITS OBJECTS OF PROVIDING EDUCATION IS USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WHICH IS NOT AS PER THE OBJECT S OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, THEN THE CIT(E) IS VESTED WITH THE POWERS UNDER SUB -SECTION (3) OF SECTION 12AA TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATION SO GRANTED TO THE A SSESSEE SOCIETY. HOWEVER, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW NO ADVERSE INFERENCE AS REGA RDS THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY COULD HAVE V ALIDLY BEEN DRAWN FOR THE REASON THAT IT HAD PURCHASED ADDITIONAL LAND FOR TH E FURTHERANCE OF ITS OBJECTS. WE SHALL NOW ADVERT TO THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(E) THAT AS THE SURPLUS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE (WITHOUT CONSIDE RING DEPRECIATION) OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS BETWEEN 20% TO 30% OF ITS GROS S RECEIPTS DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS, THEREFORE, IT SUBSTANTIALLY PROVED THA T THE EMPHASIS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS ON GENERATING EXCESSIVE SURPLU SES. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IN ORDER TO CHARACTERIZE A TRUST OR AN INSTIT UTION AS ONE WHICH HAS AS ITS ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 14 OBJECT PROFIT MAKING, IT MUST BE SHOWN THAT THE PRE DOMINATE OBJECT OF THE ACTIVITY IN THE CASE OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION W AS THAT OF MAKING OF A PROFIT. IN FACT, WHERE AN ACTIVITY IS NOT PERVADED BY PROFI T MOTIVE BUT IS CARRIED ON PRIMARILY FOR SERVING THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE, IT WO ULD BE INCORRECT TO DESCRIBE IT AS AN ACTIVITY FOR PROFIT. HOWEVER, ON THE OTHER HAND WHERE THE ACTIVITY IS CARRIED ON WITH THE PREDOMINATE OBJECT OF EARNING P ROFIT, IT WOULD BE AN ACTIVITY FOR PROFIT, THOUGH IT MAY BE CARRIED ON IN ADVANCEMENT OF THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION. IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, THE PREDOMINATE OBJECT OF A CHARITABLE TRUST OR INSTITU TION IS TO CARRY ON ACTIVITIES TO SUB SERVE THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND NOT TO EARN PROFIT. RATHER, THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE SHOULD NOT BE SUBMERGED BY THE P ROFIT MAKING MOTIVE. FAIRLY STATING, THE PURPOSE OF A CHARITABLE TRUST M UST BE ESSENTIALLY CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND IT SHOULD NOT BE A COVER FOR CARRYING ON AN ACTIVITY WHICH HAS PROFIT MAKING AS ITS PREDOMINATE OBJECT. IN OUR CON SIDERED VIEW, IT WOULD INDEED BE DIFFICULT FOR A TRUST OR INSTITUTION TO S O CARRY ON ITS ACTIVITY THAT THE EXPENDITURE BALANCES THE INCOME AND THERE IS NO RES ULTING PROFIT. AS OBSERVED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SOLE TR USTEE, LOKA SHIKSHANA TRUST (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC), IF THE PROFITS MUST NECESSARILY FEED A CHARITABLE PURPOSE UNDER THE TERMS OF THE TRUST, THE MERE FACT THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST YIELD PROFIT WILL NOT ALTER THE CHARITABLE CH ARACTER OF THE TRUST. IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE TEST NOW IS THE GENUINENESS OF TH E PURPOSE TESTED BY THE OBLIGATION CREATED TO SPEND THE MONEY EXCLUSIVELY O R ESSENTIALLY ON CHARITY. IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT AN ACTIVITY INVOLVED IN CARRYING OUT THE CHARITABLE PU RPOSE MUST NOT BE MOTIVATED BY A PROFIT OBJECTIVE, BUT MUST BE UNDERT AKEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADVANCEMENT OR CARRYING OUT OF THE CHARITABLE PURPO SE. RATHER, AS OBSERVED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SURAT ART SILK CLOTH MANUFACTURES ASSOCIATION (1980) 121 ITR 1 (SC), IN ORDER TO ASCERTAIN AS TO WHETHER A TRUST OR AN INSTITUTION IS CARRIED ON WIT H THE OBJECT OF MAKING PROFIT OR NOT, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE BALANCE OF INCOME IS APPLIED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY TO OBJECTS FOR WHICH SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION HAD BEEN ESTABLISHED. IN OUR C ONSIDERED VIEW, WHERE AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION CARRIES ON THE ACTIVITY OF EDUCATION PRIMARILY FOR EDUCATING PERSONS, THE FACT THAT IT MAKES A SURPLUS WOULD NOT LEAD TO THE CONCLUSION THAT IT CEASES TO EXIST SOLELY FOR EDUCA TIONAL PURPOSES AND BECOMES AN INSTITUTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING PR OFIT. WE ARE FURTHER OF THE VIEW THAT IN THE CASE OF AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITU TION WHERE THE SURPLUS GENERATED DURING THE YEAR IS PLOUGHED BACK FOR EDUC ATION PURPOSES, IT CAN SAFELY BE CONCLUDED THAT THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIO N EXISTS SOLELY FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES AND NOT FOR THE PURPOSES OF PR OFIT. IN THE CASE BEFORE US, WE FIND THAT EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY IN FURTHERANCE OF OBJECTS OF PROVIDING EDUCATION HAD CONSISTENTLY GEN ERATED SURPLUS DURING THE LAST THREE PRECEDING YEAR, NOTHING IS DISCERNIBLE F ROM THE RECORDS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WHICH WOULD IRREFUTABLY PROVE THAT GENE RATION OF SUCH SURPLUS ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 15 AND NOT RENDERING OF THE EDUCATION WAS THE PREDOMIN ATE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. IN FACT, WE FIND THAT THE SURPLUS IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY (AFTER CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION) RANGES FROM 1 5% TO 23%. THE AFORESAID SURPLUS WE FIND HAD BEEN PLOUGHED BACK BY THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY FOR THE FURTHERANCE OF ITS OBJECT. WE THUS IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE GENERATION OF SURPL US BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IN FURTHERANCE OF ITS PREDOMINATE OBJECT OF RENDERI NG EDUCATION CAN IN NO WAY HELP TO ARRIVE AT A CONCLUSION THAT THE EMPHASI S OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS ON GENERATION OF EXCESSIVE SURPLUS AND NOT REND ERING OF EDUCATION. WE THUS IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS ARE UNA BLE TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE CIT(E) THAT THE GENUINENESS OF TH E ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS NOT PROVED. IN TERMS OF OUR AFORESAID O BSERVATIONS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE CIT(E) HAD ERRED IN DECLIN ING TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. WE THUS SE T ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(E) AND DIRECT HIM TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER S EC. 12AA TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. 23. SIMILARLY IN CIT VS. SURYA EDUCATION CHARITABLE TRU ST IN ITA NO. 701/2010 THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN PARAGRAPH 11 H AD HELD AS UNDER: SECTION 11 OF THE ACT CONTEMPLATES THAT THE INCOME AS SPECIFIED THEREIN SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR OF THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME DERIVED FROM THE PROPERTY HEL D UNDER THE TRUST WHOLLY FOR CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES, WHEREAS SECTI ON 12 OF THE ACT, DEALS WITH THE CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED BY THE TRUST OR AN INSTI TUTION, ESTABLISHED FOR CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS PURPOSES, RECEIVING CONTRI BUTION, SHALL NOT BE AN INCOME IN TERMS OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. THE BENEF IT OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT, ARE AVAILABLE ONLY IF SUCH TRUST OR INSTIT UTION IS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. ON THE OTHER HAND, SECTION 10(23C) OF THE ACT ARE THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IN SUBSTITUTION OF THE EA RLIER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(22) OF THE ACT AS TO WHICH INCOME SHALL NOT BE I NCLUDED IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF ANY PERSON. THEREFORE, THE PROVISIO NS OF SECTIONS 11, 12 OR SECTION 10(23C) OF THE ACT, DEAL WITH THE INCOME OF A TRUST OR OF THE INSTITUTION AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES AS TO WHEN SUCH I NCOME IS TO BE EXCLUDED FOR COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME, BUT THE BASIS OF SU CH BENEFIT IS THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. UNLESS A TRUST OR INSTITUTION IS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, SUCH TRUS T OR INSTITUTION SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO EXCLUDE FROM ITS TOTAL INCOME, DEDUC TIONS OR CONTRIBUTIONS OR FROM OTHER SOURCES. THEREFORE, THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN FOR EXCLUDING THE INCOME FROM CONSIDERATION UNDER SECTION 10(22) NOW 10(23)(C) OR SECTIONS 11 AND 12 ARE NOT APPLICABLE WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. THE APP LICATION FOR REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE CREATION OF THE TRUST. SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, REQUIRES SATISFACTION IN RESPECT O F THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST, WHICH INCLUDES THE ACTIVIT IES WHICH THE TRUST IS ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 16 UNDERTAKING AT PRESENT AND ALSO WHICH IT MAY CONTEM PLATE TO UNDERTAKE. THE INSERTION OF SUB-SECTION (3) TO SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT, CLARIFIES THE SAID FACT, WHEN IT EMPOWERS THE COMMISSIONER TO CANCEL THE REG ISTRATION IF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST ARE NOT CARRIED OUT IN ACCO RDANCE WITH SUCH OBJECTS. 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 IT S RETURN. THEREFORE, WE FIND THAT THE JUDGMENTS REFERRED TO BY THE LEARNED COUNS EL FOR THE APPELLANT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARI SING OUT OF THE QUESTION OF REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST AND NOT OF ASSESSMENT. 24. SIMILARLY IN PARAGRAPH 4 OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE MATTER OF SHIRDI SAI DARBAR CHARITABLE TRUST HAD HELD AS UNDER: 4. THE MATTER HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY THE TRIBUNAL AF TER PERUSING THE RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS. IT HAS BEEN CATEGORICALLY REC ORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE CIT (E) HAS TO SATISFY TWO CONDITIONS WHILE GRANTING RE GISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. FIRSTLY, WHETHER THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESS EE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND THUS, THE ACTIVITIES ARE GENUINE. IT CANNOT BE CONC LUDED ON THE 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 RECOR DED THAT SECTION 13 OF THE ACT COMES INTO PLAY AT THE TIME OF GRANTING EXEMPTION U NDER SECTION 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) WITH REGA RD TO THE OBJECTS CONTAINED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ITS ACTIVITIES ARE NOT GENUINE. THUS, IT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DIRECTED BY THE TRIBUNAL TO THE CIT (E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. T HE 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 CONSIDERED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FIRST REASON ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS REFUSED TO GRANT REGISTRATION 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 REJECT THE APP LICATION FOR REGISTRATION SINCE THE TWO CONDITIONS WHICH THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) HAS TO SATISFY WHILE GRANTING THE REGISTRATION UNDER SE CTION 12A OF THE ACT, ARE THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND THE ACTIVITIES ARE ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 17 GENUINE. JUST BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED IT S INCOME TAX RETURNS IN EARLIER YEARS, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ACTIVITIE S OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE. RELIANCE PLACED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE CHENNAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ARE NOT OUT OF PLACE, WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT NON-FILING OF RETURN CANNOT BE ONE OF THE REASONS F OR DENYING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. WITH REGARD TO THE SE COND OBJECTION RAISED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) THAT AS PER CLAUSE- 12 OF THE MEMORANDUM OF TRUST, THE TRUSTEES HAVE BEEN GIVEN A BSOLUTE POWERS TO MANAGE THE PROPERTY. WE HAVE PERUSED THE CLAUSE-12 OF THE MEMORANDUM OF THE TRUST, WHEREBY THE TRUSTEES ARE AUTHORISED T O DEMISE THE IMMOVABLE PROPERTY OR PROPERTIES OF THE TRUST EITHER FROM YEA R TO YEAR OR FOR ANY FIXED TERM OR FOR ANY TERM OF YEARS OR ON MONTHLY BASIS A T SUCH RENT AND SUBJECT TO SUCH CONDITIONS AS THEY DEEM FIT AND PROPER AND ALS O ACCEPT SURRENDER OF LEASE AND MAY MANAGE THE PROPERTY AS THEY THINK PRO PER. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THIS CLAUSE, WE OBSERVE THAT THE TRUSTEES HAVE B EEN GIVEN POWERS TO GIVE PROPERTY OF THE TRUST ON LEASE OR ON RENT. WE DO NO T FIND ANYTHING 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 COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) THAT HIS CLAUSE MAY ATTRACT THE PROVIS IONS OF SECTION 13 (1)(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 OFFICER A T THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ON YEARLY BASIS AND NOT BY THE CIT (APP EALS) WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 25. RESPECTFULLY, THE FOLLOWING DECISION OF THE HONB LE HIGH COURT AND THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF DR. MADAN LAL ATRI AND SANATAN DHARM CHARITABLE EDUCATION SOCIETY WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE AS SESSEE IS ENTITLED REGISTRATION ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 18 ACCORDINGLY WE DIRECT THE CIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRAT ION TO THE SOCIETY FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION. 10. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE FINDING RECORDED BY THE CI T EXEMPTION IS NOT ARISING OUT OF THE RECORD, RATHER IT IS CONTRARY TO THE RECORD. IN OUR VIEW THE ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE CHARITABLE, AND THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALSO GENUINE. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING OUR DECISION IN T HE CASE OF SARASWATI EDUCATION (SUPRA), WE DIRECT THE CIT EXEMPTION TO G RANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FROM THE DATE OF APPLICATION. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.09.2021 SD/- SD/- (DR. M. L. MEENA) (LALIET KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 21.09.2021 GP/SR. PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1)THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) THE CIT (4) THE CIT (APPEALS) ITA NO. 602/ASR/2018 19 (5) THE DR, I.T.A.T. TRUE COPY BY ORDER