ACE DERIVATIVES & COMMODITY EXCHANGE INVESTOR (CLIENT) PRTAECTION FUND TRUST, MUMBAI V. DIT (E), MUMBAI

ITA 6580/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9667 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 30-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Competent authority
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU , AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM / I .T.A. NO. 6580 / MUM/ 20 1 4 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20014 - 15 ) ACE DERIVATIVES & COMMODITY EXCHANGE INVESTOR (CLIENT) PROTECTI ON FUND TRUST 401B, INFINITY IT PARK, GEN. AK VAIDYA MARG, DINDOSHI MALAD (E), MUMBAI 400097 / VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), 6 TH FLOOR, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS PAREL MUMBAI. 400012 . / ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AADTA 9506 A ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / DATE OF HEARING : 23.03.2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.03 . 201 8 / O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, J M: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 30 .0 9 .201 4 , PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX (EXEMPTION), 6 TH FLOOR, PIRAMAL C HAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI - 400012 IN WHICH THE APPLICATION MOVED BY THE APPELLANT U/S 12A OF THE ACT HAS BEEN ORDERED TO BE REJECTED . 2 . THE APPELLANT HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: - 1. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION) HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS DIT(E) E RRED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IGNORING ALL MERITS OF THE CASE. REVENUE BY: S HRI R. P. MEENA ( CIT DR ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI CHETAN KAKKA (AR) ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 2 2. HE FURTHER ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE NOT OF CHARITABLE NATURE BUT HAD SHADES OF BUSINESS ETHICS INVOLVED FOR CREATION OF GOODWILL AND THEREFORE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED WELL WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT, MAKING IT A GROUND OF REJECTION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A. 3. HE FURTHER ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE ACTIVITY BEING CARRIED OUT BY THE APPELLANT COULD NOT BE TERMED AS ANY OTHER OBJECTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY FOR THE REASONS THAT THE TRUST HAS BEEN FORMED FOR THE SPECIFIC PERSONS WHO INVESTED THROUGH STOCK EXCHANGE AND NOT FOR GENERAL PUBLIC AND THE OBJECT AND CONTE NTION IS VERY CLEAR THAT BENEFITS ARE NOT OPEN FOR GENERAL PUBLIC AT LARGE. 4. HE FURTHER ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE ACT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE SITTING FEE AND CONVEYANCE EXPEN SES PAID TO TRUSTEE FOR ADMINISTERING THE TRUST AND ATTENDING TRUST MEETING ARE REASONABLE CONSIDERING THE SERVICE RENDERED BY THEM AND NATURE OF PAYMENT AND APPELLANT HAS NOT VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE ACT. 5. HE FURTHER ERRED IN CONC LUDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST CANNOT BE PUT TO THE TEST OF GENUINESS WITHOUT ASCRIBING ANY REASON FOR THE SAME. 6. HE FAILED TO APPRECIATE AND OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT: A. THE TRUST IS FORMED IN PURSUANCE OF THE GUIDELINES/REGULATIONS ISSUED BY T HE FORWARD MARKETS COMMISSIONS WITH THE SOLE AIM OF CREATING A FUND WHICH COULD PROVIDE COMPENSATION TO THE INVESTORS IN CASE OF LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF DEFAULT BY THE MEMBER OF EXCHANGE AND FOR THE PROTECTION, AWARENESS AND EDUCATION OF THE INVESTORS OF EXCHAN GE. B. THE SAME IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE CAUSE, FALLING WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE TERM CHARITABLE PURPOSE AS DEFINED U/S 2(15) OF THE ACT, VIDE THE LAST LIMB THEREOF, I.E., THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. C. AN OBJECT BENEFICIA L TO A SECTION OF THE PUBLIC IS AN OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY AND TO SERVE A CHARITABLE PURPOSE IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THE OBJECT LEADS TO THE BENEFIT OF THE WHOLE MANKIND OR ALL PERSONS IN A PARTICULAR COUNTRY OR EVEN STATE. D IT WOULD BE SUFFICI ENT IF THE INTENTION IS TO BENEFIT A SECTION OF THE COMMUNITY, SUFFICIENTLY DEFINED AND IDENTIFIABLE BY SOME COMMON QUALITY OF A PUBLIC OR IMPERSONAL NATURE. E. APPELLANT IS ALSO ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM EXEMPTION US/ 10(23(EC) CANNOT BE A GROUND TO REJECT THE A PPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. F. HAVING REGARD TO THE ACCOUNTS AND DETAILED SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT, THE APPELLANT HAS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT IT HAS NOT VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE ACT AS PAYMENTS MADE TO TRUSTEES ARE IN THE NATURE OF SITTING FEES AND NOT IN THE NATURE OF SALARY, ALLOWANCE, ETC. EVEN IF IT IS ASSUMED THAT ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 3 THEY ARE IN THE NATURE OF SALARY, ALLOWANCE, ETC., THEY ARE NOT UNREASONABLE TO ATTRACT THE VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE ACT. 7. TH E APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE DIT(E) BE DIRECTED TO GRANT CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT. 3 . THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE APPELLANT FILED AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 IN THE PRE SCRIBED FORM NO. 10A ON 25.03.2014. THE APPELLANT TRUST WAS CONSTITUTED BY A TRUST DEED DATED 26.04.2012. THE TRUST WAS REGISTERE D WITH THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER MUMBAI ON 06.03.2013 VIDE REGI STRATION NO. F - 29431 (MUMBAI) . A FTER FILING THE APPLICATION BEFOR E THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX EXEMPTION, MUMBAI, THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST WAS EXAMINED WHICH WAS NOT FOUND JUSTIFIABLE IN V IEW OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT, T HEREFORE, THE APPLICATION FOR THE REGISTRATION WAS DECLINED U/S 12A A OF THE ACT. THE REASONS FOR THE DECLINING THE APPLICATION ARE MENTIONED AT PARA NO. 5,6,7 & 8 OF THE ORDER WHICH ARE HEREBY REPRODUCED AS UNDER: - THE SUBMISSION PUTFORTH BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PERUSED, HOWEVER, THE SAME IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. FIRSTLY THE TRUST HAS MAINLY ESTABLISHED FOR THE PROTECTION, AWARENESS AND EDUCATION OF THE INVESTORS OF THE EXCHANGE AND THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE NOT CHARITABLE BUT HAD SHADE OF BUSINESS ETHICS INVOLVED FOR CREATION OF GOODWILL. THEREFORE, THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST CANNOT BE CONS IDERED WELL WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. FURTHER, AS THE ACTIVITY ARE BEING CARRIED OUT COULD NOT BEEN TERMED AS ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY AT LARGE. IN NUTSHELL THE REGISTRATION COULD NOT BE GRANTED MERELY BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENT OF CREATION OF FUND UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF EXCHANGE. IT CAN BE ALSO SEEN THAT STOCK EXCHANGES WHO WISHED TO TAKE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND HAS TO REGISTER ITSELF AS PER THE REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 10(23EC) OF THE ACT AND IT IS NOT M ANDATORY FOR INSTITUTION TO REGISTER ITSELF UNDER 12AA OF THE ACT TO REAP SQUARELY FELL WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 10(23EC) OF THE ACT. THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT COULD NOT BE GRANTED MERELY BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENT OF CREATION OF FUND UNDER THE ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 4 PROVISION OF COMMODITY EXCHANGE DID NOT IPSO FACTO WOULD MAKE SUCH TRSUT/INSTITUTIONS A CHARITABLE ONE WHICH WOULD BE ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT IN ORDER TO QUALIFY EXEMPTION U/S 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT. 6. FURTHER, FROM THE BANK STATE MENT IS OBSERVED THAT THE TRUST HAS MADE VARIOUS PAYMENT TO THE TRUSTEES ON 20.08.2013 23.08.2013 AND 27.08.2013 AND THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED TO THE AUDIT. IN RESPONSE THE ASSESSEE STATES THAT SECTION 13(3) COVERS ONLY REMUNERATION OR ALLOWANCE PAID TO THE TRUSTEES AND APPLICANT TRUST HAS PAID ONLY SITTING FEES. THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT OF SECTION 13(3) STATES THAT WHETHER ANY PAYMENT WAS MADE TO ANY SUCH PERSON DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR BY WAY OF SALARY ALLOWANCE OR OTHERW ISE? IF SO GIVE DETAILS. THIS IS NOTHING BUT A BENEFIT/ALLOWANCE GIVEN TO THE TRUSTEES. THEREBY THE ASSESSEE HAS VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 7. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT APPEARS THAT THE ACTIVITY AS BEING CARRIED OUT COULD NOT BE TERMED AS ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY FOR SIMPLE REASON THAT IT WAS MEANT FOR THE BENEFIT OF SPECIFIC PERSON WHO ARE THE MEMBERS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE TRUST AND NOT FOR GENERAL PUBLIC. 4. ON THE BA SIS OF THE ABOVE SAID REASONS THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST U/S 12A A WAS DISMISSED. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPELLANT BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED BY THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PARTIES AND PERUS ED THE RECORD. BASICALLY, THE TRUST HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED FOR THE PROTECTION, AWARENESS AND EDUCATION OF THE INVESTOR OF THE EXCHANGE. THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST HAS BEEN DULY BEING RECORD ED IN THE TRUST DEED DATED 26.04. 2012 WHICH LIES AT PAGE NO. 3 TO 12 O F THE PAPER BOOK. THE FIRST GROUND WHICH HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE DIRECTOR INCOME - TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI FOR DECLINING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION IS THAT THE TRUST HAS MAINLY ESTABLISHED FOR THE PROTECTION, ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 5 AWARENESS AND EDUCATION OF THE INVESTOR OF THE EXCHANGE AND THE SAID OBJECT WAS NOT FOUND CHARITABLE BEING BUSINESS AND FALL WITHIN THE PREVIEW OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE HONBLE ITAT MUMBAI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE TITLE D AS INTER - CONNECTED STOCK EXCHA NGE INVESTORS PROTECTION FUND (ISE IPF) VS. DCIT (EXEMP) (2013) 38 TAXMANN.COM 329 (MUM) TRIBUNAL IN W HICH IT HAS BEEN SP ECIFICALLY HELD THAT THE WHERE MAIN OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST WAS TO PROTECT INVE STOR BY WAY OF CREA TING A FUND AND FUND CREATED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE FUND HAVING BEEN SET UP TO ADVANCE AN OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A A OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES , THE SAID GROUND IS NOT LIABLE TO BE CONSI DERED AS BUSINESS ACTIVITY WHICH NOWHERE FALL WITHIN THE PERVIEW OF THE PROVISION U/S 2(15) OF THE ACT. THE SECOND GROUND FOR REJECTION OF THE APPLICATION IS THAT THE ACTIVITY OF THE TRUST IS NOT OPEN FOR GENERAL PUBLIC AT LARGE AND REGISTRATION IS REQUIRE D TO BE GIVEN MERELY BECAUSE OF CREATION OF FUND UNDER THE PROVISION OF EXCHANGE. NOW IT IS TO BE SEEN WHETHER ON THIS GROUND THE APPLICATION FOR THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A A IS LIABLE TO BE DECLINED OR NOT. ON THIS ISSUE THE ITAT, MUMBAI HAS ALSO DECIDED TH E MATTER OF CONTROVERSY IN ITA. NO. 7922/M/2012 MCX STOCK EXCHANGE INVESTOR PROTECTION FUND CURRENCY DERIVATIVES SEGMENT TRUST VS. DIT (EXEMPTION) MUMBAI DATED 22.01.2014 THE RELEVANT FINDING OF THE SAID CASE IS HEREBY REPRODUCED AS UNDER: - 5. HAVING CONS IDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE RELEVANT RECORD WE NOTE THAT THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA HAS BEEN REJECTED BY THE DIT(EXEMPTION) ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: I) THE ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE BEING CARRIED OUT NOT FOR THE O BJECT OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY BUT MEANT FOR BENEFIT FOR SPECIFIC PERSONS INVESTING ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 6 THROUGH SPECIFIC STOCK EXCHANGES. II) THAT THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT QUALIFY AS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION AS IT DOES NOT CATER FOR ANY PUBLIC AT LARGE BUT IT HAS BEEN CREAT ED TO INDEMNITY THE INVESTORS AGAINST THE LOSS CAUSED ON ACCOUNT OF NEGLIGENCE ETC. 6. AT THE OUTSET WE NOTE THAT THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS DEALT WITH BOTH THE OBJECTIONS OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION) IN THE CASE OF INTERCONNECTED STOCK EXCHANGE IN VESTORS PROTECTION FUND VS DIT(EXEMPTION) (SUPRA) AND THE CONCLUSION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH IS AS UNDER: HOWEVER, A COMPREHENSIVE AND HOLISTIC READING OF THE TRUST DEED WOULD ALLAY ALL SUCH MISGIVING/S OR INFERENCE/S, AND, IN OUR CLEAR VIEW THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR TAKING ANY SUCH VIEW. FIRSTLY, AS A CONDITION FOR AN ELIGIBLE CLAIM, THE RELEVANT MEMBER OF THE STOCK EXCHANGE IS TO BE DECLARED AS A DEFAULTER FOLLOWING THE PRESCRIBED PROCEDURE. TWO, THE CORPUS OF THE FUND IS TO BE BUILT THROUGH, INTER ALIA, SHARE OF LISTING FEES, INTEREST ON 1% LISTING DEPOSIT, PAID AND KEPT BY THE ISSUER COMPANIES WITH THE ITA NO.7922/M/2011 MCX STOCK EXCHANGE INVESTORS PROTECTION FUND CURRENCY DERIVATIVES SEGMENT TRUST 4 RESPECTIVE STOCK EXCHANGES. AN INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF A PARTICULAR MEMBER STOCK EXCHANGE IS NOT CALLED UPON TO PAY ANY DIRECT CHARGES TO THE APPLICANT FUND. IN FACT, A PART OF THE AUCTION MONEY OF THE DEFAULTING MONEY IS ALSO, IN TERMS OF THE SEBI CIRCULAR (FITTC/FII/02/2002 DATED 15.05.2002), MADE OVER TO THE CORPUS OF THE FUND. ACCORDINGLY, THE OBJECT OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE AS A SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, ETC. FURTHER, EVEN ASSUMING SO, THE SAME DOES NOT INVOLVE ANY CONSIDERATION INASMUCH AS NO QUID PRO QUO CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE MANDATORY CONTRI BUTIONS TO THE FUND BY THE PARTICIPATING STOCK EXCHANGES. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT FUND IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE FUND, SET UP TO ADVANCE AN OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, AND HAS BEEN WRONGLY DENIED REGISTRATION AS ONE BY THE REVEN UE. WE, ACCORDINGLY, VACATING THE FINDINGS OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER, DIRECT IT TO GRANT REGISTRATION APPLIED FOR. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. 7. AS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE IDENTICAL ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE FUND, SET UP TO ADVANCE AN OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY AND THEREFORE, THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A HAS BEEN WRONGLY DENIED BY THE AUTHORITY. FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINA TE BENCH WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE DIT(EXEMPTION) WITH THE DIRECTION TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SAID FINDING, WE NOTICED THAT THE HONBLE ITAT MUMBAI HAS PASSED THE ORDER ON TH E BASIS OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 7 HONBLE ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF INTER - CONNECTED STOCK EXCHANGE INVESTORS PROTECTION FUND (SUPRA). ACCORDINGLY, ON THIS GROUND ALSO THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A A OF THE ACT IS ALSO NOT L IABLE TO BE DECLINED. NOW COMING TO THE THIRD GROUND FOR DECLINING THE APPLICATION IN WHICH THE AUTHORITY DECLINES THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND OF THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SQUARELY FALL WITHIN THE SECTION 10(23EC) OF THE ACT AND ACCORDI NGLY REQUIRED TO BE REGISTERED. THIS ISSUE HAS ALSO BEEN COVERED AND DECIDED BY THE HONBLE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF NCDEX INVESTOR (CLIENT) PROTECTION FUND TRUST (SUPRA) . THE FINDING OF THE SAID CASE IS HEREBY REPRODUCED BELOW AS UNDER.: - 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL BEFORE US.WE FIND THAT IN THE CASE OF INTERCONNECTED STOCK EXCHANGE INVESTORS PROTECTION FUND(SUPRA) THE TRIBUNAL HAS DELIBERATED UPON THE ISSUES AND HAS DECIDED IT IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER: HOWEVE R, A COMPREHENSIVE AND HOLISTIC READING OF THE TRUST DEED WOULD ALLAY ALL SUCH MISGIVING/S OR INFERENCE/S, AND, IN OUR CLEAR VIEW THERE IS NO SCOPE FOR TAKING ANY SUCH VIEW. FIRSTLY, AS A CONDITION FOR AN ELIGIBLE CLAIM, THE RELEVANT MEMBER OF THE STOCK EX CHANGE IS TO BE DECLARED AS A DEFAULTER FOLLOWING THE PRESCRIBED PROCEDURE. TWO, THE CORPUS OF THE FUND IS TO BE BUILT THROUGH, INTER ALIA, SHARE OF LISTING FEES, INTEREST ON 1% LISTING DEPOSIT, PAID AND KEPT BY THE ISSUER COMPANIES WITH THE RESPECTIVE S TOCK EXCHANGES. AN INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF A PARTICULAR MEMBER STOCK EXCHANGE IS NOT CALLED UPON TO PAY ANY DIRECT CHARGES TO THE APPLICANT FUND. IN FACT, A PART OF THE AUCTION MONEY OF THE DEFAULTING MONEY IS ALSO, IN TERMS OF THE SEBI CIRCULAR (FITTC/FII/02 /2002 DATED 15.05.2002), MADE OVER TO THE CORPUS OF THE FUND. ACCORDINGLY, THE OBJECT OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE AS A SERVICE IN RELATION TO ANY TRADE, ETC. FURTHER, EVEN ASSUMING SO, THE SAME DOES NOT INVOLVE ANY CONSIDERATION INASMUCH AS NO QUID PRO QUO CAN BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE MANDATORY CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE FUND BY THE PARTICIPATING STOCK EXCHANGES. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THEREFORE, THE APPLICANT FUND IS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE FUND, SET UP TO ADVANCE AN OBJECT OF 6552/13NCDEX 3 GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY, AND HAS BEEN WRONGLY DENIED REGISTRATION AS ONE BY THE REVENUE. ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 8 WE, ACCORDINGLY, VACATING THE FINDINGS OF THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER, DIRECT IT TO GRANT REGISTRATION APPLIED FOR. WE DECIDE ACCORDINGLY. RESPECFULLY, FOLLOWING THE ABOVE DEC ISION, WE DECIDE EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE - TRUST AND DIRECT THE DIT - E TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO IT. 7 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SAID FINDING, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO BE DECLINED ON THE GROUN D OF THE REGISTRATION U/S 10(23EC) OF THE ACT. THE OTHER GROUND S FOR DECLINING THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT ARE IN CONNECTION WITH THE PAYMENT OF MEETING FEES TO THE TRUSTEES WHICH IS NOT LIABLE TO BE CONSIDERED AT THIS STAGE OF THE REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST . I N THIS REGARD, WE ARE ALSO FIND IN SUPPORT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITAT IN THE CASE OF TITLE AS KUL FOUNDATION VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX - 1, PUNE (2015) 54 TAXMANN.COM 143 (PUNE TRIBUNAL) AND IN THE CASE OF ASHOKA EDUCATION FOUNDATION VS. CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1, NASIK (2015) 53 TAXMANN.COM 436 (PUNE TRIBUNAL) . IT IS SPECIFICALLY HELD THAT AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST , THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO BE DECLINED IN VIEW OF THE PROVISION OF SECTION13 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE SAID CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT HAS WRONGLY BEEN REJECTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME - TAX (EXEMPTION). THEREFORE, WE SET AS IDE THE ORDER IN QUESTION AND RESTORED THE AP PLICATION BEFORE THE DCIT EXEMPTION TO CONSIDER THE SAME IN VIEW OF THE OBSERVATION MADE ABOVE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL FILED BY THE APPELLANT IS HEREBY ORDERED TO BE ALLOWED. 8 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HERE BY ORDERED TO BE ALLOWED . ITA. NO.6580 /M/14 A.Y.2014 - 15 9 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.03. 2018 . SD/ - SD/ - ( G.S. PANN U ) ( AMARJIT SINGH ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED : 28.03. 2018 VIJAY / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE A PPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI