Sree Pinnamaneni Sree Ramadasu Charitable Trust, Secunderabad V. DIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad

ITA 710/HYD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4828 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-11-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 10-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P SOMASEKHAR REDDY
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 12

Judgement Text

1 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, A.M. AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M. ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMDASU CHARITABLE TRUST, NIZAMABAD. PAN AADAS0892A VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR APPELLANT : SHRI K.C. DEVDAS FOR RESPONDENT : SHRI P.SOMASEKHAR REDDY DATE OF HEARING : 26.11.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.11.2013 ORDER PER SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, J.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE-TRUST AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD DATED 20.07.2010. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS EARLIER FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO.1 0A ON 29-01-2010, SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' IN SHORT). HOWEVER, AFTER STATING THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS MIXED OBJ ECTS I.E., BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS OBJECTS AND REF ERRING TO THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MP SHANTI VERMA JAIN 231 ITR 787 AND THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT 2 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD IN THE CASE OF GHULAM MOHIDIN TRUST 248 ITR 587, TH E DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD, VID E HIS ORDER IN F.NO.DIT(E)/HYD/12A/70(01)/09-10 DATED 20-7-2010, REJECTED THE SAID APPLICATION OF T HE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER OF THE DIT(E), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT), HYDERABAD. ON SUCH APPEAL, THE HON'BLE ITAT VIDE THEIR ORDER IN ITA NO.1248/HYD/2010 DATED 11-3-2011 HAVE SET-ASIDE THE SAID MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE D IT(E) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF THE SAID MATTER. THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE HON'BLE ITAT, IN THIS REGA RD, IN PARA 2 OF THEIR SAID ORDER ARE REPRODUCED AS UND ER: '2. AT THE OUTSET, IT APPEARS THAT THE LEARNED DIT(EXEMPTIONS) PASSED HIS ORDER REFUSING REGISTRATION TO THE TRUST UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT WITHOUT GIVING MANDATORY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE AS REQUIRED UNDER THE PROVISO TO SECTION 12AA(1)(B) OF THE ACT. HENCE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE OF REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT TO THE FILE OF THE DIT(E) FOR FRESH CONSIDERATI ON IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE ALSO DIRECT THE TRUST TO COOPERATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT FOR EXPEDITIOUS DISPOSAL OF THE APPLICATION.' 4. AFTER RECEIPT OF THE SAID ORDER OF THE HON'BLE ITAT IN MAY, 2011, PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED AFRES H VIDE NOTICE DATED 25-5-2011. ON 07-11-2012, THE LEARNED A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE 3 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD SUPPLEMENTARY TRUST DEED AND GOT IT REGISTERED BEFO RE THE SUB-REGISTRAR, NIZAMABAD BEARING REGISTRATION NO.720/11 DATED 27-8-2011, BY MAKING CERTAIN AMENDMENT TO SOME CLAUSES OF THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEE D DATED 13-9-2007. IT WAS STATED THAT SINCE THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE TRUST BOARD, DUE TO RESIGNATION, REMOVAL AND DEATH OF SOME OF THE ORIGI NAL TRUSTEES AND INDUCTION OF NEW TRUSTEES, THE NEWLY CONSTITUTED TRUST BOARD DEEM IT EXPEDIENT TO AMEND THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED THROUGH THE SUPPLEMENTARY TRUST DEED AND ALSO TO AMEND CERTAIN CLAUSES WITH A VIEW TO AVOID PROCEDURAL AND PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES THAT MA Y ARISE IN THE COURSE OF ADMINISTRATION OF THE TRUST ACTIVITIES. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE EXIST ING CLAUSE AT S.NO.3(II) AT PAGE 6 OF THE ORIGINAL TRUS T DEED WAS AMENDED DELETING THE WORDS 'VEDIC SCHOOL' IN TH E SAID SUPPLEMENTARY DEED. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED T HAT THE OBJECT CLAUSE NO.3(VIII) AT PAGE 6 OF THE ORIGI NAL TRUST DEED, WAS AMENDED BY DELETING THE WORDS 'OR TRAININ G CENTRE(S) IMPARTING KNOWLEDGE OF THE VEDAS, DHARMA, PHILOSOPHY, SANSKRIT, LITERATURE'. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT CERTAIN OTHER AMENDMENTS WERE MADE I N CLAUSE NO.3(XIII), CLAUSE NO.5(III), CLAUSE NO.7 AN D CLAUSE NO. 8 OF THE SAID ORIGINAL TRUST DEED. IT WAS SUBMI TTED THAT FOLLOWING SUCH AMENDMENT MADE IN THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED, THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGI STRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED A.R, FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, EVEN IF THEIR TRUST IS CONSIDERED AS A CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS TRUST (WIT H 4 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD MIXED OBJECTS), THE SAME IS ALSO ELIGIBLE FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT. HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE A.P HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF C IT VS. SOCIAL SERVICE CENTRE 250 ITR 39. 5. THE DIT(E) HAS CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AR AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE DIT(E) GONE THROUGH THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED WHI CH WAS EXECUTED ON 3-9-2007 AND THE SUPPLEMENTARY TRUS T DEED WHICH WAS MADE LATER ON 27-8-2011, MODIFYING VARIOUS OBJECT CLAUSES ETC. HOWEVER, THE DIT(E) UNA BLE TO AGREE WITH SUCH CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED A.R TH AT NOW THE TRUST IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA , AFTER SUCH SUPPLEMENTARY TRUST-DEED MADE ON 27-8-2011. ON CAREFULLY GOING THROUGH THE SAID ORIGINAL TRUST-DEE D, IT IS SEEN THAT THERE IS NO STIPULATION / PROVISION FOR M AKING ANY AMENDMENT TO THE OBJECTS OF THE SAID TRUST. UND ER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, SUCH SUPPLEMENTARY DEED MADE BY THE TRUSTEES, INCLUDING NEWLY INDUCTED TRUSTEES, SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO MODIFICATION / RECTIFICATION MADE TO THE OBJECT CLAUSES AT S.NO.3(II) AND 3(VII) ETC., I S NOT VALID. IT MAY BE STATED THAT, IT IS SETTLED PRINCIP LE OF TRUST LAW THAT ONCE A TRUST IS CREATED AND CERTAIN OBJECTS STIPULATED THEREIN, EVEN THE SETTLER HAS NO POWER T O DELETE ANY OF THE OBJECTS. IN THIS REGARD, THE DIT( E) RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SAKTHI CHARITIES VS. CIT (1984), 149 IT R 624, WHEREIN, A DEED OF RECTIFICATION DELETING CERTAIN O RIGINAL OBJECTS OF A TRUST-DEED WAS HELD TO BE NOT VALID AN D ALSO IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. KAMALA TOWN TRUST (1996), 21 7 5 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD ITR 699, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT ANY CHANGE I N TRUST DEED IS NOT POSSIBLE UNLESS THE DEED ITSELF PROVIDES FOR SUCH CHANGE. THEREFORE, THE DIT(E) WAS OF THE V IEW THAT THE SAID SUPPLEMENTARY DEED MADE BY THE PRESEN T TRUSTEES ON 27-8-2011 IS NOT LEGALLY VALID. THE DIT (E) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT, AS PER THE DECISION OF HON'B LE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF KAMALA TOWN TRUST (SUPRA), ANY RECTIFICATION/AMENDMENT, REQUIRED TO B E MADE IN A TRUST-DEED, WHICH IS AN INSTRUMENT, NEED TO BE MADE BY APPROACHING THE CIVIL COURT HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE MATTER. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DIT(E) HELD THAT THE SAID SUPPLEMENTARY DEED MADE BY THE ASSESSEE-TRUST, UNILATERALLY AMENDING SUCH OBJECT CLAUSES, IS, THUS , NOT LEGALLY VALID. HENCE, THOSE OBJECT CLAUSES AT S.NO. 3(II) AND 3(VII) AS PER THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED, REFERRED TO IN THE EARLIER ORDER OF THE DIT(E), ARE STILL IN FORCE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE-TRUST AND UNDER THAT CIRCUMSTA NCE, AS THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS HAVING MIXED OBJECTS IE., BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIOUS OBJECTS AND IT WAS FORMED ON 3/9/2007 I.E., AFTER 01-04-1962, IT DOES NOT QUALIF Y EITHER AS A PUBLIC RELIGIOUS TRUST OR AS A PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST AND UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCE AND HAVING REGARD TO THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.12A.A. R.W.S . SEC.11 OF THE ACT AND FURTHER KEEPING IN VIEW THE R ATIO OF DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN STATE OF KERAL A V. M.P.SHANTI VARMA JALN (1998) 231 ITR 787 (SC) AND CIT V. PALGHAT SHADI MAHAL TRUST (2002) 254 ITR 212 (SC) AND CIT V. UPPER GANGES SUGAR MILLS LTD. (1997 ) 6 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD 227 ITR 578 AND OF THE HON'BLE JAMMU & KASHMIR HIGH COURT IN GHULAM MOHIDDIN TRUST VS. CIT [2001] 248 ITR 587, THE ABOVE TRUST CANNOT BE ALLOWED REGISTRA TION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT. 6. THE DIT(E) FURTHER OBSERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, EVEN IF IT IS CONTENDED, TH OUGH NOT ACCEPTED THAT THE SAID SUPPLEMENTARY TRUST-DEED MADE ON 27-8-2011 IS VALID, STILL THEN, THE ASSESSE E TRUST CANNOT BE GRANTED REGISTRATION ON THE BASIS O F THE SAID APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10A, FILED EARLIER ON 29/1/2010. SUCH SUPPLEMENTARY DEED HAS BEEN MADE MUCH LATER, AFTER FILING OF THAT APPLICATION IN FOR M NO.10A ON 29-1-2010. THUS, DURING THE RELEVANT PERI OD, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SUCH APPLICATION FILED ON 29/01/2010, IT MAY BE NOTICED THAT THE SAID ORIGINA L TRUST-DEED CONTAINING SUCH OBJECT CLAUSES WHICH ARE OF RELIGIOUS NATURE AND OTHER CHARITABLE CLAUSES, WAS VERY MUCH IN FORCE. UNDER THAT CIRCUMSTANCE AND WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING MIXED OBJECTS, IT CANNOT BE GRANTED REGISTRATION UJS.12AA ON THE BASIS OF THE S AID APPLICATION FILED IN FORM NO.10A. ACCORDINGLY, THE DIT(E) REFUSED FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO ASSESSE E TRUST UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT. 7. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E) THE ASSESS EE TRUST IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI K.C. DEVDAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ITAT HAD PASSED ITS ORDER IN ITA.1248/H/20 10 DATED 11.3.2012 AND SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FIL E OF 7 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD DIT(E) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. SINCE, IN THE EARLIE R ROUND THE DIT(E) HAD REJECTED 12AA REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE-TRUST ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUS T HAD MIXED OBJECTS I.E., BOTH CHARITABLE AND RELIGIO US OBJECTS, THE EXISTING CLAUSES AT SERIAL NO. 3(2) AT PAGE 6 OF THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED AND 3(7) AT PAGE 8 OF TH E ORIGINAL TRUST DEED WAS DELETED AND THE TRUST DEED WAS AMENDED BY WAY OF SUPPLEMENTARY DEED. THE DIT(E) AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SUPPLEMENTARY DEED MADE BY THE TRUSTEE HELD THAT RECTIFICATION MADE TO THE OBJ ECT CLAUSE-1 AT SERIAL NO.3(2) AND 3(7) ETC., IS NOT VA LID. THE DIT(E) HELD THAT AS PER THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF KAMALA TOWN TRUST 217 ITR 699, ONLY A CIVIL COURT HAS JURISDICTION TO AME ND THE TRUST DEED AND HENCE, THE SUPPLEMENTARY DEED MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST UNILATERALLY AMENDING SU CH OBJECT CLAUSES IS NOT LEGALLY VALID. FURTHER, HE HE LD THAT EVEN OTHERWISE, SINCE THE TRUST HAS BOTH RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE OBJECTS, REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA CANNOT BE GRANTED. 9. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER ARGUED THAT THE SINCE THE AMENDMENT IS LEGALLY INVA LID, THE SUPPLEMENTARY TRUST DEED IS CONSEQUENTLY INVALI D. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PLEADED THAT T HE RECTIFIED TRUST DEED MAY BE IGNORED AND THE ORIGINA L TRUST DEED ITSELF CAN BE CONSIDERED FOR REGISTRATIO N UNDER SECTION 12AA FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN THE CA SE OF KASYAPA VEDA RESEARCH FOUNDATION VS. CIT (2011) 11 ITR (TRIB.) 468, IN WHICH DECISION THE TRIBUNAL FOU ND 8 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND HELD TH AT 12AA REGISTRATION IS TO BE GRANTED FOR A TRUST HAVING ITS OBJECT FOR RUNNING A VEDIC SCHOOL. 11. THE LEARNED COUNSEL ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE TRUST HAVING MIXED OBJECTS SHALL ALSO BE ENTITLED F OR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT AND HE R ELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNA L IN THE CASE OF REHOBOTH MISSION VS. DIT(E) (2010) 42 SOT 1 49 (HYD.) WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HELD AS UNDER : '6. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE LANGUA GE OF THIS PROVISION TO SUGGEST THAT AN INSTITUTION OF MIXED OBJECTS IS PRECLUDED FROM GETTING REGISTRATIO N U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE OBJEC TS OF THE TRUST IN QUESTION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON NO NON-CHARITABLE OR NON-RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES. WE PLACE RELIANCE ON THE JUDGEMENT OF ACIT V. BARKATE SAIFIYAH SOCIETY 213 ITR 492 (GUJ) AND CIT V. CHANDRA CHARITABLE TRUST 294 ITR 86 ( GUJ), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT A TRUST CAN EITHER B E FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES OR FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES O R IT CAN BE FOR BOTH. ONLY A TRUST WHICH IS FOR RELIG IOUS PURPOSE IS EXCLUDED AND DEBARRED FROM REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. A TRUST WHOSE OBJECT IS CHARITABLE AS WELL AS RELIGIOUS IS NOT DEBARRED FRO M REGISTRATION. FURTHER, IN THE CASE OF NEW LIFE IN CHRIST EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION V. CIT & OTHERS 246 ITR 532 (MAD), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT FOR GRANTING OR REFUSING REGISTRATION U/S 12A IN RELATI ON TO SUCH TRUST, THE ONLY CONDITION PRECEDENT IS THAT 9 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION SHOULD BE MADE IN TIME AND THE ACCOUNTS OF THE INSTITUTE SHOULD BE AUDITED. NO ENQUIRY ABOUT OBJECTS OF THE TRUST CAN BE MADE U/S 12A OF THE ACT. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE JUDGEMENTS CITED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE CASE CONSIDERED BY THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT SQUARELY APPLY TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE ON HAND. THE DEPARTMENT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY CONTRARY DECISION TO OUR NOTICE. IN OUR OPINION, IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE DIT(E) SHOULD NOT HAVE REJECTED THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON THIS REASON. COMMENTING ON THE HONOURABLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION, THE DIT(E) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS INTRODUCED A NEW CONCEPT KNOWN AS 'CHARITABLE RELIGIOUS TRUST.' ACCORDING TO HIM, TRUST HAS TO BE EITHER WHOLLY RELIGIOUS OR WHOLLY CHARITABLE. OTHERWISE, IT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION AND THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT DID NOT CONSIDER THE WORD 'OR' WHICH HAS BEEN EMPLOYED U/S 11(1)(A) AND SEC. 12 OF THE ACT AND THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAS INTERPRETED SEC. 13(1)(B ) OF THE ACT. WE ARE UNABLE TO AGREE WITH THE DIT(E) AS TO HOW AND WHY THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS O F THE PRESENT CASE. THERE IS NO SUCH BAR SINCE THERE IS NO JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT'S JUDGEMENT ON THIS ISSUE, TO THE CONTRARY AND THIS OBSERVATION OF THE DIT(E) IS UNWARRANTED. CONSEQUENTLY, WE DIRECT THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y SUBJECT TO FULFILMENT OF OTHER CONDITIONS, IF ANY.' 12. THE LEARNED D.R. RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE DIT(E). 10 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD 13. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. WE FIND THAT THE GIST OF THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION IS THAT THE V EDAS, FOR THE PROPAGATION OF WHICH IT IS FOUNDED, DECLARE THAT GOD IS OMNIPRESENT AND PERVADES ALL MATTER. THE VED AS REPRESENT THE IDEALS OF HUMAN LIFE, CALLED THE LAW OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, FOR WHICH THERE IS NO VALID MEANS OF PROOF. THE VEDIC MANTRAS ARE TAUGHT TO THE PUBLIC A T LARGE I.E., WITHOUT ANY DISTINCTION, AND WHICH HELP MEN AND WOMEN TO LEAD A HEALTHY, PEACEFUL, HAPPY AND PROSPEROUS LIFE. SOME SLOKAS FROM THE VEDIC TEXTS H AVE BEEN REPRODUCED IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TO DELINEATE THE MEANING OF THE VEDAS, AND THE PURPOSE OF VEDIC EDUCATION, INCLUDING THE YOGA AND THE VEDANTA , SUMMARISES IN THE VEDAS. THE VEDAS HAVE INSPIRED MEN OF ALL AGES, HAILING THEIR SUBLIMITY. THEY ARE NOT MEANT EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE HINDUS OR HINDU COMMUNITY , AS STATED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BUT FOR THE ENTIRE MANKIND. 14. BESIDES, IT IS ALSO ENGAGED IN CHARITABLE WORK FOR COMMON PUBLIC, SO THAT THE SAME COULD NOT BE IGNORED. WE ALSO OBSERVE THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEES-TRUST ARE NOT CONFINED TO THOSE ACTIVITI ES TOWARDS VEDIC RESEARCH TRAINING AND TRAINING CENTRE S IMPARTING KNOWLEDGE OF VEDIC DHARMA, PHILOSOPHY AND SANSKRIT LITERATURE BUT IS ALSO UNDERTAKING PURELY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. HENCE, THE TRUST IS HAVING M IXED OBJECTS. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHOSE OBJECTS ARE PAR TLY RELIGIOUS AND PARTLY CHARITABLE IS ELIGIBLE FOR REG ISTRATION 11 ITA.NO.710/HYD/2013 SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, HYDERABAD UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN T HE CASE OF REHOBOTH MISSION VS. DIT(E) (SUPRA). CONSEQUENTLY, WE DIRECT THE DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTR ATION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY SUBJECT TO FULFILMENT OF OT HER CONDITIONS, IF ANY. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL OF THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED. 15. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26.11.2013 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 26 TH NOVEMBER, 2013 VBP/- COPY TO 1. SREE PINNAMANENI SREE RAMADASU CHARITABLE TRUST, C/O . M/S. SEKHAR & CO. CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 133/4, R.P. ROAD, SECUNDERABAD 500 003. 2. DIT (EXEMPTIONS), 3 RD FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, HYDERABAD. 3. DDIT(E), HYDERABAD 5. DR A BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD.