M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECIALITY HOSPITAL SOCIETY, LUDHIANA V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

ITA 796/ASR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3349 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 08-01-2019
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARVINDER KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: VINAY SHRIVASTAV A RS
• Keywords: Gift; Charitable institution
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

P A G E | 1 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH AT JALANDHAR BEFORE SHRI N.K SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECIALITY HOSPITAL SOCIETY, H.NO. 162, VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE CHAKAR, TEHSIL JAGRAON, DISTRICT LUDHIANA. VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH. PAN AAFAA3658L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR & SHRI. VINAY SHRIVASTAV, A.RS REVENUE BY: SMT. PARVINDER KAUR, C.I.T, D.R DATE OF HEARING: 15.01.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11.03.2019 O R D E R PER RAVISH SOOD, JM THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (EXEMPTIONS), C HANDIGARH [FOR SHORT CIT(E)] UNDER SEC. 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE IN COME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT IT ACT), DATED 30.10.2017. THE ASSESSE E ASSAILING THE ORDER OF THE CIT(E) HAS RAISED BEFORE US THE FOLLOWING GR OUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1 THAT THE ORDER PASSED U/S 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDI GARH IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUST IFIED TO ARBITRARILY REJECT THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961. 2. THAT HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO HOLD THAT THE ACTIV ITIES CLAIMED TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE APPELLANT DO NOT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF SEC. 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. P A G E | 2 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHICH WAS E STABLISHED ON 10.01.2017 HAD FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10A AS ON 17.04.2017 WITH THE CIT(E), CHANDIGARH, SEEKING REGISTRATION U NDER SEC. 12A OF THE IT ACT. THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SO CIETY WERE TO SET UP, RUN AND MAINTAIN DISPENSARIES AND HOSPITAL FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC IRRESPECTIVE OF CASTE OR CREED; TO CONSTRUCT BUILDI NG FOR THAT PURPOSE AND FOR STAFF ON THE LAND IN POSSESSION OR PURCHASE D OR DONATED FROM TRUST COMMITTEES; TO RECEIVE AND ACCEPT ANY GIFTS, SUBSCRIPTION AND DONATION WHETHER IN CASH OR IN KIND OR ACQUIRED BY ANY OTHER LAWFUL WAYS AND MEANS AND SPEND THE SAME IN FULFILMENT OF ALL OR ANY OF THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY; TO APPLY THE INCOM E FOR THE FULFILMENT OF OBJECT AND NOT TO PAY ANY PORTION THEREOF BY WAY OF PROFIT OR DIVIDEND OR BONUS; AND TO DO ALL SUCH LAWFUL ACTS, NEEDS AND THINGS INCIDENTAL TO THE ATTAINMENT OF ITS OBJECTS. 3. THE CIT(E) IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE ACTIVITIES AND THEREIN CONFIRM AS TO WHETHER THE SAME WERE IN ACCORD WITH ITS STATED OBJECTS, DIRECTED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH CERTAIN DETAILS/CLARIFICATI ONS. ON THE BASIS OF REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER PERUSING THE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, THE CIT(E) CALLED UPON THE ASS ESSEE TO PROVIDE THE RATIONALE AS TO WHY THE REGISTRATION SHOULD BE GRAN TED IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY APPARENT CHARITABLE ACTIVITY BEING PURSUED A LONG WITH EVIDENCE THEREOF. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE CIT(E) THAT ADMITTEDLY NO ACTIVITY HAD YET BEEN CARRIED OUT TOWARDS THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SO CIETY. APART THEREFROM, IT WAS NOTICED BY HIM THAT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ALSO DID NOT REVEAL ANY EXPEND ITURE IN THE NATURE OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE. RATHER, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE CIT(E) THAT THE ONLY EXPENDITURE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS TOWARDS PAYMENTS TO ARCHITECTS WORKING GROUP. IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED BY H IM THAT THE CLAIM P A G E | 3 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) OF THE ASSESSEE THAT A DOCTOR HAD BEEN EMPLOYED FOR FREE MEDICAL ADVICE WAS ALSO NOT DISCERNIBLE FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, AS NO EXPENDITURE IN CONTEXT THERETO WAS FOUND TO HAVE BE EN INCURRED. ON THE BASIS OF HIS AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS THE CIT(E) OBSERVED THAT AS THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD NOT CARRIED OUT ANY ACTIVITIES AND HAD ONLY RAISED CLAIMS OF FORMULATING A PLAN TO RUN DISPENSARIES AN D HOSPITALS, HENCE THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES REMAINED UNVERIFI ABLE. FURTHER, IT WAS OBSERVED BY HIM THAT THERE WAS ALSO NO EVIDENCE WHA TSOEVER OF THE PREPARATORY STEPS THAT WOULD SUPPORT THE CLAIM OF T HE ASSESSEE SOCIETY OF OPENING A MULTI-SPECIALITY HOSPITAL. APART THERE FROM, THE CIT(E) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE OF THE NECESSAR Y PERMISSIONS/LICENSES THAT WERE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSE E SOCIETY FOR OPENING A HOSPITAL OF THE CLAIMED SIZE. IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, THE CIT(E) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD NEITH ER CONDUCTED ACTIVITIES AS PER ITS CLAIM NOR ITS FINANCIAL STATE MENTS WERE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CLAIMS SO RAISED BY IT. IN THE BACKDROP OF HIS AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS THE CIT(E) CONCLUDED THAT TH E GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WERE AT THE PRESENT STAGE UNVERIFIABLE AND THUS COULD NOT BE BROUGHT WITHIN T HE REALM OF ACTIVITIES WHICH COULD BE HELD TO BE OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE. IT WAS ALSO OBSERVED BY HIM THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ALSO COUL D NOT EXPLAIN AS TO HOW CREATING A MULTI-SPECIALITY HOSPITAL WOULD QUAL IFY FOR MEDICAL RELIEF AS ENVISAGED IN SEC. 2(15) OF THE IT ACT. I N FACT, THE CIT(E) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ENVISAGED ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSES SEE SOCIETY COULD BE PURELY IN THE NATURE OF A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WITH NO ELEMENT OF MEDICAL RELIEF, WHATSOEVER. ON THE BASIS OF HIS A FORESAID OBSERVATIONS THE CIT(E) DECLINED TO GRANT REGISTRATION UNDER SEC . 12AA TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. P A G E | 4 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS ASSAILED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(E) PASSED UNDER SEC. 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE IT A CT IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT A .R) FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET OF THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL SUB MITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHICH WAS IN OPERATION SINCE 10.01 .2017 HAD FILED AN APPLICATION IN FORM 10A SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12A OF THE IT ACT ON 17.04.2017. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT THE CIT(E) INSTEAD OF CONFINING HIMSELF TO THE EXAMINATION OF THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES AT TH E STAGE OF CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR GRANT O F REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA OF THE IT ACT, HAD HOWEVER TRAVERSED BEYO ND THE SCOPE OF HIS JURISDICTION AND HAD DECLINED THE REGISTRATION FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD NOT CONDUCTED ANY ACTIVITIES. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. A.R THAT AS THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS IN THE NASCENT STAGE, HENCE FOR THE SAID REASON NO ACTIVITIES WERE CARRIE D OUT TOWARDS THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. IT WAS SUBMITTED B Y THE LD. A.R THAT AS THE AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WER E TO SET UP, RUN AND MAINTAIN DISPENSARIES AND HOSPITALS FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC IRRESPECTIVE OF CASTE OR CREED AND TO DO ALL SUCH ACTIVITIES FOR THE FURTHERANCE OF THE SAID OBJECT, HENCE IT WAS ESTABLISHED FOR A CHARITA BLE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING MEDICAL RELIEF. IT WAS AVERRED BY THE LD. A.R THAT THE CIT(E) HAD ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE IN DECLINING THE REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12A OF THE IT ACT TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIET Y. 5. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (FOR SHORT D.R) RELIED ON THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(E). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES FOR BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(E) UND ER SEC. 12AA(1)(B)(II) OF THE IT ACT AND THE MATERIAL AVAIL ABLE ON RECORD. ON A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(E), IT STAND S REVEALED THAT THE P A G E | 5 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WERE TO SE T UP, RUN AND MAINTAIN DISPENSARIES AND HOSPITALS FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC IRRESPECTIVE OF CASTE OR CREED, AND TO DO ALL SUCH ANCILLARY ACT IVITIES IN ORDER TO FACILITATE FURTHERANCE OF THE SAID OBJECT. WE FIND THAT THE CIT(E) HAD DECLINED THE GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY FOR THE REASON THAT NO CHARITABLE ACTIVITY WAS FOUND TO HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT BY IT. RATHER, THE FACT THAT THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ALSO DID NOT REVEAL INCURRING OF ANY SUCH EXPENDITURE BY THE ASSESSEE S OCIETY TOWARDS THE AFORESAID CHARITABLE PURPOSE HAD ALSO WEIGHED IN TH E MIND OF THE CIT(E). INFACT, THE CIT(E) HAD OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS ALSO NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER OF THE PREPARATORY STEPS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN FURTHERANCE OF ITS AFORESAID OBJECT S VIZ. OBTAINING OF NECESSARY PERMISSIONS/LICENSES FOR OPENING THE HOSP ITAL ETC. IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, THE APPLICATION SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12A DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD NEITHER CONDUCTED ACTIVITI ES AS PER ITS AIMS AND OBJECTS NOR ITS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS SUPPORTED THE SAME. APART THEREFROM, THE CIT(E) HAD ALSO EXPRESSED HIS DOUBTS AS TO HOW SETTING UP A MULTI-SPECIALITY HOSPITAL WOULD QUALIFY FOR M EDICAL RELIEF AS ENVISAGED IN SEC. 2(15) OF THE IT ACT, AS HE HELD A CONVICTION THAT THE SAME MAY BE IN THE NATURE OF A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WITH NO ELEMENT OF MEDICAL RELIEF WHATSOEVER. 7. WE HAVE DELIBERATED AT LENGTH ON THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IN THE BACKDROP OF THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(E). WE FIND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 12AA WHICH CONTEMPLATES THE PROC EDURE FOR REGISTRATION, READS AS UNDER : THE [PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OR] COMMISSIONER, ON R ECEIPT OF AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF A SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION MADE UNDER CLAUSE : (A) [OR CLAUSE (AA) OF SUB-SECTION (1)] OF SECTION 12A SHALL:- P A G E | 6 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) (A) CALL FOR SUCH DOCUMENTS OR INFORMATION FROM THE SOC IETY OR INSTITUTION AS HE THINKS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION AND MAY ALSO SUCH INQ UIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM NECESSARY IN THIS BEHALF; AND (B) AFTER SATISFYING HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE S OCIETY OR INSTITUTION AND THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES, HE :- (I) SHALL PASS AN ORDER IN WRITING REGISTERING THE SOCI ETY OR INSTITUTION; (II) SHALL, IF HE IS NOT SO SATISFIED, PASS AN ORDER IN WRITING REFUSING TO REGISTER THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION........ THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS MANDATES EXAMINATION OF TW O BASIC CONDITIONS FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO AN ASSESSEE UNDER SEC. 12AA VIZ. (I) EXAMINATION OF OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTIT UTION; AND (II) SATISFACTION OF THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION ON THE BAS IS OF INQUIRIES. IN SO FAR, THE OBSERVATION OF THE CIT(E) THAT NONE OF THE OBJECTS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED THE TERM MEDICAL RELIEF AS ENVISAGED UN DER SEC. 2(15) OF THE IT ACT IS CONCERNED, WE ARE UNABLE TO PERSUADE OURSELVES TO SUBSCRIBE TO THE SAME. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW THE A IM AND OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY TO SET UP, RUN AND MAINTAIN DI SPENSARIES AND HOSPITALS FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, IRRESPECTIVE OF C ASTE OR CREED, CLEARLY BRINGS THE SAME WITHIN THE REALM OF THE TERM MEDIC AL RELIEF AS ENVISAGED UNDER SEC. 2(15) OF THE IT ACT. AS FAR AS THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(E) THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD NOT CARRIE D OUT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES IN FURTHERANCE OF ITS STATED AIMS AND OB JECTS ARE CONCERNED, THE SAME IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW WAS NOT RELEVANT AT THE STAGE OF CONSIDERING OF THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE SOCI ETY FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA OF THE IT ACT, SPECIFI CALLY WHEN THE LATTER HAVING BEEN ESTABLISHED ON 10.01.2017 WAS IN ITS NA SCENT STAGE. 8. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAD IN ITS REPL Y DATED 16.10.2017 FILED WITH THE CIT(E) ACCEPTED THAT NO A CTIVITY HAD YET BEEN CARRIED OUT TOWARDS ITS AIMS AND OBJECTS. WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED P A G E | 7 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WHICH WAS ESTABLISHE D ON 10.01.2017 WAS IN ITS NASCENT STAGE AND WAS YET TO WORK TOWARD S ITS OBJECTS. WE FIND THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYAN A IN THE CASE OF CIT-II, CHANDIGARH VS. M/S SURYA EDUCATIONAL AND CH ARITABLE TRUST (ITA NO. 710 OF 2010; DATED 05.10.2011) HAS HELD TH AT AN APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE WITHIN ONE YEAR OF THE CREATION OF THE TRUST AND THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT THAT THE T RUST OR INSTITUTION SHOULD HAVE STARTED ALL ITS ENVISAGED ACTIVITIES IN THE FIRST YEAR ITSELF. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT SEC. 12AA OF THE IT ACT R EQUIRED SATISFACTION IN RESPECT OF THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST, WHICH INCLUDES THE ACTIVITIES WHICH THE TRUST IS UNDERTAK ING AT PRESENT AND ALSO WHICH IT MAY CONTEMPLATE TO UNDERTAKE. APART T HEREFROM, IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THAT SUB-SECTION (3) TO SECTION 12AA OF THE IT ACT EMPOWERED THE COMMISSIONER TO CA NCEL THE REGISTRATION IF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST WERE NO T CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS OBJECTS. 9. IN THE BACKDROP OF THE AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF JURISDICTION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIE W THAT THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE CIT(E) THAT THE ENVISAGED ACTIVITIES O F SETTING UP A MULTI- SPECIALITY HOSPITAL BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY MAY TUR N OUT TO BE A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY WITH NO ELEMENT OF MEDICAL REL IEF WHATSOEVER, IS AN ASPECT WHICH HAS TO BE LOOKED INTO BY THE ASSESS ING OFFICER AT THE STAGE WHEN THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME AND ALSO BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR CANCELLING THE REGISTRATION IN EXE RCISE OF HIS POWERS UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) TO SEC. 12AA OF THE IT ACT, I N CASE IF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY ARE AT ANY STAGE FOUND BY HIM AS NOT BEING CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS AIMS AND O BJECTS. BE THAT AS IT MAY, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE CIT(E) AS PER THE MANDATE OF LAW, AT THE STAGE OF CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE P A G E | 8 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) SOCIETY FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA O F THE IT ACT WAS SUPPOSED TO CONFINE HIMSELF TO TWO ASPECTS VIZ. (I) EXAMINATION OF OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION; AND (II) SAT ISFACTION OF THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION ON THE BASIS OF INQUIRIES. A S OBSERVED BY US HEREINABOVE, IT WAS NOT CORRECT ON THE PART OF THE CIT(E) TO HAVE REJECTED THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCI ETY FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA FOR THE REASON THAT TH E ACTIVITIES ENVISAGED IN THE AIMS AND OBJECTS HAD NOT BEEN CARR IED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY, WHICH AS OBSERVED BY US HEREINABO VE WAS IN ITS NASCENT STAGE. WE THUS IN ALL FAIRNESS RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(E), WHO SHALL DISPOSE OFF THE APPLICATION F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE BY CONFINING HIMSELF TO TWO ASPECTS VIZ. (I) EXAMIN ATION OF OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION; AND (II) SATISFACTION ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE SOCIETY OR INSTITUTION ON THE BAS IS OF INQUIRIES AS HE MAY DEEM FIT. 10. THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY F OR GRANT OF REGISTRATION UNDER SEC. 12AA OF THE IT ACT IS RESTO RED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(E) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN TERMS OF OUR AFORE SAID OBSERVATIONS. 11. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.03.2019 SD/- SD/- ( N.K. SAINI) (RAVISH SOOD) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL ME MBER PLACE :CHANDIGARH; DATED 11.03.2019 PS. ROHIT P A G E | 9 ITA NO. 796/ASR/2017 M/S ANAND ISHER AMAR CHARITABLE CANCER & MULTI SPECI ALTY HOSPITAL VS.CIT(EXEMPTIONS) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. / CIT 5. DR, ITAT, CAMP BENCH, JALANDHAR 6. / GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// ! / BY ORDER, ' / # $% (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) & '() /ITAT, CAMP. BENCH, JALANDHAR