M/s Tunbridge English High School Education Society, Bangalore V. DIT, Bangalore

ITA 821/BANG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 63683 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C P RAMASWAMY; H V GOWTHAMA
• Assessee Lawyers: S K AMBHASTHA IITAT
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Benefit of exemption
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

PAGE 1 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE SHRI N BARATHVAJA SANKAR, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.821/BANG/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12) M/S TUNBRIDGE ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION SOCIETY, NO.86/2, INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE. PA NO.AABTT2097B VS THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) DATE OF HEARING : 16.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.08.2012 REVENUE BY : SHRI H V GOWTHAMA, C.A. & SHRI C P RAMASWAM Y, C.A. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S K AMBHASTHA, CIT(DR -I),ITAT ORD ER PER GEORGE GEORGE K : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE DIT (E) - DATED 9.8.2011 IN REJECTING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED SEVEN GROUNDS. HOWEVE R, ALL THE GROUNDS RELATE TO A SOLITARY ISSUE, NAMELY: THAT THE DIT (E) GROSSLY ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE INSTITUTION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT BY IGNORING THE MAIN AND PREDOMINANT OBJECT OF T HE ASSESSEE. PAGE 2 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 2 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE ISSUE ARE AS U NDER: THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS RUNNING AN EDUCATIONAL I NSTITUTION. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED AN APPLICATION BEFORE THE DIT (E ) FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT ON 18.3.2011. ON VERIFICATION OF T HE PARTICULARS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE - TRUST, THE DIT (E) HAD OBSERVED TH AT THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION CONTAINED T HE FOLLOWING OBJECTS WHICH WERE, ACCORDING TO THE DIT (E), CONFINED FOR THE BENEFITS OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY: (A) TO CONDUCT ON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES AND AS AN EXPRES SION OF CHRISTIAN SERVICE BY TUNBRIDGE ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL; (B) TO AMELIORATE THE EDUCATIONAL BACKWARDNESS OF ANGLO INDIANS RETAINING ENGLISH AS THE MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION TO P RESERVE THE EMPLOYMENT OF ENGLISH AS SUCH MEDIUM. 4. AFTER DUE CONSIDERATION OF THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO PLACING RELIANCE IN THE CA SES OF (I) GANJAM NAGAPPA AND SON TRUST V. DIT (E) 269 ITR 59 (KAR); AND (I I) M/S SHUBHRAM TRUST IN ITA NO.380/2009 DATED 30.5.2011 OF THE HONBLE JURI SDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, THE DIT (E) HAD OBSERVED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE PR ESENT CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION WERE FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY WHICH ATTRACTS THE PROVISIONS OF S. 13(1) (B) OF THE ACT. ELABOR ATELY DEALT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF S. 13 (1)(B) OF THE ACT, THE DIT (E) HAD OBSERVED THUS: 5. THE EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 13(1)(B) WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE SINCE T HE ANGLO INDIAN COMMUNITY IS NOT COVERED BY THE SAID EXPLANATION. HENCE, THE BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 11 & 12 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE IN THIS CASE. IN THIS CONNECTION, RELIANCE PAGE 3 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 3 IS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S PALGHAT SHADI MAHAL TRUST (254 ITR 212) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IN CASE OF M USLIM COMMUNITY WHICH WAS DECLARED AS BACKWARD COMMUNITY BY THE KERALA GOVT, THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE AS IT WAS STATE SPECIFIC. 6. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MENTIONED ABOVE AND ALSO AS THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCI ETY ARE FOR A SPECIFIC COMMUNITY BEING VIOLATIVE OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE I T ACT, THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA IS HEREBY REJE CTED. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS COME UP WITH THE PRESENT APPEAL. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED AR ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER: (I) THAT THE ASSESSEE INSTITUTION HAS BEEN IMPARTIN G EDUCATION FROM THE BEGINNING AND ITS ONLY ACTIVITY IN TERMS OF ITS OBJECT 4(C) WHICH READS AS UNDER: (C) TO MAINTAIN A HIGH STANDARD OF DISCIPLINE, EXC ELLENCE AND EFFICIENCY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF TEACHING AND TRAINING IMPARTED AT THE SAID INSTITUTION CALCULATE D AT ATTAINMENT OF HIGH QUALITIES OF A LIBERAL YET PRACTI CAL EDUCATION IN ITS PUPILS AND STUDENTS AND TURNING OU T WELL INTEGRATED AND USEFUL CITIZENS OF OUR COUNTRY AND AW ARE OF THE NEEDS OF OUR RURAL AND URBAN UNDERPRIVILEGED STUDENTS. (II) THAT THE INSTITUTION HAS BEEN OPEN TO ALL STUD ENTS AT FEES FIXED BY THE STATE AUTHORITIES AND IMPARTING QU ALITY AND STANDARD EDUCATION; (III) THAT THE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ONLY EDUCATION AND 100% OF THE INCOME WAS BEING APPLIED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES; AND THAT SINCE IMPARTING EDUC ATION PAGE 4 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 4 IS A CHARITABLE PURPOSE PER SE IN TERMS OF S. 2(15) OF THE ACT, PRIMA FACIE THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRAN TED REGISTRATION IN TERMS OF S. 12AA(1) OF THE ACT; - THAT THE DIT (E) HAD FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT S. 12A WAS ONLY AN ENABLING PROVISION AND CONSEQUENTLY HE HA D TO ONLY SATISFY AS TO WHETHER THERE WERE OBJECTS CHARITA BLE IN NATURE AND THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE WERE G ENUINE; - THAT INDISPUTABLY THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE- INSTITUTION FROM ITS INCEPTION, THERE WERE NO ACTIV ITIES INDULGED IN OTHERWISE THAN FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES; & - THAT ASSUMING THAT IN FUTURE ANY RELIGIOUS ACTIVIT IES MIGHT BE CARRIED ON BY THE ASSESSEE, IT SHALL BE FOR THE AO TO EXAMINE SUCH THINGS AND DENY EXEMPTION FOR THA T PARTICULAR YEAR, BUT, IT CANNOT BE A REASON FOR DENI AL OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA (1). - RELIES ON THE CASE LAWS: (I) DIT (E) V. GARDEN CITY EDUCATIONAL TRUST (2011) 330 ITR 480 (KAR); & (II) SANJEEVAMMA HANUMANTHE GOWDA CHARITABLE TRUST V. DIT (E) (2006 285 ITR 327 (KAR) 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED TH E STAND OF THE DIT (E). THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED D R ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER: (I) THAT THE DIT(E) HAD RELIED ON THE DECISION REPO RTED IN 269 ITR 59 TO SUPPORT THE VIEW THAT REGISTERING AUTHORITY MUST BE SATISFIED BOTH, NAMELY (A) THE CHARITABLE CHARACTER; AND (B) THE GENUINENESS OF IT S ACTIVITIES AS ONE OF IT CANNOT SUBSTITUTE THE OTHER ; (II) THAT THE DIT (E) AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION S HOULD ONLY BE SATISFIED WITH THE GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITY AN D PAGE 5 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 5 NEED NOT RESORT TO S. 13 WHICH IS THE DOMAIN OF THE AO TO BE APPLIED AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT; RELIES ON THE CASE LAW: DIT V. GARDEN CITY EDUCATION AL TRUST (2011) 330 ITR 480 (KAR); (III) REJECTING THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT REGISTRATION/EXEMPTION CANNOT BE DENIED ON THE GROU ND ONLY THAT ONE OF THE MANY CHARITABLE OBJECTS WAS PURS UED BY THE TRUST, IT WAS ARGUED THAT MERELY BECAUSE A CHARITABLE OBJECT HAS BEEN PURSUED, THE EXISTENCE O F NON-CHARITABLE OBJECTS IN THE MEMORANDUM CANNOT BE IGNORED/OVERLOOKED TO GRANT REGISTRATION AS CHARITA BLE TRUST; - THAT THE DIT (E) WAS BOUND TO EXAMINE THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE AS EMBODIED IN THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AND IN THE PRESENT CASE, THERE WERE NO MAIN AND ANCILLARY OBJECTS AND MERELY BECAUSE ONE OR MORE OBJECTS HAVE NOT BEEN PURSUED SO FAR, DOES NOT MEAN THAT REGISTRATION SHOULD BE GRANTED, ASSUMING, SUCH NON- CHARITABLE OBJECTS WOULD NEVER BE PURSUED; RELINES ON THE CASE LAWS: 277 ITR 578 (SC) & 295 IT R 437 (AP); (IV) THAT IT IS AN ESTABLISHED LAW THAT ONCE REGIST RATION U/S 12A/12AA IS GRANTED, IT IS A FAIT ACCOMPLI AND THE AO CANNOT THEREAFTER EXAMINE OR PROBE INTO THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST; RELIES ON THE CASE LAWS: (A) 300 ITR 214 (SC) (B) 335 ITR 575 (GUJ) - THAT IF REGISTRATION IS GRANTED WITH A NON-CHARIT ABLE OBJECT BY THE DIT (E), ASSUMING THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D PAGE 6 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 6 NOT PURSUED SUCH OBJECTS, THE AO CANNOT QUESTION TH E APPLICATION OF INCOME TO SUCH OBJECTS DURING ASSES SMENT; - THAT GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO A TRUST OR SOCIETY W AS TO A CHARITABLE SOCIETY, DEPENDING BOTH ON THE STATED OBJ ECTS AND GENUINE ACTIVITIES AND NOT AN EDUCATIONAL SOCI ETY OR MEDICAL SOCIETY TO PURSUE ONLY SPECIFIC OBJECTS TO TH E EXCLUSION OF OTHER OBJECTS WHICH ARE NOT CHARITABLE ; (V) REJECTING THE ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT THE ANGLO I NDIAN IS A MINORITY COMMUNITY UNDER THE CONSTITUTION AND, THU S, THE OBJECTS TO BENEFIT SUCH COMMUNITY CANNOT BE FAUL TED WITH TO DENY REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT, IT W AS CONTENDED THAT ANGLO INDIAN COMMUNITY IS NOT A RELIG IOUS GROUP OR A LINGUISTIC MINORITY ENJOYING PRIVILEGE OF PROTECTION UNDER ARTICLE 30(1) OF THE CONSTITUTION AND THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AS AN UND ER- PRIVILEGED CLASS ANYWHERE IN INDIA AND AS ENLISTED IN EXPLANATION TO S 13(2) (B) OF THE ACT. 6.1 IN CONCLUSION, IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE VERY FIR ST OBJECT OF THE SOCIETY TO CONDUCT CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES WAS NEBULOUS AND RAISED DOUBTS ABOUT THE SECULAR CHARITABLE OBJECTS. THUS, PURSUIT OF R ELIGIOUS FAITH AND EXPRESSION THROUGH THE SOCIETY IS NOT PROHIBITED IN LAW AND IN SUCH CASE, REGISTRATION COULD ONLY BE GRANTED AS RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE SOCIETY. 7. REFUTING THE REVENUES CONTENTIONS THAT THE SC HOOL IS CONFINED FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY, VIZ., THE ANGLO INDIAN COMMUNITY AND THAT TOO, TO CONDUCT ON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES, T HE LEARNED A R SUBMITTED THAT THE PREMISES ON WHICH THE DIT (E) BASED HIS O RDER OF REJECTION IS ILL- CONCEIVED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: PAGE 7 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 7 (I) THAT THE ASSESSEES INSTITUTION HAS BEEN IMPART ING EDUCATION FOLLOWING ICSC SYLLABUS FROM ITS INCEPTION AND ITS A CTIVITY HAS BEEN IN CONFORMITY WITH ITS OBJECT 4(C) CITED SUPRA ; - THAT THOUGH THE SCHOOL UNAIDED, IT HAS BEEN OPEN TO THE STUDENTS OF ALL COMMUNITIES AT THE FEES FIXED BY THE STATE AUTHORITIES AND IMPARTING QUALITY AND STANDARD EDUCA TION; AND THAT THE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ONLY EDUCA TION AND HUNDRED PER CENT OF THE INCOME IS BEING APPLIED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES; - THAT SINCE IMPARTING EDUCATION IS A CHARITABLE PU RPOSE PER SE IN TERMS OF S. 2 (15) OF THE ACT, PRIMA FACIE THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION IN TERMS OF S. 12AA (1) O F THE ACT; - THAT THE DIT (E) HAD FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT S. 12A WAS ONLY AN ENABLING PROVISION AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE DIT (E) HAD ONLY TO SATISFY HIMSELF AS TO WHETHER THERE WERE OBJECTS CHA RITABLE AND THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE WERE GENUINE; - THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE BEEN ADM ITTEDLY GENUINE FROM THE INCEPTION OF THE INSTITUTION AND T HE PAST RECORDS REVEAL THAT THERE WERE NO ACTIVITIES INDULG ED IN OTHERWISE THAN FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND SURPRISIN GLY, THE DIT (E) HAD NOT CITED ANY SUCH INSTANCE TO SUPPORT HIS V IEW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS CARRYING ON ANY RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES; - THAT THE RATIOS LAID BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASES OF (I) DIT (E) V. GARDEN CITY EDUCATIONAL TRUST; AND (II) SANJEEVAMMA HANUMANTHEGOWDA CHARITABLE TRUST V . DIT (E) (2006) 285 ITR 327 (KAR) ARE FULLY COVERED IN THE ASSESSEES CASE; (II) WITH REGARD TO THE D RS CONTENTIONS THAT - (A) THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE INCLUDE OTHER OBJECTS, ONCE REGISTRATION IS GRANTED, THE ASSESSEE CAN CLAI M THAT SUCH REGISTRATION ENABLES THE ASSESSEE TO APPL Y PAGE 8 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 8 ITS INCOME TO ANY OBJECT INCLUDING NON-CHARITABLE OBJECT AND, CONSEQUENTLY, THE APPLICATION U/S 12AA O F THE ACT WAS RIGHTLY REJECTED; (B) THE DIT (E) HAD RELIED ON THE PROVISIONS OF S. 13(1 )(B) OF THE ACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS FOR A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY, VIZ., THE ANGLO INDIANS AND ALSO SPREADIN G CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES; & (C) ONCE SUCH OBJECTS ARE APPROVED, THEN THE ASSESSEE WOULD CLAIM THAT SUCH APPROVAL FOR APPLYING ITS INCO ME ON OTHER PURPOSES ALSO. 7.1 IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED A R THAT: - THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN ENJOYING TAX EXEMPTION IN TE RMS OF S. 10(22) FROM THE YEAR 1966 UP-TO THE AY 1998-99 AND S INCE THE ASSESSEES GROSS RECEIPTS CROSSED THE MONETARY LIMIT OF RS.1 CRORE, REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT HAS BEEN APP LIED FOR; - THAT FOR THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THREE FYS, THE AMOUNT OF FEES AND OTHER CONCESSIONS EXTENDED TO ANGLO INDIAN STUDENTS CONSTITUTED HARDLY 2.07 TO 2.34% AND SIMILAR CONCES SION WAS EXTENDED TO MANY NON-ANGLO INDIAN STUDENTS ALSO. FU RTHER, DIFFERENTLY ABLED STUDENTS BELONGING TO OTHER RELIGI OUS COMMUNITIES WERE ALSO GIVEN FEE CONCESSIONS; RELIES ON CASE LAWS: AGGARWAL MITRA MANDAL TRUST V. DIT (E) (2007) 293 I TR (AT) 259 (DEL); THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES V. ADDL CIT (1997) 225 ITR 10 10 (SC) 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED T HE RELEVANT MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORDS AND ALSO THE CASE LA WS ON WHICH THE RIVAL PARTIES HAVE PLACED THEIR STRONG RELIANCE. THE ASS ESSEE HAS BEEN RUNNING AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION AND APPLIED FOR REGISTRATIO N U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. ON VERIFICATION OF DETAILS, THE DIT (E) HAD OBSERVED T HAT THE MEMORANDUM OF PAGE 9 OF 12 ITA NO.821/ BANG/2011 9 ASSOCIATION AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION CONTAINED T HE FOLLOWING OBJECTS WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE DIT (E) CONFINED FOR THE BE NEFIT OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY: (A) TO CONDUCT ON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES AND AS AN EXPRES SION OF CHRISTIAN SERVICE BY TUNBRIDGE ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL. (B) TO AMELIORATE THE EDUCATIONAL BACKWARDNESS OF ANGLO INDIANS RELATING ENGLISH AS THE MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION TO PR ESERVE THE EMPLOYMENT OF ENGLISH AS SUCH MEDIUM. 8.1 AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE ASSESSEES CONTENT IONS AND BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE RULINGS OF THE HONBLE JURI SDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASES OF (I) GANJAM NAGAPPA & SON TRUST V. DIT (E); AND (II) SHUBHARAM TRUST REFERRED SUPRA AND ALSO DWELT WITH THE EXPLAN ATION 2 TO S. 13 (1)(B) OF THE ACT, THE DIT (E) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE OBJEC TS OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST WERE FOR A SPECIFIC COMMUNITY, WHICH IS BEING VIOLATIVE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID SECTION, THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT HAS BEEN REJECTED. HOWEVER, ON A CLOSE VE RIFICATION OF THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE FOLLOWING FACTS ARE E MERGED: 8.2 FOR APPRECIATION OF FACTS, THE PARTICULARS AR E REDUCED IN A TABULAR AS UNDER: YEAR TOTAL NO. OF STUDENTS ANGLO INDIAN STUDENTS TUITION AND LAB FEES FEES & OTHER CONCESSIONS % OF CONCESSION TO A I STUDENTS A I STUDENTS NON- A I STUDENTS 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 959 967 958 21 19 19 RS.70.57 LAKHS RS.75.58 LAKHS RS.78.70 LAKHS 21 STUDENTS 1.6 LAKHS 19 STUDENTS 1.6 LAKHS 19 STUDENTS 1.89 LAKHS 22 STUDENTS RS.0.64 LAKH 14 STUDENTS 0.45 LAKH 17 STUDENTS 1.17 LAKHS 2.22% 2.07% 2.34% PAGE 10 OF 12 ITA NO.821 /BANG/2011 10 8.3 MOREOVER, THE FEE CONCESSIONS EXTENDED TO THE NON-ANGLO INDIAN AND NON-CHRISTIAN STUDENTS COMPRISED WERE OF HINDUS AND MUSLIM STUDENTS FOR THE ACADEMIC YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 AND 2009-10. FURTHER, IN THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2009-2010, FIFTEEN STUDENTS OF DIS ABLED CATEGORY IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR CASTE, CREED AND RELIGION HAV E BEEN EXTENDED FEE CONCESSIONS. NONE OF THE STUDENTS WERE BELONGED TO ANGLO INDIAN COMMUNITY. MOREOVER, THE BENEFIT DERIVED BY THE ANGLO INDIAN COMMUNITY DID NOT EXCEED EVEN 5% OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE INC URRED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST. THE ABOVE STATISTICS FURNISHED BY THE ASSES SEE HAS NOT BEEN DISPELLED/CONTROVERTED BY THE REVENUE. THE ABOVE ST ATISTICS UNAMBIGUOUSLY TESTIFY THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUSTS OBJECTS WERE NOT F OR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY AS ALLEGED BY THE DIT (E) AND AS A RESULT OF WHICH, HE HAD INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF S.13 (1)(B) OF THE AC T. ANOTHER SALIENT FEATURE WHICH WE HAVE NOTICED WHILE ANALYZING THE LIST CONTA INING THE FEE CONCESSIONS EXTENDED TO THE DISABLED STUDENTS IS THAT THEY WERE BELONGED TO EITHER HINDU OR MUSLIM COMMUNITY BUT, NONE WERE FROM THE CH RISTIAN OR ANGLO INDIAN COMMUNITY. THIS CLEARLY EXHIBITS THE SECULAR CHARACTER OF THE ASSESSEE - TRUST THAT THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION H AS BEEN SERVING THE MASSES IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR CASTE, CREED AND RELIGION. T HOUGH AT THE TIME OF INCEPTION OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST, THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION HAD BEEN CARVED OUT THE OBJECTS OF ASSOCIATION, ACCORDING TO WHICH, THE TWIN OBJECTS WERE THAT OF (C) TO CONDUCT ON CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLES AND AS AN EXPRES SION OF CHRISTIAN SERVICE BY TUNBRIDGE ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL. (D) TO AMELIORATE THE EDUCATIONAL BACKWARDNESS OF ANGLO INDIANS RELATING ENGLISH AS THE MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION TO PR ESERVE THE EMPLOYMENT OF ENGLISH A SUCH MEDIUM. PAGE 11 OF 12 ITA NO.821 /BANG/2011 11 8.4 HOWEVER, BY ITS AMENDMENT DATED 5.3.2011, THE BYE LAWS HAVE SINCE BEEN AMENDED TO CATER THE NEEDS OF ANGLO INDI ANS AND CHRISTIAN AS SECTIONS OF THE PUBLIC AND ALSO FOR ALL OTHERS WITH OUT DISTINCTION IRRESPECTIVE OF CASTE, CREED, COMMUNITY, PHYSICAL OR ECONOMIC HAND ICAPS ETC., THIS CLEARLY BRINGS OUT THE SECULAR CHARACTER BEING ADOPTED BY TH E ASSESSEE TRUST. AT THIS POINT OF TIME, WE WOULD LIKE TO RECALL THE FIN DINGS OF THE HONBLE ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF AGGARWAL MITRA MAQNDAL TRUST V. DIT (E) REPORTED IN (2007) 293 ITR (AT) 259 (DEL) WHEREIN I T HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT AN OBJECT BENEFICIAL TO THE SECTION OF THE PUBLIC IS AN OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY AND TO SERVE A CHARITABLE PUR POSE, IT IS SUFFICIENT IF THE INTENTION IS TO BENEFIT A SECTION OF PUBLIC AS DIST INGUISHED FROM A SPECIFIED INDIVIDUAL . THUS, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1) ARE NOT DIREC TLY RELEVANT IN THIS REGARD, 8.5 THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DIT V. GARDEN CITY EDUCATIONAL TRUST REPORTED IN (2011) 330 ITR 480 (KAR) HAS RULED THAT IMPARTING OF EDUCATION BEING THE MAIN OBJECT OF TH E ASSESSEE TRUST, IT HAS TO BE ACCEPTED THAT ASSESSEE EXISTS F OR A CHARITABLE PURPOSE AND, THEREFORE, IT IS ENTITLED TO REGISTRATION U/S 12A; MANNER OF APPLICATION OF FUNDS AND ALLOW-ABILITY OF BENEFIT OF EXEMPTION U NDER SS. 11 AND 12 ARE MATTER WHICH ARE TO BE EXAMINED BY THE AO AT THE TIM E OF ASSESSMENT AND NOT BY THE CIT. 8.6 TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE MATTER AS DELIBERATED UPON IN THE FORE-GOING PARAGR APHS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE DIT (E) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN FORMING AN OPINION THAT PAGE 12 OF 12 ITA NO.821 /BANG/2011 12 THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE FOR A SPECIFIC COMM UNITY BEING VIOLATIVE OF THE PROVISIONS OF S. 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. AS A MAT TER OF FACT, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SERVING THE PUBLIC IRRESPECTIVE OF CASTE, CREED AND RELIGION BY IMPARTING EDUCATION AND, THUS, IT IS ENTITLED TO RE GISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT. IT IS ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. 8.7 BEFORE PARTING WITH, WE WOULD LIKE TO REITERA TE THAT WE HAVE DULY PERUSED THE CASE LAWS ON WHICH THE REVENUE HAD PLACED STRONG RELIANCE AND OF THE FIRM VIEW THAT THEY ARE NOT DIRECTLY APPLI CABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWE D. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 31 ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2012 AT BANGALORE. SD/- SD/- (N BARATHVAJA SANKAR) (GEORGE GEORGE K) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER COPY TO : 1. THE REVENUE 2. THE ASSESSEE 3. THE C IT CONCERNED. 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED. 5. DR 6. GF MSP/ BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, ITAT, BA NGALORE.