MAHARAJA SHRI AGRASEN SHIKSHA TRUST,KOTA V. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

ITA 1395/JPR/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust, which appealed against the decisions of the CIT (Exemption) rejecting its applications for registration under section 12AB and for approval under section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary issues were the Trust's registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, and the interpretation of the Trust's objectives concerning community benefits. The Tribunal found that the CIT (Exemption) had erred in its rejection, particularly noting that registration under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act is not a prerequisite for section 12AB registration, and the Trust's activities were not exclusively for a particular community as initially claimed by the CIT (Exemption).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 28437 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2024-2025
• Other Referred Cases: APJ Abdul Kalam Education and Welfare Trust vs. CIT(E)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: DHARMESH SHAHA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 12; 80G

Judgement Text

" vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Jh xxu xks;y] ys[kk lnL; ,o Jh ujsUnz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2024-25 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust 24-C Shopping Centre, PIP, Kota, S.O, Anandpura @ photo Talab, Kota cuke Vs. CIT (Exemption) LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAITM 3891 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Dharmesh Shaha, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/02/2025 mn?kks\"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 24/02/2025 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: NARINDER KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This common order is to dispose of the above captioned two appeals, as the same arise from common facts and have been argued together. ITA No. 1396/JP/2024 2. By way of this appeal, appellant- trust has challenged order dated 12.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(Exemption), whereby its application u/s 2 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) has been rejected on following two grounds: -Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 -Object for the benefit of particular community ITA No. 1395/JP/2024 3. By way of this appeal, the applicant trust has challenged order dated 12.06.2024, passed by Ld. CIT(E), whereby its application u/s 80G of the Act has been rejected for want of registration u/s 12AB of the Act. Applications seeking condonation of delay in filing of the two appeals 4. It may be mentioned here that both the appeals challenging orders dated 12.06.2024, came to be presented on 25.11.2024. The appeals being barred by limitation, the Registry raised objections. Thereupon, only copies of two separate applications came to be submitted on behalf of the appellant seeking condonation of delay. 5. Today for the first time, in the course of arguments, counsel for the applicant has submitted original application seeking condonation of delay. The application is supported by two affidavits. 3 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) One affidavit is that of Sh. Devendra Kumar, one of the trustees of the applicant trust. The other affidavit is that of Sh. Rajendra Prasad Lodha, Chartered Accountant of the applicant trust. 6. Ld. AR for the appellant has contended that the applicant trust was not having any certificate of its registration under RPT Act, and that is why on rejection of application u/s 12AB of the Act, Chartered Accountant representing the applicant before Ld. CIT(E) was under the impression that provisional registration of the applicant was still in force and afresh application for registration could be presented on receipt of certificate u/s 12AB. The contention is that it was on the advice of said Chartered Accountant, subsequently given, that the applicant trust preferred two appeals on 25.11.2024, but, by then their presentation had got delayed. 7. The above said contention has been raised in line with the averments put forth in the application seeking condonation of delay. The application is supported by two affidavits i.e. one of the trustee of the applicant trust and other of the Chartered Accountant, who represented the applicant before Ld. CIT(E), and ultimately rendered advice that 4 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) impugned order be challenged by way of these appeal, instead of filing of afresh applications under section 12 AB of the Act before Ld. CIT(E). 8. In the course of arguments, Ld. DR for the revenue has not controverted the submissions put forth by the Ld. AR for the applicant-trust and the deposition contained in the two affidavits. 9. In view of the uncontroverted averments put forth by the applicant trust, supported by the two affidavits, we feel satisfied that there was ‘sufficient cause’ with the applicant trust in late filing of the appeal. Consequently, we condone the delay in filing of the two appeals. 10. On merits, Ld. AR for the appellant trust and Ld. DR for the revenue have argued the appeals today itself. Non registration of the appellant Trust under RPT Act, 1959 11. As regards the first ground of rejection of application raised by Ld. CIT(E) that the applicant trust was not got registered under RPT Act, Ld. AR for the appellant has submitted copy of certificate issued under RPT Act on 25th July, 2024. 5 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) 12. From the above said certificate, available at page No. 56 of the paper book submitted today on behalf of the appellant, the first ground of rejection of the application u/s 12AB of the Act does not survive. Even otherwise, it may be mentioned here that Co-ordinate Bench ITAT, Jaipur has held in APJ Abdul Kalam Education and Welfare Trust vs. CIT(E) decided on 15.01.2025 that for purpose of registration of such institutions, u/s 12AB of the Act, registration under RPT Act 1959 is not one of the essential requirements. Object of the Trust to benefit a particular community 13. The only other ground made basis for rejection of the contention u/s 12AB of the Act is that the objects of the applicant trust are for the benefit of a particular community i.e. Agarwal community. In this regard, Ld. CIT(E) has observed in para 3.1 of the impugned order that during the Financial Year 2023-24, applicant trust provided facility of scholarship to 12th students, out of which only one student was of the Jain community and others belonged to Agarwal community. Ld. CIT(E) went on to observe that activities of the institutions would be carried out only for the benefit of Agarwal community thereby restricting 6 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) the benefit to the persons of a particular religion, which is not permissible under the law. In this regard, Ld. CIT(E) also relied on provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act. 14. It may be mentioned here that scholarships given, during the F.Y 2023-24, are not claimed to have been given to the students from Agarwal community only. Even otherwise, for the purpose of registration u/s 12AB of the Act, Ld. CIT(E) is not to take into consideration the provisions of section 13(1) (b) of the Act. Said provision is meant for the purpose of computation of total income and not for consideration of suchlike applications. 15. In view of the above discussion, the second ground, made basis of rejection of the application u/s 12AB of the Act, is hereby set aside. Result 16. In view of the above findings, while allowing ITA No. 1396/JP/2024, the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(E) rejecting the application u/s 12AB of the Act is hereby set aside, and Ld. CIT(E) is directed to take steps for registration of applicant u/s 12AB of the Act, in accordance with law. 7 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) ITA No. 1395/JP/2024 17. As noticed above, vide impugned order dated 12.06.2024, Ld. CIT(E) rejected application u/s 80G of the Act. 18. The only ground for rejection of said application is that that the separate application u/s 12AB of the Act stood rejected on the same day. 19. As discussed above, appeal -ITA No. 1396/JP/2024 has been allowed with the direction to Ld. CIT(E) for steps for registration of the applicant trust u/s 12AB of the Act. Consequently, the ground raised by Ld. CIT(E) for rejection of the application u/s 80G of the Act, no more survives. As a result, applicant trust deserves to be granted approval u/s 80G of the Act. Result 20. As a result, this second mentioned appeal ITA No. 1395/JP/2024 is allowed and the impugned order dated 12.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(E) is hereby set aside. 21. Appeal files be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. 8 ITA Nos. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024 Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust vs.CIT(E) Copy of the order be placed in the record of the connected appeal file. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/02/2025. Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y ½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 24/02/2025 *Ganesh Kumar, Sr. PS vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant- Maharaja Shri Agrasen Shiksha Trust, Kota 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- CIT (Exemption) 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ The ld CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The ld CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 1395 & 1396/JP/2024) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar "