2010 (9) TMI 1099 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11 - Registration u/s.12AA denied - HELD THAT - The only ground available with the CIT to cancel the registration is to either establish that the activities of the trust or institution are not genuine or that the same are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or institution as the case may be. In our considered opinion the CIT is bound to function strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Therefore we find the action of the CIT on this aspect as beyond jurisdiction in terms of s. 12AA(3). On this aspect we may also notice that it is not the case of the CIT that the registration granted earlier was on the basis of any fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the assessee. Therefore the said objection taken by the CIT is liable to be ignored without going into the merits of the same. In the result in the absence of any other objection raised by the CIT and in terms of our aforesaid discussion the order of the CIT is unsustainable. We hold so. In the final analysis we set aside the impugned order and the registration granted to the assessee in terms of its application dt. 9th June 2008 is hereby restored. Resultantly the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Justification for invoking the provisions of Section 12AA(3) of the IT Act, 1961 to withdraw the registration granted under Section 12AA(1)(b).
2. Examination of whether the activities of the assessee are in accordance with its principal objectives.
3. Determination of whether the activities of the assessee qualify as "charitable purpose" under Section 2(15) of the IT Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Justification for invoking Section 12AA(3) to withdraw registration:
The appeal revolves around the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) to withdraw the registration granted to the assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b) of the IT Act. The CIT issued a show-cause notice questioning the alignment of the assessee's activities with its principal objectives and whether these activities could be deemed charitable under Section 2(15) of the Act. The CIT concluded that the activities were not in accordance with the objectives and involved commercial activity, thus withdrawing the registration.

2. Examination of whether the activities of the assessee are in accordance with its principal objectives:
The CIT argued that the activities did not align with the objectives stated in the memorandum of association, specifically pointing out that the activities lacked an element of research. The Tribunal found that the CIT misinterpreted the objectives by giving them a restrictive reading. The objectives included promoting research, development, and popularization of non-conventional and renewable energy sources. The Tribunal noted that activities such as distributing solar energy devices and setting up micro-hydel generator sets were in line with these objectives. The Tribunal also highlighted that the assessee's role as a nodal agency for small hydel projects was within the scope of its objectives, as it involved advising and coordinating with the State Government on energy projects.

3. Determination of whether the activities qualify as "charitable purpose" under Section 2(15):
The CIT contended that the activities of harnessing hydro-power potential involved commercial activity, thus not qualifying as charitable. However, the Tribunal emphasized that the CIT's power to cancel registration under Section 12AA(3) is limited to situations where the activities are not genuine or not carried out in accordance with the objects. The Tribunal found no evidence of fraud or misrepresentation by the assessee and noted that the CIT's reasoning did not align with the statutory provisions. The Tribunal concluded that the activities of the assessee were genuine and aligned with its objectives, thus restoring the registration.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the CIT's order, reinstating the registration granted to the assessee under Section 12AA(1)(b). The appeal of the assessee was allowed, confirming that the activities were in accordance with the objectives and qualified as charitable under the IT Act.