Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 1812 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 11 - Application u/s 80G rejected - existing registration of the institution u/s 12AA - proof of institution as established for charitable purposes - HELD THAT:- It is an undisputed fact that assessee is registered u/s 12AA and the said registration has not yet been withdrawn. We further find that assessee was earlier given registration u/s 80G of the Act which expired on 31.03.2009 Assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 on 08.10.2016 and has claimed exemption u/s 11 for whole of the income and has filed its income at Nil. DR was not able to demonstrate that the returns filed by assessee for assessment year 2013-14 and 2016-17 was not accepted by the department. There is no violation on the part of assessee which could lead to the withdrawal of registration u/s 12AA of the Act. Once the fact that assessee was charitable institution is established the Revenue Authorities at the time of granting registration u/s 80G of the Act can not deny registration u/s 80G of the Act, in view of the judgment of Sonepat Hindu Educational Vs. CIT [2005 (5) TMI 52 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] wherein held that registration of the institution u/s 12AA was itself a sufficient proof of the fact that the institution is established for charitable purpose. In the instant case, the Commissioner had not found that the objects of the assessee, established in India, as set out in its memorandum of association, were not for a charitable purpose or that the society was not carrying on its activities in furtherance of its objects. Registration of an institution under section 12 A(a) by itself is a sufficient proof of the fact that the trust or the institution concerned is created or established for charitable or religious purposes. Assessee had enjoyed approval under section 80G from the year 1991 to 31-3-1999, i.e., even after the amendment of its objects on 17-9-1989 and after the insertion of clause (Vi) in section 80G(5), with effect from 1-10-1991, the Commissioner was not justified in holding that either fresh registration under section 12A(a) was required or the memorandum should have been amended as per the procedure laid down in section 92 of Code of Civil Procedure. Above all assessee was already enjoying registration u/s 80G which expired on 31.03.2009 and as per circular no. 7/2010 dated 27.10.2010, the registration was deemed to have been extended in perpetuity (unless withdrawn) had the registration expired on or after 1st Oct. 2009. Therefore it is only a technical reason due to which the registration was not deemed to have been extended. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|