Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (3) TMI 32 - AT - Income TaxCancelling /withdrawing the registration u/s 12AA - Held that:- When it is neither the case of the revenue that the assessee trust which for years had been acknowledged as a ‘Çharitable trust’ had during the year embarked on to any such new activities, which can safely be characterized as non-genuine activities, nor is it the claim of the revenue that the assessee trust is found to be carrying out activities which are not in accordance with its objects, therefore in the absence of satisfaction by the assessee of either of the aforesaid preconditions which forms the foundation for exercising the jurisdiction by him for cancelling the registration of the assessee trust under Sec. 12AA(3), it can safely be concluded that the DIT(Exemption) had wrongly cancelled the registration of the assessee trust vide his order passed u/s 12AA(3) of the ‘Act’. We thus in light of our aforesaid observations thus set aside the order passed by the DIT(Exemption) u/s 12AA(3) and therein restore the registration of the assessee trust. The contention of the Ld. A.R that the DIT(Exemption) had exceeded his jurisdiction by cancelling the registration of the assessee trust u/s 12A, w.e.f A.Y. 2009-10, despite the fact that he was seized of such jurisdiction only w.e.f 01st June, 2010, is found to be misconceived and as such does not merit acceptance, is thus rejected. We thus in light of our aforesaid observations therein set aside the order of the DIT(Exemption) cancelling the registration granted to the assessee trust u/s 12A of the ‘Act’. We may however clarify that as we have set aside the cancellation of the registration of the assessee trust by the DIT(Exemption) vide his order passed under Sec. 12AA(3), which was assailed before us by the assessee, therefore we refrain from adjudicating the issue as to whether the activities of the assessee trust, viz collection of ‘Auditorium fees’ would be hit by the provisions of Sec. 2(15), or not, which thus is left open, and the assessee shall remain at a liberty to raise and contest the same before the A.O. Thus the ‘Ground of appeal No. 2’ is disposed of by us in terms of our aforesaid observations, and as such is partly allowed.
|