Refusal of registration us 12A to society of close family members or on the ground that it will charge fee from the students do not justify refusal – ITAT
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 1085 (2016) (12) ITAT
Important Case Laws cited:
Queen’s Educational Society vs. CIT (2015) 8 SCC 47
Visvesvaraya Technological University vs. ACIT (Supreme Court)
Sri Gian Ganga Vocational and Education Society vs. CIT Rohtak (2013)
Chaudhary Bishambher Singh Education Society v. Commissioner of Income-tax
DDIT(E) vs. Institute of Marketing and Management
NLB Charitable Trust Vs CIT
The Grievance:
The assessee was aggrieved by the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (CIT) with respect to denial of registration u/s 12A and approval u/s 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Brief Facts of the Case:
The appellant was a society registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860 and running a school. It filed two applications in Form No. 10A and 10G for seeking registration u/s 12A and 80G respectively along with copy of Society Registration certificate issued by Registrar of Firms & Societies, copy of memorandum & Articles of Association and list of office bearers of the society and its PAN of society, income & expenditure account, balance sheet along with audit reports in form No. 10B for three financial years. CIT called for a report from the Assessing Officer concerned on the eligibility of the assessee and the fulfilment of the conditions required for the grant of registration/approval applied for. In response, the lower authorities did not clearly recommend the case for registration u/s 12AA or u/s 80G and left the matter to be decided on merits.
The CIT referring to the definition of ‘Charitable purpose’ rejected the applications of appellant by observing among other things as under:
Contentions of the Assessee:
The assessee relied on number of case laws and contended that the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax was bad both in the eye of law and on facts.
Contentions of the Revenue:
The Revenue contended that the society had not undertaken any charitable activity. Drawing our attention to the balance sheet of the society and the income and expenditure account. It was submitted that the society was incurring only capital expenditure and not for any activity as per Rules and Regulations of the Society.
Observations made by the ITAT:
The Tribunal observed that the conclusion reached by the CIT that the assessee trust was profit oriented entity and not the charitable institute, was based only on the ground that the assessee would charge hefty fees from the students.
The ITAT noted that the CIT had failed to throw any light on the aims and objects of the society and to examine whether the activities of the society were to achieve the aims and objects as per its memorandum and simply because the assessee will charge fee from the students, did not go to suggest refusal of registration to the assessee society.
Regarding the observation made by the CIT that the governing body belonged to close family members, the Tribunal opined that this also did not bar for the formation of society. The society is a separate entity from its members and is governed by the Societies Registration Act, 1960 and each society makes separate Rules and Regulations.
Further, observing that the expenses incurred on advertisement were for hiring talented faculty members, the Tribunal opined that these could not be said to have incurred for other than educational purpose and therefore, the allegation made by the CIT that the assessee incurred advertisement expenditure for procuring more admission of the students with sole motive of earning profit was wrong.
Held:
The ITAT held that there was no justification to refuse the registration to the assessee society and accordingly, the appeal of assessee was allowed for registration u/s 12AA and the approval u/s 80G was restored to the file of CIT for deciding the same afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Addition u/s 68 for jewellery purportedly received on death of grandparent under Will upheld. In a recent judgment, ITAT upheld…
Supreme Court lays down tests to determine whether a debt is a financial debt or an operational debt under IBC…
Merely because directors of two companies were common not mean that deposits received was bogus and companies were shell companies…
Application though named as rectification but if tax imposed is not legitimate then it also touches upon the merit –…
Cost of acquisition as on 01.04.1981 taken as per valuer report by reverse indexing of current FMV to be further…
ITAT directed AO to serve notice of hearing both through electronic and physical mode upon the assessee In a recent…