Excel for
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD
I.T.A. No. 994/HYD/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 ORDER
PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M. : “2. It is noticed that vide that supplementary trust deed executed on 13-05-2015, three new objects have been added in the case of the assessee, showing as Main Aims and Objects. At page 2 of that supplementary deed under para 2 it is mentioned, WHEREAS the Founders are keenly desirous of creating a Charitable Trust of Public Nature for the main aims and objects as shown below apart from the aims and objects in the main Trust Deed. Later, there are mention of new objects, showing under the head ‘Main Aims and Objects’ with sl.nos. 1(a) to (c), sl.no. 2 & sl.no.3. It is not understood and also not clear as to how in that supplemental deed made later, such new objects have been added are referred to as main objects, when in the original trust deed made on 15-10-2014, the objects of the trust are mentioned under para 2 with sl.no.(a) to (k) which otherwise constitute the main objects in the case of the applicant trust. Further, it has not been clarified by the Ld. AR as to under which circumstances such supplemental trust deed has been made and executed by the founders of the trust, adding such further objects in the case of the trust. In fact, the applicant has not been able to furnish and explain full factual particulars and also has not been able to clarify about the actual and existing objects in the case of the trust. Under these circumstances, having regard to the provisions of clause (b) to subsection (1) of Sec. 12AA of the Act, in my view, the applicant trust in this case cannot be granted registration u/s. 12AA”. 2. Ld. Counsel submitted that assessee has the following objects as per deed dt. 15-10-2014 as under:
a. To construct dharmasala, rest houses, community hall to be used for the purposes of the Trust without any profit nature for a nominal rent for maintenance. 2.1. In addition, assessee also made a supplementary trust deed dt. 13-05-2015 having the following objects as well:
1. (a) Spreading or promotion of education by establishing, maintaining and supporting studentship and scholarship for the poor, needy and deserving students: 2.2. It was the submission of Ld. Counsel that assessee’s objects are very clear and charitable in nature and the CIT(Exemptions) has erred in rejecting the registration. Ld. CIT-DR relied on the orders of CIT(Exemptions) to submit that the objects are not clear and no explanation was furnished by assessee. 3. We have considered the issue and perused the documents placed on record. As can be seen from the objects, they are very clear and they are charitable in nature and not having any religious objects. We are unable to understand on what basis the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) came to his conclusion in rejecting the registration. We are also unable to understand what Ld.CIT(E) meant by the actual and existing objects in the case of the trust. Since the objects are very clear, in case the CIT(Exemptions) has any other clarifications required, he could have sought explanation. Since CIT(Exemptions) has not applied his mind to the facts in issue, we are of the opinion that his order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the order dt. 27-05-2015 is set aside with the direction to CIT(Exemptions) to consider the issue of registration u/s. 12A, afresh after giving due opportunity to assessee. 4. In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th October, 2015
Sd/- Sd/-
|