Avneesh Jhingan, J v. Manoj Kumar2020.03.06 16:25I Attest To The Accuracy Andauthenticity Of This Documenthigh Court,Chandigarh

ITA No. 153 of 2019} 1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANAAT CHANDIGARH ITA No. 153 of 2019Date of decision: 2.3.2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh .. Appellant Vv M/.s Shree Durga Mata Mandir .. Respondent CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY TEWARIHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEBEESH JHINGHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEBEESH JHING Present:Mr. Denesh Goyal, Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant.appellant. AVNEESH JHINGAN, J. The revenue is in appeal under Section 260A of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) against the order dated 7.9.2018 passed bythe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short, ‘the Tribunal’)claiming following substantial questions of law: “(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case theITAT is correct in directing the registration to be accordedinstead of reverting it back for re-examination in the lightof judgement of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court inappeal No. 112 of 2013 in the case of CIT, Meerut Vs. M/sA. R. Trust, Meerut, wherein it was held that the Tribunalcould have ordered for setting aside the order ofRegistering Authority refusing registration but it could nothave directed for registration straight away in as much asITAT is correct in directing the registration to be accordedinstead of reverting it back for re-examination in the lightof judgement of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court inappeal No. 112 of 2013 in the case of CIT, Meerut Vs. M/sA. R. Trust, Meerut, wherein it was held that the Tribunalcould have ordered for setting aside the order ofRegistering Authority refusing registration but it could nothave directed for registration straight away in as much as ITA No. 153 of 2019|2] there has to be satisfaction recorded by the RegisteringAuthority which was lacking?Authority which was lacking? (11) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the cased and inlaw, the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in ignoring the fact thatthe assessee society had sought registration u/s 12AA after34 years of its operation whereas no cogent reason for theapplication not having been made for the last 34 years wassubmitted to this office?law, the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in ignoring the fact thatthe assessee society had sought registration u/s 12AA after34 years of its operation whereas no cogent reason for theapplication not having been made for the last 34 years wassubmitted to this office? (111) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, thorder of the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in holding that theCIT(E) has not made any specific finding or theobservation in his order that the assessee society is notworking towards achieving its aims and objectives whereasin the CIT(E)'s order, there are clearly findings that most ofthe objects seemingly are generic in nature and don't getcovered by the various limbs of charitable purposesenvisaged in section 2(15) of the Act?order of the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in holding that theCIT(E) has not made any specific finding or theobservation in his order that the assessee society is notworking towards achieving its aims and objectives whereasin the CIT(E)'s order, there are clearly findings that most ofthe objects seemingly are generic in nature and don't getcovered by the various limbs of charitable purposesenvisaged in section 2(15) of the Act? (iv) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theHon'ble ITAT is correct in merely holding that thedissolution clause has been added and disregarding theview of the CIT(E) that not only the same has beenincorporated after the application was made but also theresolution has not been accepted and registered by theoffice of Registrar of firms and Societies as a part of theregistered document under the Registration Act 1860. Merepassing of a resolution to the effect doesn't make the paperHon'ble ITAT is correct in merely holding that thedissolution clause has been added and disregarding theview of the CIT(E) that not only the same has beenincorporated after the application was made but also theresolution has not been accepted and registered by theoffice of Registrar of firms and Societies as a part of theregistered document under the Registration Act 1860. Merepassing of a resolution to the effect doesn't make the paper ITA No. 153 of 2019}3] legally tenable and admissible in proceedings. To thatextent, the MoA of the society is impinged by a lack ofdissolution clause?extent, the MoA of the society is impinged by a lack ofdissolution clause? (v) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theorder of the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in ignoring the factthat a small portion of the receipt has been shown to bespent on charitable activities which regrettably cannot becorroborated with that of the aims and objects of the societyin absence of any evidence on records as no other proofhave been submitted for the charitable activities conductedby the society?order of the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in ignoring the factthat a small portion of the receipt has been shown to bespent on charitable activities which regrettably cannot becorroborated with that of the aims and objects of the societyin absence of any evidence on records as no other proofhave been submitted for the charitable activities conductedby the society? (vi) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and inlaw, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in ignoring the fact that sucha large amount of corpus fund and accumulated assetsremained unexplained and the corpus funds have receivedwithout written instructions. Moreover in the absence ofinstructions the amount doesn't get cover by the provisionsof section 11 and 12 of the Act?law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in ignoring the fact that sucha large amount of corpus fund and accumulated assetsremained unexplained and the corpus funds have receivedwithout written instructions. Moreover in the absence ofinstructions the amount doesn't get cover by the provisionsof section 11 and 12 of the Act? (vii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, theorder of the Appellate Tribunal is contrary to the evidenceand material on the record of the case and therefore,3&%4&%'&EGorder of the Appellate Tribunal is contrary to the evidenceand material on the record of the case and therefore,3&%4&%'&EG The brief facts are that the respondent-society is in operationsince February, 1983 having following aims and objects; “(a) to take steps to acquire land for construction of a temple (b) to celebrate important religious festivals and hold functions ITA No. 153 of 2019|4] to honour the memory of great men of thought and action;(c) to arrange public disclosure on subjects connected withancient Indian heritage;ancient Indian heritage; (d) to maintain communal harmony by extending activecooperation to the people of various faiths in accordancewith great spiritual heritage of India and her secularstructure and also to promote better understanding amongthe people of various beliefs;cooperation to the people of various faiths in accordancewith great spiritual heritage of India and her secularstructure and also to promote better understanding amongthe people of various beliefs;(e) the Sabha is strictly not political.” “(a) to take steps to acquire land for construction of a temple (b) to celebrate important religious festivals and hold functions ITA No. 153 of 2019|4] to honour the memory of great men of thought and action;(c) to arrange public disclosure on subjects connected withancient Indian heritage;ancient Indian heritage; (d) to maintain communal harmony by extending activecooperation to the people of various faiths in accordancewith great spiritual heritage of India and her secularstructure and also to promote better understanding amongthe people of various beliefs;cooperation to the people of various faiths in accordancewith great spiritual heritage of India and her secularstructure and also to promote better understanding amongthe people of various beliefs;(e) the Sabha is strictly not political.” Application for registration under Section 12A of the Act wasfiled on 16.9.2016. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) rejectedthe application vide order dated 30.3.2017 mainly on the ground thatregistration was applied for almost after 34 years for coming into existence;there was no dissolution clause in the Memorandum of Association and theassessee-society had huge corpus as compared to the amount used,Aggrieved of the rejection of application, appeal was preferred. TheTribunal allowed the appeal on 7.9.2018. The relevant portion of the orderof the Tribunal is quoted below; “5. We have heard the Ld. Representative of the parties andalso have gone through the records. In our view, theregistration to the assessee society has been wrongly denied bythe Ld. CIT(E). There is no specific finding or the observationof the Ld. CIT(E) in the order that the assessee society is notworking towards achieving its aims and objectives. Theassessee society is a religious body and is engaged in themaintenance of Shree Durga Mata Mandir at Manimajra. Such ITA No. 153 of 2019}>] type of religious Mandirs are not private property of anyindividual or any society, hence, the property of such entitiescannot be taken over or distributed among the members of thesociety. So far as the absence of dissolution clause, it wasbrought in the knowledge of the CIT(E) that the assesseesociety subsequently passed a_ resolution whereby aDissolution clause have been added to the Memorandum ofAssociation of the society. So far as the accumulation ofcorpus funds etc. is concerned, it was explained to theLd. CIT(E) that corpus fund has been made out of thedonations received from the members and the devotees ofShree Durga Mata Mandir for maintenance of mandir andpurchase of new property and that the said receipts were dulyaccounted for and that the institution was established whollyfor religious purposes. It has been further explained that thecorpus fund has been further applied for building of newhall/religious activities and functions, staff salary and langaractivities (free food). That the corpus fund of Rs. 1,31,23,853/-as on March 31, 2017 has been duly utilized for templepremises, furnishing and fittings and on utensils.6. It is evident that the assessee society is engaged inmaintenance of Mandir. There is no allegation that the Corpusfund or the surplus accumulated funds are being used for thepurpose other than the aims and objects of the assessee society.The corpus as well as accumulated surplus as is claimed isbeing used for maintenance and development of Shree Durga ITA No. 153 of 2019160] Mata Mandir which is a religious place visited by the devoteesand open to all.” Learned counsel for the appellant is not able to dispute thatthere is nothing on record to show that the assessee was not working forachieving its aims and objects or that the accumulated funds were used forpurposes other than aims and objects. He has not been able to show that thefindings recorded by the Tribunal quoted above are erroneous much lessperverse. In such circumstances, no question of law much less substantialquestion of law arises. No interference is called for in the order of theTribunal| The appeal is dismissed. (AVNEESH JHINGAN) (AJAY TEWARIT)JUDGE JUDGE ITA No. 153 of 2019160] Mata Mandir which is a religious place visited by the devoteesand open to all.” Learned counsel for the appellant is not able to dispute thatthere is nothing on record to show that the assessee was not working forachieving its aims and objects or that the accumulated funds were used forpurposes other than aims and objects. He has not been able to show that thefindings recorded by the Tribunal quoted above are erroneous much lessperverse. In such circumstances, no question of law much less substantialquestion of law arises. No interference is called for in the order of theTribunal| The appeal is dismissed. (AVNEESH JHINGAN) (AJAY TEWARIT)JUDGE JUDGE 2420207AWhether speaking/reasoned:Yes/NoWhether reportable:Yes/No