Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Jodhpur v. Shripaliwal Brahman Samaj Seva Mandal Phalodi(D.b.income Tax Appeal

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, JODHPUR VS. SHRIPALIWAL BRAHMAN SAMAJ SEVA MANDAL PHALODI(D.B.INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.193/13) Dated:- 10.5.16. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHAHON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr.Sheetal Kumbhat, for the appellant. 1.This appeal is directed against order dated 16.1.13 of IncomeTax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur, whereby anappeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Commissionerof Income Tax , Jodhpur, dated 27.4.12, dismissing therespondent's application under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act,1961 (for short “the Act”), has been allowed and the matter is restoredto the file of CIT for deciding afresh, in terms of the observationsmade. 2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that therespondent Society is constituted with an object for betterment ofPaliwal Samaj and the amendment of the bye-laws of the Society hasnot brought any change. Learned counsel submitted that the Societywhich is not duly registered as Trust under the provisions of Section 17of Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1958, was not entitled for registrationunder Section 12AA of the Act and thus, the ITAT has seriously erredin setting aside the order passed by the CIT and restoring the matterto his file for deciding afresh. 3.A perusal of the order passed by the CIT reveals that he hadproceeded with the presumption to the effect that earlier object with regard to the activities of the Trust for betterment of Paliwal BrahminSamaj continues even after substitution of the object clause in thebye-laws, which is found to be contrary to the material on record bythe ITAT. That apart, in absence of any provision mandating that forthe purpose of registration under Section 12AA of the Act, the Trustmust be registered as public trust under the relevant statute of theState, the reason assigned by the CIT declining the registration on theground that the respondent trust is not duly registered under Section17 of Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1958, was not justified. In this viewof the matter, taking into consideration all the relevant aspects, theITAT has committed no error in setting aside the order passed by theCIT and restoring the matter back to his file for decision afresh. 4.No substantial question of law arises for consideration of thiscourt in present appeal.court in present appeal. 5.Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed in limine. (KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA),J. (SANGEET LODHA),J. Aditya/