Itta/461/2012 Of M/S. Joginpally Br Educational Society v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OFJULY TWO THOUSAND AND THIRTEEN PRESENT THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICESRI KALYAN JYOTI SEN GUPTA AND THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI I.T.T.A. No.461 OF 2012 Between: M/s. Joginapally BR Educational Society,Having its office at 6-3-248/3, Road No.1,Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Rep. by its Secretary Sri J. Vamshidhar Rao ..... Appellant AND Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) Hyderabad .....Respondent The Court made the following : JUDGMENT:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri K.J. Sengupta) This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 31.8.2012 andsought to be admitted on the following suggested questions of law. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of thecase, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal wascorrect in law in confirming an order of theCommissioner of Income Tax withdrawingregistration granted to the Appellant underSec.12AA of the Act by relying upon grounds thatare not germane or relevant for exercise of powersof withdrawal conferred on the Commissioner underSec. 12AA(3) of the Act? We have heard the learned counsel for theappellant and the gone through the impugned judgmentand order of the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal on fact found as follows: In the present case, as seen from the facts narratedby the CIT (Central), Hyderabad, the assessee iscollecting the capitation/donation for admitting thestudents to the institution and also the seizedmaterial reflects violation of object clause of theassessee. Again in paragraph No.14 of the judgment and order, the learned Tribunal held as follows: In these circumstances, the assessee cannot beconsidered as a trust engaged in charitableactivities. The objects of the trust have beenviolated in a wholesome manner and the basis onwhich registration is granted no longer survives orhold good, would call immediate interference by theregistration granting authority. In thesecircumstances, the registration authority cancels theregistration...…….The CIT (Central), Hyderabadconsidering the entire facts of the case found thatthere is violation of the provisions of Section 2(15)of the Act and the case cannot be called as a trustand it is carrying on the activities in a commercial manner for which registration under Sec. 12Acannot be continued. Learned counsel for the appellant argued beforeus that the precondition for cancellation of theregistration under Section 12AA(3) of the Income TaxAct has not been fulfilled. He says that there is no clear-cut fact finding that the activities of the trust or theinstitution are not genuine and not being carried out inaccordance with the objects of the trust. In our view, the objects of the institution havebeen violated and in its place commercial activitieshave taken place. Therefore, the contention of thelearned counsel for the appellant that the preconditionfor withdrawing the registration is not satisfied, is notcorrect, as it is held on fact that the activities of said trustare not being carried on in accordance with the objectsof the trust. In view of the aforesaid finding, we dismiss theappeal. No order as to costs. ______________________ Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, CJ. __________ G.Rohini, J.