Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. That there is no violation of the conditions as laid under Section 12A of the IT Act.

2. The assessee filed an application for registration under Section 12A of the IT Act. Copies of this application are placed at p. 5 of the assessee's paper book. As per this application, the trust was created on 1st Feb., 2001. A certified copy of the instrument under which the trust was created, was filed. A certified copy of the document evidencing the creation of the trust, was also filed. Copies of accounts of the trust, for the latest year, were also filed. Copies of audited accounts are at pp. 3 and 4 of the assessee's paper book. As per trust deed (copy at APB pp. 7 to 17), the objects of the trust are charitable. These objects, as contained in the trust deed are:

3. The learned CIT(A) has passed the following impugned order:

The assessee has applied for registration under Section 12A of the IT Act. Perusal of the documents placed on file reveals that the assessee's declared aims are to provide medical assistance to the poor in the form of medical aid, food, clothes, etc. in India, to give donations to the hospitals, nursing homes, educational institutes, blind institutes, etc. The trust has been created with the corpus of Rs. 63,000. Perusal of the details filed by the trust reveals that despite the fact that an amount of Rs. 63,000 was available with it, no charitable activity has been carried out by the trust. Its intention to act as per the objects of the trust has not been reflected by any activity. No charitable activity has been carried out although the trust was formed in January, 2001, and funds were available. Therefore, there appears to be no intention to do so. The object appears to be to collect donations in the name of charity. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v. CIT is applicable on the facts of this case. The formation of the trust is not for carrying out any charitable activity and none has been carried out. I, therefore, reject the application of the assessee.

9. Further, as per Section 12AA(l)(b), an order in writing is to be passed on an application made by the trust for registration as such, after the CIT has satisfied himself about the objects of the trust and the genuineness of his activities. The contention of the learned Counsel for the assessee has been that this was the first year of the trust. The learned CIT(A) had only to see the objects of the trust. He went wrong in observing that there appeared to be no intention on the part of the assessee to carry out any charitable activity and that the object of the trust appeared to be to collect donations in the name of charity and that the formation of the trust was not for carrying out any charitable activity and none had in fact been carried out. As per the learned Counsel, the learned CIT(A) has travelled beyond his jurisdiction. Moreover, according to the learned Counsel, there is no finding that the objects of the assessee are not charitable. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ashutosh Davar Trust v. Director of IT (2002) 77 TTJ (Del) 976 : (2002) 123 Txman 182 (Del)(Mag). On the other hand, the contention of the learned Departmental Representative has been, that Section 12AA(l)(a) is very clear. As per this provision, the CIT shall call for such documents or information from the trust as he thinks necessary, in order to satisfy himself about the genuineness of the activity of the trust and may also make such enquiry as he may deem necessary in this behalf. As per Section 12AA(1)(b), the CIT has to satisfy himself about both the objects of the trust and the genuineness of its activities. Therefore, the learned Departmental Representative contends that in the present case, the learned CIT(A) was correct in passing the impugned order, since no activity was carried out by the assessee.

10. At first glance, the arguments of learned Departmental Representative appear to be correct. However, when one goes a little deeper, the position is otherwise. The section takes care of situation where activities have been carried out by a trust, whereas it does not lay down anything negative in cases where no activities have been carried out, like in the case before us. In such a case, to our minds, the sole criterion for grant/non-grant of registration would be for the CIT to see the objects of the trust. If the objects of the trust are charitable, just because no activity has been carried out by the trust, this does not entitle the CIT to hold that the trust was not entitled to registration, even though its objects were charitable. Pertinently, in the present case, the order of the CIT, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the assessee, makes no mention of the objects of the assessee-trust being not charitable. Moreover, we have delineated these objects hereinabove. A perusal thereof shows that these objects are in the nature of charitable objects. Also, the learned Departmental Representative has not denied this factum before us.