Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: charitable trust objects in Golden Sand Trust, Kolkata vs Cit(Exemptions), Kolkata, Kolkata on 31 March, 2017Matching Fragments
18. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and carefully perused the impugned order and examined the legal provisions and the judicial decisions relied upon by the parties during their submissions. In the present case the appellant was registered u/s 12A of the Act as a charitable trust by the DIT (Exm) on 07.03.2001. The assessments we note thereafter were completed on the footing that the appellant was pursuing charitable objects and income of the trust was applied for charitable purposes. We note from a perusal of the Objectives of the trust are reproduced as under:
allegation of such persons were used for drawing adverse inferences against the appellant, which vitiates the order.
25. As said earlier, the registration of a charitable trust can be cancelled by the Commissioner u/s 12AA(3) only if the activities of the trust are not genuine or that the activities are not carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust. In the present case assessee was registered u/s 12A by the DIT (Exm) on being satisfied that objects of the trust were charitable. In the SCN dated 3.3.2016 the Ld CIT had required the assessee to furnish copies of the Audited A/cs for the period 2010-11 to2014-15 and also complete list of donations received and paid during the period 1.4.2009 to 31.3.2015. In response the assessee had furnished such documents along with Certificates in Form-10B. Copies of these documents were also furnished before us in Paper book. We find from these documents that the income derived by the assessee during this period was applied for charitable purposes. We also note that even though the appellant had furnished the relevant details, Ld CIT did not point out any specific instance where it could be held that income or donation received was not used for charitable purpose. Even at the time of hearing the Ld. CIT DR with reference to audit reports furnished in the Paper book did not point out any specific instance in any year which would show that the activities of the trust were carried out for non-charitable purposes so as to persuade us to hold that activities of the trust were not genuine. We also find that other than the allegation that trust accepted bogus donation through Axis Bank A/c standing in the name of SFWHP the Ld CIT did not establish any other instance where it can be said that the activity of the Trust was not genuine or that activity was not carried out as per the objects of the trust. We have discussed in the foregoing our reasons for holding that on the basis of material gathered by the Ld CIT or disclosed by him in the impugned order it cannot be held that the assessee trust had indulged in money laundering activity or that the assessee was guilty of accepting unaccounted moneys of the trustees in the form of bogus Golden Sand Trust, AY:
cancelling the registration when the activities of the trust were charitable in nature and the activities were conducted in accordance with the objects of the trust. The same view was again taken by the Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Vs Karnataka Lingayat Education Society (supra) where the trustees were found to be receiving Capitation Fees for admission of students for medical course.
27. Similar view was taken by the Co-Ordinate Bench of the ITAT at Lucknow in the case of Fateh Chand Charitable Trust - ITA No. 792/LKW/2015 dated 18.3.2016. In this case the facts involved were pari-
in CIT Vs. Apeejay Education Society reported in 59 Taxman.com 1021 and Hon'ble Allahabad High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Redrose School 2 CTR 394 (All) and taking note of the CBDT Instruction No. 1132 dated 05.01.1978 wherein it was clarified that the payment of a sum by one charitable trust to another for utilization by the donee towards its charitable object its proper application of income for a charitable purpose was pleased to cancel the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E).
29. Applying ratio laid down in these judgments to the facts of the present case we find that the activities of the assessee trust were only for charitable purposes. In the impugned order no case is established by the Ld CIT that activities of the trust were not genuine or that activities conducted were not in accordance with the objects of the trust. The only allegation against the appellant is that donation of Rs.70 Lacs which the assessee received in April 2011 from SFWHP was bogus. In support of this allegation the Ld CIT relied only on the complaints lodged by Dr. Dhruba Chakraborty with authorities. We however find that nowhere in the complaints filed the complainant had made allegations against the appellant. Even after the enquiry was conducted by EOW of West Bengal Police in relation to the donation received from SFWHP no penal proceedings have been instituted against the appellant nor the Ld CIT referred to any report if any of the investigating agency who had enquired into the complaint of SFWHP, indicting the appellant of committing any wrong doing. We also find that Dr. Chakraborty was never examined by the Ld CIT nor opportunity of examining him was provided to the appellant so the order of the Ld CIT is bad in law. Recently, vide order published on 16 November 2015, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Andaman Timbers vs CCE, held that failure to give the assesse the right to cross- examine witnesses whose statements are relied upon results in breach of Natural Justice and it is a serious flaw which renders the order a Nullity. In these circumstances; based on unverified and unproven allegations and complaints it cannot be held that appellant's act of receiving Golden Sand Trust, AY: