2012 (11) TMI 1140 - AT - Income Tax

Taxpayer's Appeal Upheld Against Registration Withdrawal: Focus on Genuine Compliance

The Tribunal allowed the taxpayer's appeal against the Commissioner's withdrawal of registration under section 12A of the Act. The Tribunal emphasized ... Registration and Cancellation of institution u/s 12AA- Charitable Purpose u/s 2(15) - Administrative Commissioner withdrew the registration u/s 12AA on the ground that the institution's aggregate value of the receipt from the charitable activities exceeds ₹4 crore which is beyond the limit as mentioned in s. 2(15), therefore, the taxpayer is not charitable institution. HELD THAT:- If the aggregate contract receipts exceed ₹ 10 lakhs in any of the years, at the best, the assessing officer may deny exemption at the time of assessment proceedings. In view of the above, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the subsequent amendment to section 2(15) of the Act by introducing Proviso fixing the monetary limit in respect of public utility services cannot be a reason to cancel the registration. The Commissioner cannot go beyond the conditions provided in section 12AA(3) for cancelling the registration that are - (1) when the activity of the trust or institution is not genuine; (2) when the activity is not being carried out in accordance with the object of the trust / institution. In other words, the registration can be cancelled only if the Commissioner is satisfied that the object of the trust is not genuine or the activity of the taxpayer society was not carried out in accordance with the object. Decision in favour of assessee. Issues:Withdrawal of registration granted u/s 12A of the Act based on non-compliance with section 2(15) - Jurisdiction of Commissioner u/s 12AA(3) - Impact of subsequent amendments to section 2(15) on registration cancellation - Entitlement for exemption u/ss 11 & 12 of the Act after withdrawal of registration.Analysis:The taxpayer appealed against the Commissioner's order withdrawing the registration granted u/s 12A of the Act. The taxpayer's counsel argued that the Commissioner lacked the authority to withdraw registration without proving non-genuineness or non-compliance with the trust's object as per section 12AA(3) of the Act. The counsel relied on judgments emphasizing the limited powers of the Commissioner in canceling registration. The taxpayer had operated in accordance with the approved object, and any deviation should be addressed under sections 11 & 12, not under section 2(15) of the Act.The Departmental Representative contended that the taxpayer's engagement in commercial activities, like winning a bid with Indian Railways, exceeded the monetary threshold specified in section 2(15), making it ineligible for charitable status. The Commissioner's withdrawal of registration was deemed appropriate based on this argument. However, the Tribunal noted that the cancellation of registration under section 12AA(3) required proof of non-genuineness or non-compliance with the trust's object, not just exceeding the monetary limit set by subsequent amendments to section 2(15).The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of section 2(15) and the impact of subsequent amendments, particularly the First Proviso, which excluded certain activities from charitable status based on monetary thresholds. Despite the taxpayer's engagement in commercial activities, the Tribunal found that the registration could not be canceled solely due to exceeding the monetary limit. The Tribunal emphasized that registration under section 12AA did not automatically guarantee exemption u/ss 11 & 12; the taxpayer must meet the conditions for claiming exemptions. While the taxpayer might not be entitled to exemptions due to exceeding the monetary limit, this issue should be addressed during assessment proceedings, not through registration cancellation.Ultimately, the Tribunal set aside the lower authority's order, allowing the taxpayer's appeal. The judgment highlighted the importance of distinguishing between registration and entitlement to exemptions under the Act, emphasizing that cancellation of registration should be based on non-genuineness or non-compliance with the trust's object, not just exceeding monetary thresholds specified in subsequent amendments to the Act.