Tribunal Invalidates Retroactive Cancellation of Registration under Income-tax Act

The Tribunal held that the Director of Income-tax (Exemption) lacked jurisdiction to cancel registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with retrospective effect. The cancellation order dated 16-11-2009 was quashed as the DIT(E) did not have the power to cancel registrations before the statutory amendment on 1-6-2010. The Tribunal found the cancellation invalid and emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory amendments. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the DIT(E)'s order was set aside on 10th December 2010.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Director of Income-tax (Exemption) [DIT(E)] to cancel registration under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Validity of the cancellation of registration with retrospective effect.
3. Compliance with the principles of natural justice and directions of the Tribunal.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Jurisdiction of DIT(E) to Cancel Registration under Section 12A:
The core issue was whether the DIT(E) had the authority to cancel the registration granted under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that the DIT(E) lacked the jurisdiction to cancel the registration as the power to do so was conferred only from 1-6-2010 by the Finance Act, 2010. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, noting that the power to cancel registration under section 12AA(3) was introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004, effective from 1-10-2004, and further clarified by the Finance Act, 2010, effective from 1-6-2010. The Tribunal cited the Allahabad High Court's decision in Oxford Academy For Career Development, which held that the power to cancel registration was not retrospective and could not apply to registrations granted before the amendment.

2. Validity of the Cancellation with Retrospective Effect:
The DIT(E) cancelled the registration with effect from 1-4-2000, citing misuse of charitable status for undue benefits and bogus earthquake relief operations. The Tribunal found this action invalid because the power to cancel the registration retrospectively was not available to the DIT(E) at the time the order was passed. The Tribunal emphasized that the amendment granting such power was effective only from 1-6-2010, and thus, any cancellation prior to this date was void ab initio.

3. Compliance with Principles of Natural Justice and Tribunal Directions:
The assessee contended that the DIT(E)'s order violated the principles of natural justice as it did not consider the Tribunal's directions to inquire into the activities for the financial year 2003-04. Instead, the DIT(E) relied on activities from the financial year 2000-01. The Tribunal noted that the DIT(E) failed to provide adverse findings for the financial year 2003-04 and instead focused on earlier years, which was beyond the scope of the Tribunal's directions. The Tribunal highlighted that the DIT(E) should have confined its inquiry to the specified period and not extended it to previous years without proper justification.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the DIT(E) acted beyond its jurisdiction by cancelling the registration retrospectively and without adhering to the statutory amendments. The order dated 16-11-2009 was quashed as it was passed before the DIT(E) was conferred with the power to cancel the registration under section 12A. Consequently, the Tribunal did not delve into the merits of the case, rendering the issue on merits infructuous. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the order of the DIT(E) was set aside.

Order Pronounced:
The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the order was pronounced on 10th December 2010.

---