1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>High Court overturns rejection of religious trust's tax registration application, citing compliance with rules</h1> The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, a public religious trust, in their application for registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, ... Application For Registration, Charitable Trust Issues involved: Application for registration of trust under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 rejected for non-compliance with rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.Summary:The petitioners, a public religious trust, applied for registration under section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was rejected by the Commissioner citing non-compliance with rule 17A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The trust, created over 100 years ago without any formal instrument, submitted various documents including revenue records, property tax assessments, and citizen affidavits to support its existence. The Commissioner held that these documents did not evidence the creation of the trust as required by rule 17A. The High Court analyzed the relevant sections and rules, emphasizing that the intention behind section 12A was not to exclude trusts created without an instrument. It interpreted rule 17A to encompass all evidential documents logically inferring the trust's creation. The court found that the documents submitted by the petitioners, such as historical revenue records and property tax assessments, provided a logical basis for inferring the trust's creation and thus satisfied the requirements of rule 17A. Consequently, the Commissioner's order was quashed, and he was directed to reconsider the trust's application in light of the court's observations. No costs were awarded, and the security amount was to be refunded to the petitioners.