Tribunal reinstates society's tax exemptions revoked due to lack of evidence

The Tribunal overturned the decision of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax to cancel the registration of the assessee society under Section 12AA and withdraw the exemption granted under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the allegations of diversion of funds for personal use, non-genuine scholarship expenses, and improper payments were not substantiated with concrete evidence. It concluded that the society's activities were genuine and aligned with its objectives, ordering the restoration of both registrations.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Withdrawal of exemption granted under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act.
2. Diversion of funds of the assessee society for personal purposes.
3. Non-genuine scholarship expenses.
4. Payment made to Rajasthan Housing Board in contravention of Section 11(5) read with Section 13(1)(c).
5. Withdrawal of exemption granted under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Withdrawal of exemption granted under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act:
The assessee society challenged the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr.CIT) which canceled its registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The Pr.CIT based his decision on findings that the society was not operating according to its stated objectives and was involved in activities such as diversion of funds for personal purposes, non-genuine scholarship expenses, and improper payments to the Rajasthan Housing Board.

2. Diversion of funds of the assessee society for personal purposes:
The Pr.CIT alleged that the society diverted funds for personal use, citing evidence from a search operation at Integral Bank, where unaccounted cash was found. The cash was claimed to belong to the St. Wilfred group of colleges. The Pr.CIT concluded that the society collected fees in old denomination notes post-demonetization and did not record these in its books, implying fund diversion for personal use. The Tribunal, however, found that the source of the cash was indeed fees collected from students, which were recorded in the society's books. The Tribunal noted that the cash was found in the bank's possession and not used for personal benefit, thus rejecting the Pr.CIT's findings.

3. Non-genuine scholarship expenses:
The Pr.CIT questioned the genuineness of scholarship payments made by the society, based on non-receipt of replies to notices sent to students and denials from some students. The society contended that all scholarships were paid via account payee cheques, and the students were produced for verification. The Tribunal found that the society provided sufficient evidence, including bank statements and confirmations from students, proving the genuineness of the scholarship payments. The Tribunal concluded that the Pr.CIT's apprehensions were unfounded.

4. Payment made to Rajasthan Housing Board in contravention of Section 11(5) read with Section 13(1)(c):
The Pr.CIT held that the society's payment to the Rajasthan Housing Board on behalf of Adarsh Gyan Vidyalaya Samiti, a related entity, was in violation of Section 11(5) and Section 13(1)(c). The Tribunal found that the payment was made under an "agreement to sell" for the purchase of land, which was used for educational purposes. The Tribunal noted that the land transfer was subject to approval from the Rajasthan Housing Board and that the society was in possession of the land, using it for educational activities. The Tribunal concluded that the payment was a permissible investment in immovable property and not in violation of the cited sections.

5. Withdrawal of exemption granted under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act:
Following similar reasoning as in the case of Section 12AA, the Pr.CIT withdrew the exemption granted under Section 10(23C)(vi). The Tribunal applied its findings from the Section 12AA case, concluding that the society's activities were genuine and in accordance with its objectives. The Tribunal directed the restoration of the exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) from the date it was withdrawn.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal found that the Pr.CIT's findings were based on suspicions and not supported by conclusive evidence. The Tribunal directed the restoration of the society's registration under Section 12AA and the exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi), concluding that the society's activities were genuine and in line with its stated objectives.

---