Charitable trust registration dispute: exemption denial sent back for fresh examination of earlier registration and related evidence.

Denial of exemption and related expenditure claim was examined in the context of an assessee's assertion of earlier charitable registration under section 12AA, loss of the certificate in a flood, past acceptance of exemption, RTI responses, and a later fresh registration. The Tribunal noted that the claim had not been examined on merits and that material on record supported the plea of earlier registration. Applying the principle that appellate proceedings continue the assessment process and that the proviso to section 12A(2) required proper examination, it found the existing record insufficient to sustain the denial and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the denial of exemption and related expenditure claim on the ground that the trust did not produce the registration certificate under section 12AA was justified, and whether the matter required fresh consideration in light of the assessee's claimed earlier registration and later fresh registration.

Analysis: The assessee asserted that it had been registered as a charitable trust since 1953 and that registration under section 12AA had been granted long earlier, though the certificate was lost in a flood. It also relied on past acceptance of exemption claims, RTI responses, and a later fresh registration. The Revenue maintained that absence of the certificate disentitled the assessee to exemption, and that a later registration could not operate retrospectively for the year under appeal. The Tribunal noted that the assessee's claim had not been examined on merits and that the record indicated substantial material supporting the plea of earlier registration. Relying on the principle that appellate proceedings are a continuation of assessment proceedings and that the claim under the proviso to section 12A(2) required proper examination, the Tribunal held that the issue should be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer.

Conclusion: The denial of relief was not sustained on the existing record, and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

---