Tribunal Overrules CIT: Jurisdiction Lacking to Cancel Section 12A Registration, Assessee's Appeal Succeeds.

The Tribunal quashed the CIT's order, ruling that the CIT lacked jurisdiction to rescind the registration granted under section 12A. It emphasized that the power to cancel registration must be explicitly conferred by statute, which was absent in this case. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the CIT's action was deemed without jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the CIT can rescind/withdraw the registration granted earlier u/s 12A.
2. Whether the CIT has the power of review under the Income-tax Act.
3. Applicability of section 21 of the General Clauses Act (GCA) to the CIT's order.

Summary:

1. Whether the CIT can rescind/withdraw the registration granted earlier u/s 12A:
The primary issue was whether the CIT could rescind/withdraw the registration granted to the trust u/s 12A in 1974. The CIT issued a notice to the trust on 4-12-2002, citing various grounds such as the trust being run as a private trust, misuse of corpus funds, non-disclosure of business receipts, and limiting activities to a particular religious community. The CIT, invoking section 21 of the General Clauses Act (GCA), rescinded the registration on 27-2-2003, citing financial discrepancies and misappropriation of trust funds.

2. Whether the CIT has the power of review under the Income-tax Act:
The assessee contended that the CIT had no power of review under the Income-tax Act, as the Act is an independent code and does not confer such powers. The Tribunal agreed, stating that the power to review is not inherent and must be conferred by statute. The Tribunal cited several judgments, including Patel Narshi Thakershi v. Pradyumansinghji Arjunsinghji, to support the view that no authority has inherent power to review its own order unless specifically provided by law.

3. Applicability of section 21 of the General Clauses Act (GCA) to the CIT's order:
The Tribunal examined whether section 21 of the GCA, which allows the rescinding of orders, could be applied to the CIT's order. It concluded that the word "orders" in section 21 of the GCA refers to subordinate legislation and not to judicial or quasi-judicial orders. The Tribunal applied the rule of Noscitur a sociis, interpreting "orders" in the context of associated words like "notifications, rules, and bye-laws," which are in the nature of subordinate legislation. Consequently, the Tribunal held that section 21 of the GCA could not be invoked to rescind the registration granted u/s 12A.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal quashed the CIT's order, holding that the CIT had no jurisdiction to rescind/withdraw the registration granted u/s 12A. The Tribunal emphasized that the power to cancel registration must be explicitly conferred by the statute, and in the absence of such power, the CIT's action was without jurisdiction. The appeal of the assessee was allowed.

---