AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 491
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id application was rejected by the then Director of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad, vide his order in F No.DIT(E)/12A/264(05)/ 2007-08 dated 29.11.2007, communicated under the signature of the Income Tax Officer (H.Qrs) (Exempt), O/o. the DIT(E), Hyderabad. Aggrieved by the said order of the DIT(E), the assessee has filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad (ITAT' in short). During such appeal, the assessee has pleaded that the said order rejecting claim for registration u/s.12A was not signed by the authorised officer but it was signed by the Income Tax Officer. After considering such submission of the assessee, the ITAT, vide their order in ITA No.214/Hyd/2008 dated 05.08.2008, had set-aside the said order dt. 29.11.2007 and remitted the matter to the file of the DIT(E) with a direction to pass an order on merits, after giving opportunity to the assessee and in accordance with law. The relevant observations made by the ITAT in this regard, under para 3 at page 2 of that order, are reproduced as under: "......Under the Income-tax Act, only an officer of the level of Commissioner has to pass an order either granting or ejecting the registration. S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....public charitable institution and hence, cannot be granted registration u/s.12AA of the Act. 3.2. Further, it may be mentioned here that the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh, in their decision vide judgement dated 17th December, 2012 in WP No.31640 of 2011, in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Seed Certification Agency Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-Ill, Hyderabad and others, have held that the activity of Agricultural Market Committee does not come within the ambit of "Charitable Purpose". In that decision, the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, held so, after considering their earlier decision in CIT Vs. Agricultural market Committee (2011) 336 ITR 641, the Memorandum explaining the provisions in the Finance Bill, 2008 and the Budget Speech of the Finance Minister of Union of India delivered on 29.02.2008 and the proviso to Section 2(15) of the Act, introduced vide Finance (No.2) Act, 2009. In this context, it is pertinent to refer to the following observations made by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Para-18 at Page 15-16 of the said decision .......... In our view the said decision has no application to the present case and was based....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue and directed the Revenue to allow the registration under section 12A for the interregnum period during which AMC were made taxable entities by virtue of amendment, vide the judgement in the case of CIT vs. Agriculture Market Committee, 336 ITR 641. However, the learned DIT(E) relying on the later judgment in the case of A.P. State Seed Certification Agency in WP.No.31640 of 2011 dated 17.12.2012 denied the benefit to the society. 5. Ld. Counsel placed on record the order of A.P. State Seed Certification Agency to submit that the issue decided by the Hon'ble A.P. High Court is not about the registration under section 12A which was already granted to the said society but, approval under 10(23C). Therefore, the said order does not apply to the facts of the case. It was submitted that learned DIT(E) did not find any of the objects not for charitable purpose and there is no requirement of producing books of accounts before the DIT(E) at the time of considering the registration. In fact, assessee also furnished income and expenditure statement and being a Government organization it has maintained its books of accounts. Since the Hon'ble A.P. High Court has considered similar ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion under s. 12A so as to claim the benefit under s. 11(1). The fact of being covered under any of the clauses of s. 10 does not mean that a person is disqualified to seek registration under s. 12A. It is nobody's case. When the statute confers the benefit, there was no necessity for AMCs to seek registration under s. 12A. By reason of the amendments by the Finance Act, 2002, when they were denied the exemption by reason of losing the status of 'local authority' for the purpose of the IT Act, so as to claim exemption it was necessary for the AMCs to apply for registration under s. 12A/12AA. Even though the object of adding the Explanation to s. 10(20) was to restrict the benefit under s. 10(20), it was never the intention of Parliament to deny the benefit to a juridical person which was otherwise entitled to seek exemption from payment of tax de hors s. 10(20). The absence of any corresponding amendments to ss. 11 to 13, although s. 10(29) was deleted and 10(20) was amended, itself is sufficient indication to belie the submission made by the Revenue's counsel.--CIT vs. Market Committee Dhariwal & Ors. (2007) 294 ITR 563 (P&H) concurred with. The words 'public ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith s. 11(5). This prescribes the forms and modes of investing or depositing the money by a trust or charitable institution registered under s. 12A. The submission that as an AMC is bound to adhere to the financial practices as mandated by the AMC Act, it would not be in a position to comply with s. 11(5) is wholly misconceived. It is well-settled that at the time of considering the application made for registration as a trust or a charitable institution under s. 12A r/w s. 12AA, the CIT is required to look to the objects of the trust and nothing more. Even otherwise the contention is without substance. Sec. 14(1) of the AMC Act r/w r. 8 of the Rules mandate that "all moneys received by an AMC shall be deposited in a single banking account with the nearest Government treasury, or with the sanction of the Government in a bank" out of which all the expenditure of the AMC shall be defrayed. Under s. 11(5)(iii) deposit of the moneys in scheduled bank is substantial compliance with the law. It is nobody's case that any AMC contravened s. 14(1) of the AMC Act at any time in the past. Therefore, the contention of the Revenue is rejected.-- Sanjeevamma Hanumanthe Gowda Charitable Trust....