TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 453
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... registration u/s.12A on 18-3-2014. The DIT(E) declined registration on the plea that as per clause 16B(viii) word "Upashraij" were mention. "Upashrau" is a Jain religious place. As per clause 16B(i) word "Panch Pratikraman" is an ancient teachings but the same is pertaining only to Jain Religious. As per clause 13 trust can received the monies from "Worshipper". Therefore, it is a religious trust. As per clause 20 trust activities include prayers worship, rites and ceremonies. On perusal of the preamble of trust deed of the applicants reveals that settlor was desirous of creating a trust for public charitable purpose rather than religious purpose. But for that some clauses are religious and commercial in nature. Hence, it is mixed trust (C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence, the trust cannot be termed as the Charitable and Religious Trust. Further the Clause 16B refer by the DIT(E) are extension of Object "Education" these are ancillary object of the main object of Education. 6. With regard to objection of DIT(E) in respect of clause 16B(viii), we found that the reading of the entire clause together it is found all these places are one category of places where the students and learner can stay to obtain the education. It is not exclusive clause of persons belonging to a particulars cast/ religion. These will be constructing with the sole object of transforming the people. Therefore, it cannot be treated to be for the benefit of a particular religion or community. 7. With regard to observation of DIT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....veera, Gautham Buddha etc. all speak of the same. A synthetic teaching of these tenets of life addresses the concept of universal enhancement of values of human life and not just benefit only a particular religion or community. Even the veda, panch pratikamna cannot be treated as religious activity. 9. The ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the case of Shiva Shakthi Shiridi Sai Anugraha Mahapeetam, Hyderabad Vs. DIT(E) [2015] 58 taxmann.com 209 (Hyderabad-Trib), held as under :- "9. However, careful analysis of the aforesaid clauses, makes it clear that neither they are for the benefit of a particular religion or community nor they are confined to particular class of people or people of a particular caste or creed. On the contrary, these o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne to believe that they are for the benefit of a particular religious community, hence, coming within the mischief of section 13(1)(a) or 13(1)(b) of the Act. On the contrary, these clauses, if at all they can be called to be of religious nature, are for the benefit of general public, hence, can be considered to be in the nature of any other object of general public utility as engrained in the definition of 'charitable purpose' u/s 2(15) of the Act. Law is well settled that ' any other object of general public utility' is of the widest connotation as the word 'general' in said expression signifies a whole class. Hence, advancement of any object of benefit to the public or a section of the public as distinguished from....