TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 579
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mic and consequent lockdown announced by the State Government. It was accordingly submitted that due to lockdown, the assessee was prevented from filing the present appeals and the delay so happened was not deliberate. In support, the reliance was also placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 27.04.2021 wherein the period of limitation in filing of appeal, irrespective of the limitation prescribed under the general law or special laws whether condonable or not shall stand extended with effect from 14th March, 2021 till further orders. It was accordingly submitted that the delay so happened in filing the present appeal was beyond the control of the assessee and the same may be condoned and appeals of the assessee may be heard on merits. 3. Per contra, ld. Pr.CIT/DR did not raise any specific objection and fairly submitted that the explanation so furnished by the ld. AR regarding delay in filing the present appeal on account of COVID-19 pandemic may be considered by the Bench as it deems fit and appropriate. 4. After hearing both the parties and considering the material on record, we find that there was a reasonable cause for delay in filing the present appeals due....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onally registered for a period of three years without any enquiry. Further, attention was also drawn towards the provision of sub section (3) of section 12AA which empowers the ld. CIT(E) to withdraw exemption if he is not satisfied with the extent of activities carried out by charitable trust. Thus, the remedy being made available under the law, there is no justification to reject the application at the threshold level for the reason of non-commencement of activities. In view of the above, the order of ld. CIT(E) denying approval deserves to be quashed and he may be directed to grant approval as applied u/s 12AA as well as section 80G of the Act. 6. Per contra, the ld. Pr. CIT/DR in his submission taken us through the order of the ld CIT(E) and submitted that the ld CIT(E) while deciding on the application seeking registration u/s 12AA has to examine the objects of the assessee company and secondly, the genuineness of the charitable activities actually undertaken by it. It was submitted that being a limitation matter and inspite of giving sufficient opportunities, the appellant company failed to produce complete details and furnish explanation, therefore, the ld CIT(E) decided ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt company has not undertaken any activity of charitable nature and thus, the genuineness of activities of the assessee company could not be established. Further, the ld CIT(E) held that under Rule 17A, certified copies of instrument establishing the assessee company needs to be verified with the originals. The ld. CIT(E) therefore stated that the assessee company has failed to furnish details and furnish explanation/documentation regarding genuineness of charitable activities undertaken by it inspite of giving sufficient opportunity and being a limitation matter, he decided basis material available on record and assessee company's application seeking registration u/s 12AA was rejected. 9. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that in response to the show cause dated 11.03.2021, the assessee company did submit its response vide letter dated 19th of March, 2021 and it is therefore, factually not correct that the assessee company has not submitted the requisite information and explanation as sought by the ld. CIT(E) rather he has failed to correctly appreciate the submissions so filed by the assessee company. The ld A/R further submitted that registered office of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tax on receipt of an application for registration of a trust to call for such documents as may be necessary to satisfy himself about the genuineness of activities of the trust or institution and make inquiries in that behalf; it empowers the Commissioner to thereupon register the trust if he is satisfied about the objects of the trust or institution and genuineness of its activities. 7. In the present case, the trust was formed as a society on 30-5- 2008 and it applied for registration on 10-7-2008 i.e. within a period of about two months. 8. No activities had been undertaken by the respondent Trust before the application was made. The Commissioner rejected the application on the sole ground that since no activities have been undertaken by the trust, it was not possible to register it, presumably because it was not possible to be satisfied about whether the activities of the trust are genuine. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (for short, the 'Tribunal') reversed the orders of the Commissioner. The Revenue Department approached the High Court by way of filing an appeal. The High Court upheld the order of the Tribunal and came to the conclusion that ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... position would be different where the Commissioner proposes to cancel the registration of a Trust under sub-section (3) of section 12AA of the Act. There the Commissioner would be bound to record the finding that an activity or activities actually carried on by the Trust are not genuine being not in accordance with the objects of the Trust. Similarly, the situation would be different where the trust has before applying for registration found to have undertaken activities contrary to the objects of the Trust. 13. We therefore find that the view of the Delhi High Court in the impugned judgment is correct and liable to be upheld. 14. Ms. Bhati, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, fairly drew our attention to a judgment of the Allahabad High Court in titled as CIT v. R.S. Bajaj Society [2014] 42 taxmann.com 573/222 Taxman 111 (All.) which has taken the same view as that of the Delhi High Court in the impugned judgment. The Allahabad High Court has also referred to a similar view taken by the High Courts of Karnataka and Punjab & Haryana. 15. Apparently, a contrary view has been taken by the Kerala High Court in the case of Self Employers Service Societ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....has been in existence for some time and also by a newly registered trust and there is no stipulation that the trust should have already been in existence and should have undertaken any activities before making the application for registration. Therefore, we are of the view that ratio decidendi of the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court can be applied equally in the instant case where though the assessee company has been in existence for quite some time and is clearly not a newly registered company but at the same time, since no activities are carried on by it since its inception as so claimed by it, it can still apply for registration. However, in this case, where the assessee company is in existence for more than a decade, the ld CIT(E) is well within his jurisdiction to examine such claim of no-activity by the assessee company and where it is found that some activities were actually been carried on by the assessee company, he is bound to record his satisfaction as to whether the activities so carried on are genuine and in accordance with its stated objectives or not. Secondly, the ld CIT(E) is well within his jurisdiction u/s 12AA(1)(a)(ii) to examine whether the asse....