TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 722
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1 The order of the CIT(E), Hyderabad is erroneous in law and on the facts of the case. 2 The CIT(E), Hyderabad erred in concluding in a very causal manner that the University has not carried out any substantial charitable activity. 3 The CIT(E), Hyderabad erred in not appreciating the fact that 'education ' is a charitable purpose under Section 2(15), which is being pursued by the appellant from its inception on May 20, 2020. 4 The CIT(E), Hyderabad erred in not properly appreciating the charitable activity of education being carried out by the appellant in the past periods as submitted in response to notices issued during the approval proce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s, which aggregated to incurring expenditure over Rs. 14 Crores during the past periods. 10 The CIT(E), Hyderabad failed to consider the charitable activity of education of the appellant in grating 365 student scholarships worth Rs. 3.65 Crores. 11 The CIT(E), Hyderabad failed to appreciate the appellant is using infrastructure worth around Rs. 582.24 crores provided by its sponsoring body Mahindra Educational Institutions for carrying out the charitable activity of education. 12 The CIT(E), Hyderabad failed to appreciate that the charitable nature of the institution and the utilization of the funds for the charitable purpose has been conclusively examined at the time of grant of approval under section 10(23C). ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....novation Centre, DRDLK, ISRO etc. so that the students are equipped with better exposure to practical issues and also helpful in their employment career after education. The assessee university campus is spread over 107 acres of land to facilitate various educational activities. By considering all these facts and the nature of activities of the assessee university, it was granted exemption approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) by learned CIT (Exemption) Hyderabad vide order dated 10/02/2021. The learned AR has further contended that at the time of granting approval u/s 10(23C)(vi), the learned CIT (Exemption) examined the charitable nature of activities of the assessee being education of the University and only after complete satisfaction about the char....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....niversity i.e. Telangana Ordinance No.1 of 2020, dated 20/05/2020. The assessee furnished all the details of donation for the verification of the learned CIT (Exemption). The learned CIT (Exemption) has not found anything from the record to doubt the genuineness of the activities of the assessee. Thus, the assessee has satisfied the condition as provided u/s 80G of the Act. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision dated 11/08/2017 of the Amritsar Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Seth Vinod Kumar Somani Charitable Trust vs. CIT (E) in ITA No.570/ASR/2016 for the A.Y 2016-17 and submitted that the Tribunal has observed that once the registration u/s 12AA is granted on satisfaction of the condition laid down therein,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... institution is a necessary condition for which the CIT has to satisfy himself before granting approval u/s 80G(5) of the I.T. Act, 1961. In case he is not satisfied about these conditions, he shall pass an order in writing rejecting such application. Thus, the learned DR has submitted that the impugned order passed by the Pr. CIT is as per the provisions of section 80G(5) of the Act as the assessee failed to produce the proof of expenditure to establish the charitable nature of the activities of the assessee. The learned DR has further contended that in the reply to the notice, the assessee has simply stated that the record is voluminous and cannot be uploaded. However, the sample bills and vouchers could have been produced by the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing the impugned order and rejecting the application of the assessee has given the reasons in para 3 as under: "3. On perusal of the submissions of the assessee, it is observed that no charitable activities are being carried out by the assessee trust, which is in violation of provisions of section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. In light of the above facts, the present application in form 10AB for registration u/s 80G is herewith rejected." 6. It is apparent from the impugned order of the CIT (E) that it is a non-speaking cryptic order summarily rejecting the application without giving a definite finding of fact that the activities carried out by the assessee university are not charitable in nature or are not genuine for achieving its....