Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Cuttack
Orissa Olympic Association, … vs Cit(Exemptions), Hyderabad on 6 December, 2019 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.323/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2009-2010 Orissa Olympic Association, Vs. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad
Barabati Stadium, Cuttack
PAN/GIR No.AAAA0 O318 E (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : S/Shri S.K.Tulsyan/Digat Dash, ARs Revenue by : Shri S.M.Keshkamat, CIT, DR Date of Hearing : 07/11/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : /12/ 2019 ORDER

Per C.M.Garg,JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(E) Hyderabad, Bhubaneswar for the assessment year 2009-2010 . 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: ” 1) That the order passed by the Ld. CIT(E) is arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons and bad in law.

2) a.) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) having accepted that the objects of the Association and its activities being charitable, not for the purpose of profit and genuine and having granted registration upto A.Y. 2008-09, erred in having refused registration from A.Y. 2009-10 onwards in effective continuance of registration and the objects of the Association and its activities still being the same by holding that the proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was applicable to the assessee, making it not eligible for registration. P a g e 1 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 b.) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E)
having granted the assessee registration upto A.Y. 2008-09, erred in
having refused registration from A.Y. 2009-10 onwards holding that
the proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was
applicable as the assessee had receipts above Rs.25 lakhs from A.Y.
2009-10 onwards, although none of the activities of the appellant
were related to trade, commerce or business without disputing that
the assessee had utilized 85% of its income in furtherance of its
objects from A.Y. 2009-10 onwards, thus being entitled to exemption
as per section ll(l)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3) That the Ld. CIT(E) having granted registration upto A.Y. 2008-
09, erred in having refused registration from A.Y. 2009-10 onwards
holding that the proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
was applicable since the assessee had receipts above Rs.25 lakhs
from A.Y. 2009-10 onwards in ignorance of the Circular No. 21/2016
[F.NO.197/17/2016-ITA-I], dated 27.05.2016 issued by CBDT holding
that registration already granted u/s 12AA to a charitable institution
shall not be cancelled merely on the ground that the cut-off specified
in the proviso to section 2(15) of the Act is exceeded without there
being any change in the nature of activities of the institution. 4) a.) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.
CIT(E) erred in having refused registration to the assessee from A.Y.
2009-10 onwards in ignorance of the findings of the Hon’ble ITAT,
Cuttack in the assessee’s own case vide order dated 04.07.2014 in
ITA No. 334/CTK/2011 holding that the proviso to section 2(15) of
the Income Tax Act, 1961 will not apply retrospectively, being
inserted only w.e.f 1.4.2009 as a result of which the assessee’s case
will not be hit by the proviso to section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act,
1961 in the year of the Application for Registration being the year
1997.

b.) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E)
erred in refusing to grant the assessee registration u/s 12AA of the
Income Tax Act, \96\ from the A.Y. 2009-10 onwards alleging
violation of section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring the
rationale and legislative intent behind the amendment to section
2(15) by the Finance Act, 2008 which envisaged that an entity
engaged in commercial activities will only be hit by the mischief of
proviso to section 2(15) of the Act and not whose predominant
object was that of general public utility.

P a g e 2 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 5) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(E) erred in refusing to grant the assessee registration u/s 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 from the A.Y. 2009-10 onwards in ignorance of the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income Tax, Orissa, Bhubaneswar’s Order No. Adm (GL) 12 A/58/84-85/30,852 dated 6th of December, 1984 vide which he had granted exemption to the assessee as a charitable institution u/s 4(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1922 and u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in response to the assessee’s application dated 22nd October, 1984 u/s 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and which is still valid and has not been cancelled till date. 6) That the assessee craves leave to amend, alter, modify, substitute, add to, abridge and/ or rescind any or all of the above grounds.”

3. Briefly stated the relevant facts of this case are that the appellant, Orissa Olympic Association was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 860 on 24.2.1961 under registration No.344/42 of 1960-61 having its registered office at Barabati Stadium, Cuttack. The appellant Association had been created for affiliating itself to the Indian Olympic Association (IOA)and enforcing all rules and regulation of the IOA and organizing various gains in the State of Odisha.

4. A search and Seizure operation was carried out in the residential premises of the Honorary Secretary of Orissa Olympic Association on 28.03.2006 and also Survey operation u/s. 133A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was conducted in the business premises of the assessee Association and demands were raised for the A.Ys.2002-2003 to 20.07-08 and the same were confirmed by the first Appellate authority. The Assessee society preferred second appeal against the orders of lower authority before this P a g e 3 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 Tribunal and pleaded that the application filed in 1997 seeking registration U/S.12A of the I.T. Act, 1961 is still pending with the Competent Income Tax Authorities for consideration. The Tribunal accepted such plea put forth by the assessee Association and set aside the assessment orders framed for the A.Ys.2002-03 to 2007-08 for denovo examination pending disposal of the petition filed by the Association u/s.12A of the I.T. Act by the Income tax Authority. Accordingly, following the directions of the Tribunal, the Commissioner of Income Tax, Cuttack called for information from the assessee society vide fetter dated 06.01.2010 and after considering the submissions of the assessee Association, the Commissioner of Income Tax, Cuttack vide order dated 22.03.2010, rejected the application of the assessee Association/ for the reasons stated therein. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Commission of Income Tax, Cuttack, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ITAT. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the Tribunal vide its order in ITA No.334/CTK/2011, dated 04.07.2014, set aside the order of CIT and restored the issue to the file of CIT with the direction that the CIT shall look into the matter of registration of the institution afresh after giving proper and sufficient opportunity to the Assessee Association and clarified that while considering the application of the assessee, the CIT should not apply proviso to Sec. 2(15) retrospectively.

P a g e 4 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 6. Consequent upon the CBDT’s notification No. 65/2014 dt. 13.11.2014 (F. No. 187/38/2014 ITA -I) U/S 120 (1) & (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (So No. 2754(E) published in Gazette of India, extraordinary part – II, sec 3(11) on 22-10-2014 & subsequent notification in this regard, jurisdiction over the case, stands assigned to CIT(E), Hyderabad. Accordingly, as per the directions of the Tribunal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Hyderabad having considered the objectives of the assessee society that they are charitable in nature and not carried out with any object to earn profits, granted registration for the assessment years 1998-99 to 2008-09. However, from assessment year 2009-2010 onwards, the CIT(E) did not grant registration u/s.12A of the Act on the ground that since the income of the assessee exceeded Rs.25 lakhs, in all previous years i.e. 2001-02 to 2008-09, the assessee has violated the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 1.4.2009, and hence did not continue registration. Hence, the assessee association is in appeal before us. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the relevant materials placed on the record of the Tribunal.

8. Ld counsel for the assessee drew our attention to para 8 of the impugned order and submitted that the ld CIT(E) himself noted that the objectives of Orissa Olympic Association would fall in the advancement of any other object of general public utility. Ld counsel further explained that the Association is formed with the objective of furthering and encouraging P a g e 5 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 sports and control over all matters relating to the participation of Orissa in the National and any other games held under the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). Ld counsel further pointed out that the assessee is enjoying exemption u/s.10(23) of the I.T.Act, 1961 w.e.f. 1.4.1974 and application of the assessee for grant of registration u/s.12A of the Act has not been decided in right perspective and the assessee is running between pillar to post seeking such registration.

9. Ld counsel further pointed out that from paras 9, 10 & 11 of the impugned order, it is clear that considering the charitable objects of the appellant, the CIT(E) in para 9 of the order, clearly held that the objects of the appellant are charitable in nature and thus not carried out with any object to earn profits, and he granted registration u/s.12A of the Act from 1998-99 to 2008-09. Ld counsel further explained that after granting said registration for a limited period, the ld CIT(E) in para 10 pressed into service amended provisions of section 2(15) of the Act and contended that the second proviso to said section w.e.f. 1.4.2009 provided that in case where the activities of any trust or institution is of the nature of advancement any other object of general public utility and it involves carrying out of any activity in the nature of trade, commerce, or business but the aggregate value of receipts from such commercial activities does not exceed Rs.25 lakhs in the previous year, the purpose of such trust/institution shall be deemed as charitable despite it deriving P a g e 6 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 consideration from such activities. Ld counsel further submitted that the ld CIT(E) also observed that if the aggregate value of these receipts exceeds the specified cut off, the activity would be no longer be considered as charitable and the income of the trust/institution would not be eligible for tax exemption in that year.

10 Ld counsel further submitted that with these observations, ld CIT(E) held that the incomes received by the assessee as commercial lease rent were clearly in the nature of trade, commerce, or business etc exceeded Rs.25 lakhs in all the previous years and violated the provisions of section 2(15) of the I.T.Act, 1961 as amended w.e.f. 1.4.2009. Ld counsel submitted that when an application seeking registration u/s.12A of the Act is submitted before the competent authority, then he has two options first, to allow registration and second to dismiss the same. Ld counsel submitted that so far as cancellation of registration is concerned, ld CIT(E) cannot blow hot and cold at the same time in the same order i.e. in the first part, grant registration for the specified period and in the second part dismissing the registration of later period on flimsy ground discontinuing the same after specified period. Ld counsel submitted that the registration u/s.12A only enable the assessee to claim exemption u/s.11 & 13 of the Act, which is not automatic and the AO is empowered to examine and verify the receipts, payments and expenditure of the assessee keeping in view the P a g e 7 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 theory of application of funds for charitable purpose while granting exemption for every year to come. Therefore, ld CIT(E) was not correct and right in allowing registration upto assessment year 2008-09 and denying registration for the subsequent period. 11. Placing reliance on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Dahisar Sports Foundation vs ITO (Exemptions)-1, Mumbai, 167 ITD 710 (Mumbai), ld counsel submitted that if the object or purpose of an institution is charitable, the fact that the institution collects certain charges does not alter the character of the institution. It is not necessary that it should provide something for nothing or for less than it costs or for less than the ordinary price. Ld counsel submitted that the incomes received as per financial statement of the appellant in the form of commercial lease rent was incurred for the charitable objects of the appellant association and it is not an allegation of the ld CIT(E) hat the funds including commercial lease rent amount have been diversified or used beyond the charitable objectives of the Association of the Memorandum of Trust.

12. Further, placing reliance on another judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs Khar Gymkhana(2016) 385 ITR 162 (Bom), ld counsel submitted that once registration u/s.12A has been granted considering the charitable objectives of the general public utility of the applicant, then disqualification without examination where receipts from commercial activities exceeds Rs.25 lakhs P a g e 8 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 is not tenable in a case where there is no change in the nature of activities of the appellant and keeping in view the effect of CBDT Circular No.21 of 2016 dated 27th may, 2016, the assessee is entitled to continue the registration u/s.12A of the Act.

13. Further placing reliance on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Mumbai Port Trust vs DIT (Exemptions) in ITA No.262/Mum/2012 order dated 23.2.2018 and drawing our attention to para 5 of the said order, ld counsel submitted that once it has been held that the assessee is entitled for registration u/s.12A of the Act, then, the cancellation of registration granted u/s.12A of the Act can be done by following procedures laid down in sub-section (3) of Section 12AA of the Act and cancellation of registration without justifiable reasons may, therefore, cause additional hardship to an assessee institution due to attraction of tax liability on accreted income. Ld counsel submitted that as per provisions of section 11(1)(a) of the Act, the income derived from the property held by or under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes to the extent to which such income is applied to such purposes in India, and, where any such income is accumulated or set apart for application to such purposes in India, to the extent to which the income so accumulated or set apart, is not in excess of 15% of the income from such property, shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the institution or trust for the purpose of taxation. Ld counsel submitted that keeping in view the observation of ld P a g e 9 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 CIT(E) in paras 8 & 9 of the impugned order, restriction put by him on the basis of baseless and unsustainable grounds on the registration u/s.12A of the Act, and discontinuing the same from assessment year 2009-2010 onwards is not sustainable and correct. Therefore, the ld CIT(E) should be directed to continue the registration from 2009-2010 onwards. 14. Replying to above, ld CIT, DR strongly supported the impugned order and submitted that if it is found just and proper and necessary then the case may kindly be remanded to the file of the ld CIT(E) for redressal of the grievance of the assessee regarding continuance of registration from 2009- 2010 onwards.

15. Placing rejoinder to above, ld counsel for the assessee submitted that originally, the assessee filed application seeking registration u/s.12AA of the Act way back in 1997 and thereafter two round of proceedings have been completed at the end of the Tribunal and if the case is restored back to the file of the ld CIT(E) third time, then it would be a great unjustified to the assessee especially when the ld CIT(E) has already in para 8 of the impugned order noted that the objects of the Orissa Olympic Association would fall in the advancement of any other object of general public utility. Ld counsel submitted that from the objects of the Association, it is ample clear that precisely, the Association has been formed to act as official organization in Olympic matters in the State of Odisha to control, supervise, regulate or encourage various sports and have jurisdiction over all matters P a g e 10 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 pertaining to the participation of sportsmen/sportswomen of Orisha in the national and international events and any other games held under the control & supervision of Indian Olympic Association and there is no profit motive therein. Therefore, ld CIT(E) was not correct in restricting the registration upto the assessment year 2008-09 only and not continuing the same from the subsequent assessment year 2009-2010 onwards. Therefore, it was his prayer that the CIT(E) may kindly be directed to continue the registration from 2009-2010 onwards. 16. On careful consideration of the rival submissions, we are of the considered opinion that the main grievance of the assessee is that the ld CIT(E) granted registration for the assessment years 1998-99 to 2008-09 and in the same order from assessment year 2009-2010 denied to continue the registration u/s.12AA of the Act.

17. For proper adjudication of the grievance of the assessee, we deem it appropriate to reproduce section 12AA of the Act, wherein, the procedure for grant of registration and cancellation of registration has been provided by the legislature. Thus, section 12AA of the Act reads as follows: “12AA. (1) The [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner, on receipt of an application for registration of a trust or institution made under clause (a) or clause (aa) of sub-section (1) of section 12A, shall- (a) call for such documents or information from the trust or institution as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about the P a g e 11 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 genuineness of activities of the trust or institution and may also
make such inquiries as he may deem necessary in this behalf; and (b) after satisfying himself about the objects of the trust or institution
and the genuineness of its activities, he-

(i) shall pass an order in writing registering the trust or institution; (ii) shall, if he is not so satisfied, pass an order in writing refusing to
register the trust or institution, and a copy of such order shall be sent
to the applicant :

Provided that no order under sub-clause (ii) shall be passed unless
the applicant has been given a reasonable opportunity of being
heard.

(1A) All applications, pending before the [Principal Chief
Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner on which no order has been
passed under clause (b) of sub-section (1) before the 1st day of
June, 1999, shall stand transferred on that day to the [Principal
Commissioner or] Commissioner and the [Principal Commissioner or]
Commissioner may proceed with such applications under that sub-
section from the stage at which they were on that day. (2) Every order granting or refusing registration under clause (b) of
sub-section (1) shall be passed before the expiry of six months from
the end of the month in which the application was received under
clause (a) or clause (aa) of sub-section (1) of section 12A. (3) Where a trust or an institution has been granted registration
under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at
any time under section 12A [as it stood before its amendment by the
Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996)] and subsequently the
[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner is satisfied that the
activities of such trust or institution are not genuine or are not being
carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or institution,
as the case may be, he shall pass an order in writing cancelling the
registration of such trust or institution:

Provided that no order under this sub-section shall be passed
unless such trust or institution has been given a reasonable
opportunity of being heard.

P a g e 12 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 [(4) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (3), where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under section 12A [as it stood before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996)] and subsequently it is noticed that the activities of the trust or the institution are being carried out in a manner that the provisions of sections 11 and 12 do not apply to exclude either whole or any part of the income of such trust or institution due to operation of sub-section (1) of section 13, then, the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner may by an order in writing cancel the registration of such trust or institution: Provided that the registration shall not be cancelled under this sub- section, if the trust or institution proves that there was a reasonable cause for the activities to be carried out in the said manner.]” 18. From the above procedural mandate of section 12AA of the Act, we clearly observe that the procedure for grant of registration has been provided in sub-section (1)& (2) and the procedure for cancellation of registration has been provided in sub-section (3) & (4) of Section 12A of the Act. Sub-section (1) of Section 12AA provides that on receipt of an application for registration of a trust or institution made under clause (a) or (aa) or clause (ab), the Pr. Commissioner or Commissioner shall call for such documents or information from the trust or institution as he thinks necessary in order to satisfy himself about the genuineness of the activities of the trust or institution and may also make such inquiries as he may deem necessary in this behalf.

19. it is also ample clear that the procedure for cancellation of registration u/s. 12A of the Act has been provided in sub-section(3) of P a g e 13 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 Section 12AA of the Act, which provides that where a trust or an institution has been granted registration under clause (b) of sub-section (1) or has obtained registration at any time under section 12A [as it stood before its amendment by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 (33 of 1996)] and subsequently the [Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner is satisfied that the activities of such trust or institution are not genuine or are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or institution, as the case may be, he shall pass an order in writing cancelling the registration of such trust or institution. Proviso to sub-section(3) also provides that no order under this sub-section shall be passed unless such trust or institution has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 20. Keeping in view of above mandate of section 12AA of the Act for providing procedure for grant of registration and cancellation of registration, when we consider the facts of the present case and evaluate the validity of the impugned order on the touchstone of the provisions of the Act, then we find that the ld CIT(E) considering the objects of the appellant that they are charitable in nature and not carried out with any object to earn profits, granted registration u/s.12AA of the Act from assessment year 1998-99 to 2008-09. However, in subsequent para 10 and 11 of the impugned order, the ld CIT (E) considering the amended proviso to section 2(15) of the Act and keeping in view the income of the appellant received in the form of commercial lease rent did not continue the registration from assessment P a g e 14 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 year 2009-2010 onwards and this action of the CIT (E) gave rise to this appeal.

21. Undisputedly, in para 8 of the impugned order, the ld CIT (E) noted that the appellant is enjoying exemption u/s.10(23) of the Act w.e.f. 1.4.1974 and in para 9, ld CIT(E) further noted that the objects of the appellant are charitable in nature and are not being carried out with any object to earn profits and with these observations, he granted registration under section 12A of the Act from 1998-99 to 2008-09. At thus juncture, we are in agreement with the contention of ld counsel that as per section 11(1)(a) of the Act the lease rent incomes from the property held under the trust are wholly for charitable or religious purposes which is applied for the charitable purposes of trust income then, same is not taxable and exempt in the hands of trust or institution. From the vigilant reading of the impugned order, we clearly see that except lease rent income, there is no allegation of the ld CIT(E) to support that the incomes received by the assessee as commercial lease rent are in the nature of trade or commerce or trade, which violate the provisions of section 2(15) of the Act as amended w.e.f. 1.4.2009.

22. Further, as per order of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Dahisar Sports Foundation (supra), it is clear that if the objects of the trust are charitable, the fact that the institution collects certain charges or receipts or income P a g e 15 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 does not alter the character of the institution and it is necessary that it should provide something for nothing or for less than it costs or for less than the ordinary price.

23. As per the proposition laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Khar Gymkhana (supra), wherein, it is held that where there is no change in the nature of activities of the trust and the registration already granted u/s.12A of the Act, then same cannot be disqualified without examination where receipts from commercial activities exceeds Rs.25 lakhs as per Circular No.21 of 16 dated 27.5.2016.

24. Furthermore, as per order of ITAT Mumbai in the case of Mumbai Port Trust (supra), the process of cancellation of registration has to be done in accordance with the provisions of section 12AA(3) & (4) of the Act after carefully examining the applicability of these provisions. 25. In the present case, in the same order, the ld CIT(E) granted registration to the assessee from assessment year 1998-99 to 2008-09 and also denied continuance of registration w.e.f 2009-10 onwards without affording an opportunity to the assessee regarding the doubts arisen in the minds of the CIT(E). Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the assessee has already move upto the Tribunal in three rounds of proceedings seeking grant of registration u/s.12AA of the Act, we are of the considered view that it would be a great injustice to the appellant if the case is restored to the P a g e 16 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 file of the CIT(E) for third time. Thus, we decline to accept the prayer of ld CIT DR for restoring the matter to the file of the CIT(E) for fresh consideration.

26. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the income earned by the assessee from commercial lease rent, which is the only point of denying the continuance of registration from assessment year 2009-2010 is not a sustainable ground for dis-continuing the registration already granted to the assesse. In our humble and considered opinion, when the registration u/s.12A of the Act has been granted to the appellant and ld CIT (E) is satisfied that the activities of the assessee trust falls within the ambit of charitable and OF general public utility and on the same basis, he has granted registration u/s.12A of the Act to the appellant from the assessment years 1998-99 to 2008-09. The barriers created by the ld CIT(E) from 2009-2010 onwards , where he denied to continue the same registration is also not sustainable on this count that the assessee was not provided proper opportunity of hearing before passing such order denying continuance of registration as per mandate of sub-section(3) of Section 12AA of the Act. We dismiss the observation of ld CIT(E) recorded for the purpose of restricting the registration u/s.12AA of the Act from 2009-2010 onwards. However, we are cautious that the powers of granting registration and cancelling the registration are emanating in sub-section (3) & (4) of Section 12AA are P a g e 17 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 always in existence and in subsequent period if it is found that the activities are not genuine and are not being carried out in accordance with the objects of the trust or institution as the case may be, he shall pass an order in writing cancelling the registration of such trust or institution after allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee 27. In view of foregoing discussion, we reached to a logical conclusion that once the ld CIT (E) has granted registration u/s.12A of the Act, then, same is required to be continued till it is cancelled by way of following the procedure provided in sub-section (3) & (4) of Section 12AA of the Act and without following such procedure, the registration cannot be restricted or upto the specified time and cannot be discontinued by way of cancelling the same for subsequent period in the same order. Therefore, we set aside the order of ld CIT (E) and hold that the registration granted for the assessee w.e.f. A.Y. 1998-99 to 2008-09 is also continued direct him to grant registration from 2009-10 onwards. Hence, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed in the terms as indicated above,. 28. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on 6/12/2019. Sd/- sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) (Chandra Mohan Garg) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Cuttack; Dated 6 /12/2019 P a g e 18 | 19 ITA No.323/CT K/2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0 B.K.Parida, SPS
Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. The Appellant : Orissa Olympic Association, Barabati Stadium, Cuttack 2. The Respondent. CIT (Exemptions), Hyderabad 3. DR, ITAT, Cuttack
4. Guard file.
//True Copy// By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack P a g e 19 | 19

News Reporter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: