Hatkeshwar Mahadev Trust Vs CIT (Exemption) (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Facts
Hatkeshwar Mahadev Trust, Lunawada (Dist. Mahisagar, Gujarat) was granted provisional registration u/s 12A vide Form 10AC dated 27.05.2021. Subsequently, it applied for final registration u/s 12AB in Form 10AB on 30.06.2023.
CIT(E) rejected the application on 20.12.2023 holding that the objects of the Trust were confined to the Lunawada Nagar caste. According to CIT(E), this amounted to a “specified violation” as per Explanation to Sec.12AB(4)(d) & hence the Trust was not eligible for registration.
Objects referred by CIT(E) included:
- Temple darshan & seva restricted to “Nagar brothers”.
- Provision of utensils for caste ceremonies.
- Welfare activities for Vishnagara Nagar caste of Lunawada.
- Educational assistance only to Lunawada Nagar caste students.
Contention before Tribunal
The Trust argued that no actual income was applied for the benefit of any particular caste or community. Merely stating caste-based objects in the deed could not be treated as a “specified violation” unless income was in fact so applied.
Tribunal’s Observations/ Decision
- Clause (d) of Explanation to Sec.12AB(4) clearly uses the word “applied”.
- A specified violation arises only if income is actually applied for benefit of a particular caste/community.
- CIT(E) did not conduct any inquiry or bring material on record to show that income was so applied.
- Denial of registration merely on the basis of trust objects is incorrect & contrary to law.
- ITAT held that the CIT(E) wrongly rejected registration.
- Directed CIT(E) to grant registration u/s 12AB.
Mere recital of caste-based objects in the trust deed, without proof of actual application of income to a particular caste/community, does not amount to a specified violation under Sec.12AB(4). Registration cannot be denied solely on that ground.
