Case Law Details
RELEVANT PARAGRAPH
2. Thus the main thrust of the CIT in refusing to grant continuation of recognition u/s 80G (5) is that PAN details of certain donors were not provided to him.
5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In our considered view , the reasons advanced by the learned CIT for refusing to grant continuation of recognition u/s 80G(5) are superfluous and do not stand to legal scrutiny within the meaning of section 80G(5). For granting recognition u/s 80G(5) or continuation thereof, it has only to be seen whether the conditions laid down under clauses (1) to (5) of section 80G(5) are fulfilled or not. These conditions are (1) income of the institution of fund is granted exemption u/s 11/12 or sub-sections 23AA/23C of section 10, i.e. the assessee society was granted registration u/s 12AA; (2) There should not be any provision in the trust deed’ constitution of the society that income or asset of institution/ fund would be applied/transferred to non-charitable purposes. (3) institution or fund is not expressed for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste, (4) institution/ fund maintains regular accounts of its receipts or expenditure (s); and (5) Institution/ fund is constituted as a public charitable trust and is registered under Societies Registration Act or Companies Act, etc. or is a recognized university or educational institution. W.’ Further, Rule 11AA also does not indicate that nature or type of donation received by the fund or institution would be relevant for granting recognition u/s 80G(5) or continuation thereof. It only requires that application shall be submitted in form No. lOG along with copy of registration u/s 12A in addition to notes on activities of the institution or fund since its inception or during the last three years whichever is less and a copy of the accounts of the institution or fund for that period. Rule 11AA provides power to Commissioner to carry out enquiries as he considers necessary and call for documents or information from the institution/ fund for satisfying himself about the genuineness of its activities. Further clause (e) or Rule 11AA(2) authorizes Commissioner to refuse recognition or continuation therefore only when the conditions laid down in clauses (1) to (5) of sub-section (5) of Section 80G are not fulfilled.
7. Thus neither in the main sub-section (5) or rules made thereunder there is any provision to refuse recognition or continuation thereof only on the ground that the particulars of donors are not provided by Institution or fund. Non-availability of particulars may empower the AO to invoke section 115BBC read with section 13(7) which are effective from 1.4.07 while making the assessment of the society but so far as recognition u/s 80G(5) is concerned , they have no role to play. The provisions of section 115BBC and section 13(7) are applicable for the purposes of considering the anonymous donations as income of the assessee while making the assessment But such anonymous donations are not relevant for deciding whether continuation of recognition u/s 80G(5) is to be granted or not unless there is other material to justify that the assessee society is engaged in the activities which are not charitable activities and are only a camouflage and such anonymous / voluntary donations are a consequence of such uncharitable activities or activities which are not genuine. There are many societies and funds where money is donated in “Hundis” and there are no details of donors. The question of issuing certificate u/s 80G(5) to such donors does not arise as they are not identifiable being anonymous donors but this cannot be a basis for refusing recognition or continuation thereof and thus denying certificate u/s 80G and hence deduction to those donors who come forward and furnished their full particulars including PAN. The only effect of not furnishing particulars by the anonymous donors or in case of donors who do not furnish full particulars including PAN is that certificate u/s 80G may not be issued to them and hence deduction u/s 80G cannot be denied to them in their own assessment. Bui in respect of other donors who arc furnishing their particulars including PAN/certificate and hence, deduction u/s SOG could not be denied by not giving recognition to the society u/s 80G(5) or continuation thereof. In any case, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as in the earlier years and there is no cogent material reason for refusing continuation of recognition. We rely on the other decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs CIT, 193 ITR 321 for the proposition that if circumstances of the case remained the same as in earlier years and there is no material evidence available with the Assessing Officer to take a different view then the decision taken in earlier years has to be followed.
