Mathur, J.
1. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed against the order dated 27.7.2000 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur directing the Commissioner of income-tax, Jodhpur to grant registration to the applicant society under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. This appeal has been admitted by the order of this court dated 24.7.2001 on the following substantial question of law :-
'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that on the proper construction of aims and objects of the assessee association as disclosed in its Constitution fall within the purview of Section 2(15) of the income Tax Act so as to entitle the assessee society to registration under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act?'
3. The respondent assessee is a society registered under the Rajasthan Society Registration Act, 1958 in the name of 'Jodhpur Chartered Accountants Society, Jodhpur'. The assessee's application filed under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act on 1.7.1999 was rejected by the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, Jodhpur dated 17.1.2000 having held that object of the society does not fall within the category denoted by the words 'advancement of any other object of general public utility' appearing in Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act and as such is not a charitable society. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal after examining the aims and object of the society arrived at the conclusion that the objects of the applicant society do embrace, within its fold, a group of individuals of a particular class of society i.e., Chartered Accountants, still they form a section of public distinguished from specified individuals. As they are engaged in activities of general public utility, it falls in the category of charitable society, in view of the finding, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal by the impugned order directed to grant registration to the assessee society under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
4. It is contended by Mr. Sandeep Bhandawat, learned counsel appearing for the revenue that membership of the applicant society is not to the public at large and the benefits of the activities of the applicants are restricted to Chartered Accountant Members of the Institute. It is further submitted that in the city of Jodhpur there is only one branch of institute of Chartered Accountant as such it is not understandable as to what activities the said Jodhpur Branch will undertake that may make the society a charitable one. It is apprehended that if the test for charitable institution is applied liberally, many societies or trusts simply by a high sounding words in object clause will succeed in getting exemption from tax under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act. The learned counsel placed reliance on the decision of Karnataka High Court in CIT v. Bel Employees Death Relief Fund and Service Benefit Fund Association : [1997]225ITR270(KAR) , wherein it is held that if individuals, whose only common quality is their profession or vocation but can legitimately be invested with the attributes of a public nature, then every partnership, company or an association of person can be with an object of charity and the trusts created for benefit of such partnerships, companies and associations would be charitable trusts earning exemption under Section 11. The court further observed that absurdity of such a situation cannot be over emphasised. On the other hand, it is submitted by Mr. N.M. Ranka, Senior Advocate appearing for the assessee society that profession of Chartered Accountants is similar to legal profession and anything done for education or knowledge of profession falls within of general public utility. It is further submitted that membership of the applicant society is given to a class of persons and not to the specified persons. It is submitted that requirement of Section 2(15) is fulfilled, inasmuch as, that society will educate the people on the subject of auditing, accounting, direct or indirect taxes by holding seminars, conferences and workshops etc. Thus, according to Mr. Ranka, the object of the society as included in the Constitution pertains to general public utility. The learned counsel has placed reliance on the following decisions :-
1. CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce, 55 ITR 72.
2. Addl. CIT v. Madras Jewellers and Diamond Merchant Association : [1981]129ITR214(Mad) .
3. CIT v. A.P. Bankers & Pawnbrokers Association : [1988]170ITR476(AP) .
4. Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh v. CIT : [1983]143ITR584(All) .
5. Bar Council of Maharashtra v. CIT : [1980]126ITR27(Bom) .
6. CIT v. Bar Council of Maharashtra : [1981]130ITR28(SC) .
7. Bar council of Rajasthan v. CIT .
8. CIT v. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association : [1983]140ITR1(SC) .
9. Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association v. CIT : [1971]82ITR704(SC) .
5. In order to consider the point germane, to the controversy, it would be appropriate to make mention of the relevant provisions of law i.e., Section 11 and 12-A. Part III of Income Tax Act deals with the 'Incomes which do not form part of total income.' Section 11 excludes income from property held for charitable or religious purposes of trust or institution from the total income of the previous year. Thus, in order to take advantage of Section 11 a trust or institution has to get its registration under Section 12A. After amendment w.e.f. 1.4.1997 the registration of the trust or institution is mandatory as per the procedure laid down in Section 12AA. Section 12-A reads as follows :-
'12-A. The provisions of Section 11 and Section 12 shall not apply in relation to the income of any trust or institution unless the following conditions are fulfilled, namely :-
(a) the person in receipt of the income has made an application for registration of the trust or institution in the prescribed form and in the prescribed manner to the Commissioner before the 1st day of July, 1973, or before the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the creation of the trust or the establishment of the institution, whichever is later : Provided that the Commissioner may, in his discretion, admit an application for the registration of any trust or institution after the expiry of the period aforesaid....'
6. Thus, unless the authority is satisfied that the applicant trust or institution is a charitable or religious, it can not be registered under Section 12-A. Clause (15) of Section 2 of the Act defines 'Charitable purpose', which is extracted as follows :-
'2. In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,....
(15) 'charitable purpose' includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility;'
7. From a reading of Sections 11 and 12A, it is evident that at the stage of filing an application for registration, the Commissioner is required to examine whether the application is made in accordance with requirements of Section 12-A read with relevant rules. He is further required to examine whether the objects of the trust or society are charitable or not. According to Section 2(15) the expression 'charitable purpose' has been defined by way of inclusive definition so as to include :-
(a) relief of the poor, or
(b) education, or
(c) medical relief, and
(d) advancement of any other object of general public utility.
8. It is well settled that in order that a purpose may qualify for being regarded as an object of general public utility, it must be intended to benefit a section of public as distinguished from specified individuals.
9. We do not consider it necessary to deal with all the cases cited at Bar except the decision of the Apex Court in Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association v. CIT (supra), which provides sufficient binding guideline to resolve the controversy involved in the instant case. We may usefully extract the observations of the Supreme Court making the position clear with respect to benefit to a section of public and specified individuals.
'...an object beneficial to a section of the public is an object of general public utility. To serve a charitable purpose it is not necessary that the object should be to benefit the whole of mankind or all persons in a country or State. It is sufficient if the intention to benefit a section of the public as distinguished from a specified individual is present. The section of the community sought to be benefited must be sufficiently definite and identifiable by some common quality of a public or impersonal nature.'
10. Applying the test laid down by the Apex Court in the Ahmedabad Rana Caste Association case (supra), we find that predominant object of the society is dissemination of knowledge and education of commercial laws, tax laws for the benefit of general public to inculcate a sense of responsibility towards the nation and foster law abiding citizens. The object clause of Constitution emphasizes to propagate and disseminate knowledge about the auditing, accounting, direct and indirect taxes by holding seminars, conferences and workshops etc. The fruits of such seminars, conferences etc. would be available to public at large, thus, it appears that society is not for the benefit of a small group of individuals and it is also not only for the benefit of members but to promote awareness and education of the commercial and tax laws for the general public without any profit motive. As observed by the Supreme Court, to serve a charitable purpose it is not necessary that the object should be to benefit the whole of mankind or all persons in a country or State, even if the section of public is given benefit, it cannot be said that it is not a trust for charitable purpose in the interest of the public. In the situation of explosion in population, the vast changes brought by the scientific technology and other developments, more particularly, the universal concept of globalisation, new trends in the world order to meet the ever growing challenges to organising seminars, conferences and workshops to educate the people of commercial laws, tax laws, auditing, accounting, direct and indirect taxes are of great general public utility, at least to a section of people falling in the category of charitable institution. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly directed the Commissioner of Income-tax to grant registration to the applicant society under Section 12-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
11. We find no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed.