Hon’ble Dr. Satish Chandra, J.—By this writ petition the petitioner-assessee has assailed the order dated 25.3.2009 passed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Allahabad (hereinafter referred as CCIT), whereby he has refused the registration of the petitioner-assessee under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner-assessee is a registered society registered under the Societies Registration Act, and is running a school namely “YMCA Centenary School”. The Society presently has only two objects as per record and the same are as under :

“1. To control, run and manage educational institutions for imparting education to students right from the Nursery level to College level.

2. To establish and manage educational institutions and to construct or acquire and run or manage hostels for boys and students of our college for furtherance of their education.”

3. The petitioner-assessee has applied for the Registration under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act which is as under :

“...any university or other educational institution existing solely for educational purposes and not for purposes of profit, other than those mentioned in sub-clause(iiiab) or sub-clause (iiiad) and which may be approved by the prescribed authority......”

4. The CCIT has sought the report from the Commissioner of Income Tax (hereinafter referred as CIT) on 1.4.2008 and the same was received on 11.2.2009. On the basis of the report, the respondent No. 1 (CCIT) has refused the registration. Being aggrieved, the petitioner-assessee has filed the present writ petition.

5. With this background Shri Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Suyash Agrawal, learned counsel submits that the petitioner-assessee is a Trust set up at Allahabad. The Trust Society is running an Educational Institution, which is not for the purpose of profit.

6. The petitioner has made an application in Form 56D read with Rule 2/ca of the Income Tax Rules before the CCIT for exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) alongwith the amended copy of the Memorandum of Association, audit report, and other required documents. The petitioner is fulfilling all the requirements, and necessary documents were submitted, but CCIT has refused the exemption for the Assessment Year 2008-09 and onwards though, the registration was granted under Section 12AA vide letter dated 25.09.2008 w.e.f. 1.4.2007.

7. The learned counsel further submits that the Registration Form for the Assessment Year 2008-09 was filed in the name of the Society, where it was claimed that the activities being carried out by the Society in the name of YMCA Centenary School and the same are wholly for education purpose. The lease was granted for 99 years in the year 1910 and the building on the said lease land was erected long back as per lease-deed. In the balance-sheet the value of the building after depreciation reduced to nil.

8. He also submits that it is wrong to say that the Society is not running an educational institution. According to the learned counsel, the Society is providing education and the same is not for profit. To support his argument, he relied upon the ratio laid down in the following cases :

“1. American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute v. CBDT, (2008) 301 ITR 86 (SC);

2. City Montesari School (Regd.) v. Union, (2009) 315 ITR 48 (All);

3. Evening Christian College Society v. CCIT, (2009) 318 ITR 160 (All);

4. Vanita Vaishram Trust v. CCIT, (2010) 327 ITR 121 (Bom);

5. CP Vidya Niketan inter College v. Union, (2013) 359 ITR 322 (All);

6. Vinjane Centre v. DCIT, (2002) 258 ITR 199 (Mad); and

7. Simpkins School v. DG Income Tax (Inv.) and others, (2014) 367 ITR 335 (All)”

9. Lastly, learned counsel readout the charitable purpose mentioned under Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act 1961, and submits that the assessee is fulfilling all the conditions to avail the exemption.

10. On the other hand, learned counsel for th