DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX [EXEMPTION] vs. TUBERCULSIS RESEARCH CENTRE
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the Tribunal had committed an error in directing the DIT (Exemption) to grant registration to the assessee under Section 12A of the Act with effect from 19.02.1986. The Court noted that the trust was already enjoying exemption under Section 10(21) and the application for exemption was made after nineteen years of formation without sufficient cause. The Court reasoned that the exemption should have been granted from the date of application for the relevant year, i.e., from 25.11.2005. Therefore, the competent authority was directed to grant registration to the assessee under Section 12A of the Act with effect from 25th November, 2005. The Tribunal's order was modified to this extent. The substantial question of law was answered accordingly.
What were the facts?
The Director of Income Tax (Exemption) (appellant-revenue) granted registration under Section 12AA to Tuberculosis Research Centre (respondent-assessee) from 01.04.2005. However, the revenue did not condone the delay in the assessee's application for registration from the trust's formation date. The assessee appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), which condoned the delay and directed the revenue to consider registration from the trust's formation date (19.02.1986), giving the assessee an opportunity. The assessee's application was made on 25.11.2005, nearly nineteen years after formation, without sufficient cause. The High Court was hearing an appeal by the revenue against the ITAT's order.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the DIT (Exemption) to grant registration to the assessee under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with effect from 19.02.1986, the date of formation of the Trust, despite the application being made only on 25.11.2005 without showing any sufficient cause. Assessee's contentions: The assessee supported the impugned order of the Tribunal, submitting that the view taken by the Tribunal was just and proper and there was no reason to interfere. Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that the Tribunal committed an error by condoning the delay and directing the appellant to consider the matter for issuance of registration under Section 12AA. The revenue requested the Court to allow the appeal and quash the Tribunal's order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
O/TAXAP/459/2007 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 459 of 2007 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX [EXEMPTION]....Appellant(s) Versus TUBERCULSIS RESEARCH CENTRE....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR BD KARIA, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Page 1 of 4
O/TAXAP/459/2007 JUDGMENT Date : 11/12/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant-revenue has challenged the order dated 04.09.2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad [ for short “the Tribunal”] in ITA No. 1452/Ahd/2006, whereby the appeal preferred by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant- revenue granted registration under Section 12AA to the respondent-assessee with effect from 01.04.2005, however, the appellant did not condone the delay in applying for registration from the date of formation of the trust. Against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing the parties condoned the delay and restored the matter back to the appellant to consider the issuance of registration under Section 12A from the date of formation of the trust, after giving opportunity to the assessee. Hence, this appeal is filed at the instance of the revenue. 3. While admitting this appeal on 04.12.2007, the Court had formulated the following substantial question of law:- (A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the DIT (Exemption) to grant registration to the assessee u/S.12A of Page 2 of 4
O/TAXAP/459/2007 JUDGMENT the Act with effect from 19.02.1986 i.e. from the date of formation of the Trust though application was made only on 25.11.2005 without showing any sufficient cause 4. Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue has submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error in passing the impugned order. He further submitted that the Tribunal ought not to have condoned the delay and directed the appellant to consider the matter for issuance of registration under Section 12AA, after giving opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, he requested this Court to allow this appeal and quashed and set aside the order of the Tribunal. 5. On the other hand, learned advocate for the for the respondent-assessee has supported the impugned order of the Tribunal and submitted that the view taken by the Tribunal is just and proper, therefore, there is no germane reason to interfere with the order of the Tribunal.
We have heard learned advocate for the parties and considered the submissions. It appears from the record that the trust is already enjoying exemption under Section 10(21) of the Act. Further, it appears that the application for exemption was made by the assessee on 25.11.2005 i.e. after a period of nineteen years of the formation and that too without showing any sufficient cause. Therefore, we are of the view that the Tribunal has committed an error in Page 3 of 4
O/TAXAP/459/2007 JUDGMENT directing the DIT (Exemption) to grant registration to the assessee under Section 12A of the Act with effect from 19.02.1986. The Tribunal ought to have granted the exemption to the assessee from the date of application for the relevant year i.e. from 25th November, 2005. Therefore, the competent authority is directed to grant exemption to the assessee to grant registration to the assessee u/S.12A of the Act with effect from 25th November, 2005. 7. In view of the above, the present appeal stands disposed of. The question of law involved in this appeal is answered accordingly. The order of the Tribunal stands modified to the above extent. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J)
pawan Page 4 of 4
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Jashim Uddin vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OrsGauhati · 1 Nov 2026
- Mohammed Khadeer Baig vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 1 Nov 2026