DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE TRUST vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS)

WP(C)/12773/2025HC KeralaKLHC01028176202503 April 2025Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the 1st respondent, the Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), to consider and pass appropriate orders on the rectification application filed by the petitioner (Exhibit-P5 dated 13.02.2025) as expeditiously as possible, and at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The Court also ordered that coercive proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to Exhibit-P3 would be kept in abeyance until the rectification application is decided. The Court did not decide on the merits of the rectification application itself, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of its timely disposal. The issue of whether the initial filing before the 2nd respondent was fatal was implicitly resolved by the acceptance of the application filed before the 1st respondent.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Divine Retreat Centre Trust, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the timely disposal of a rectification application (Exhibit-P4) filed against an order (Exhibit-P3). The respondents are the Income Tax Officer (Exemptions) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions). During the proceedings, the revenue's counsel pointed out that the rectification application was initially filed before the 2nd respondent (Commissioner) instead of the 1st respondent (Income Tax Officer). The petitioner then produced a copy of the rectification application filed before the 1st respondent as Exhibit-P5. The High Court heard both parties and decided to dispose of the writ petition with a direction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the rectification application filed by the petitioner should be considered and disposed of in a time-bound manner, as per the petitioner's prayer under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner seeks a direction for the expeditious disposal of their rectification application (Exhibit-P4, later produced as Exhibit-P5) filed against an order (Exhibit-P3). The petitioner implicitly argues that the delay in disposal is causing prejudice. Revenue's Contention: The learned Standing Counsel for the respondents initially pointed out a procedural irregularity, stating that the rectification application was filed before the wrong authority (2nd respondent instead of the 1st respondent). However, upon production of the correct application (Exhibit-P5), the revenue did not raise any further objections regarding the merits of the rectification itself.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

2025:KER:28461 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 12773 OF 2025 PETITIONER: DIVINE RETREAT CENTRE TRUST VINCENTIAN PROVINCIAL HOUSE, ANGAMALY SOUTH, ERNAKULAM REPRESENTED BY ITS TREASURER,FR.RILESH RODRIGUES, PIN - 680316 BY ADVS. K.LATHA JOMTON F. PAYANKAN GAYATHRI NARENDRANATH RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) KOCHI, OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS) 4 TH FLOOR, AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682018 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), AAYAKKAR BHAVAN, OLD RAILWAY STATION ROAD, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682018 BY ADV. P. G. JAYASHANKAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

2025:KER:28461 W.P.(C). No.12773 of 2025 -:2:- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No.12773 of 2025 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2025 JUDGMENT Petitioner seeks for a direction to dispose of Exhibit-P4 rectification application filed against Exhibit-P3 order in a time-bound manner. 2. When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that Exhibit-P4 application for rectification was filed before the 2nd respondent, while the rectification petition should have been filed before the 1st respondent. Subsequently, petitioner produced a copy of the rectification application preferred before the 1st respondent as Exhibit-P5. 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit-P5 rectification application dated 13.02.2025 filed by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of

2025:KER:28461 W.P.(C). No.12773 of 2025 -:3:- receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till then, coercive proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to Exhibit-P3 will be kept in abeyance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jka/03.04.25.

2025:KER:28461 W.P.(C). No.12773 of 2025 -:4:- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12773/2025 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 23-3-1998 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 12 (A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COCHIN TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE PETITIONER FOR THE YEAR 2010-2011. Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER 21- 06-2023 ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143 (3) R.W.S 264 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ALONG WITH THE COMPUTATION SHEET THEREON ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION AGAINST EXHIBIT P3 ORDER FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT FILED UNDER SECTION 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RETIFICATION APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETIONER COMPANY BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →