SNEHATHEERAM CHARITABLE TRUST, vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION),

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/6219/2024HC KeralaKLHC01083155202404 April 2024Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. K. SINGH4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court found a mismatch between the petitioner's submission of documents and the department's stand in the impugned order. The Court noted that the department's order suggested the petitioner did not submit documents on the date fixed for hearing (22.11.2022). Considering this discrepancy, the Court concluded that a mistake or omission had occurred in the impugned order. Consequently, the order was set aside. The writ petition was allowed, and the matter was remitted back to the respondent (Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)) to reconsider the petitioner's application (Ext.P2) afresh. The petitioner was permitted to appear before the respondent with all relevant documents on 09.04.2024. The principle established is that procedural lapses or factual inaccuracies in the assessment order leading to rejection of an application warrant reconsideration.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Snehatheeram Charitable Trust, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala challenging an order (Ext.P9) by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption). This order rejected the Trust's application (Ext.P2) for registration/approval under Sections 80G and 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The rejection was based on the ground that the Trust failed to submit relevant documents for the Section 80G certificate, despite being served a notice. The Trust contended that it had submitted all necessary documents in response to a notice dated 16.11.2022, vide a letter dated 01.11.2022, contradicting the impugned order's assertion of non-submission.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order (Ext.P9) rejecting the petitioner's application (Ext.P2) for registration under Sections 80G and 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is sustainable, given the petitioner's claim of having submitted all required documents. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that they had submitted all relevant documents vide a letter dated 01.11.2022 in response to a notice dated 16.11.2022. They asserted that the impugned order incorrectly stated that no documents were submitted. The petitioner sought to quash the rejection order and direct the respondent to consider their application. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions from the revenue. The impugned order's basis was the alleged failure of the petitioner to submit documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80G,Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 6219 OF 2024 PETITIONER/S: SNEHATHEERAM CHARITABLE TRUST, WARD NO. 45 BT11/37A, CHERUVANNUR, KOZHIKODE REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE AND VICE CHAIRMAN, SHRI. ABOOBACKER SIDIQUE T., PIN - 673655 BY ADVS. A.KUMAR P.J.ANILKUMAR G.MINI(1748) P.S.SREE PRASAD RESPONDENT/S: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), 2ND FLOOR, SANJUAN TOWER, BEHIND C.R. BUILDING, KOCHI, PIN - 682018 OTHER PRESENT: SRI. JOSE JOSEPH- SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) NO. 6219 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner being aggrieved by the order in Ext.P9 whereby, the petitioner’s application in Ext.P2 under Sections 80G and 12A of the Income Tax, 1961(‘the IT Act’ for short) has been rejected on the ground that despite the service of notice, the petitioner has failed to submit the relevant documents for issuing the certificate under Section 80G of the IT Act has filed the present writ petition with following prayers:- “It is humbly prayed that this Honourable Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to Exhibit P2 application for permanent registration/approval under section 80G and Exhibit P9 order of rejection and; A. Issue a Writ of Certiorari quashing Exhibit P9 order of rejection. B. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or such other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent to consider Exhibit P2 application forthwith.” 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response to the notice in Ext.P5 dated 16.11.2022, the petitioner had submitted all the relevant documents vide Ext.P3 letter dated 01.11.2022. However, the impugned order suggests that the petitioner did not submit any document in response to the notice dated 16.11.2022 in Ext.P5. 3.It appears that there is some mismatch. This stand of the department in the impugned order is that the petitioner did

WP(C) NO. 6219 OF 2024 3 not submit the document on 22.11.2022 which is the date fixed for hearing. Considering this grounds, it appears that some mistake / omissions has crept into in the impugned order, and therefore, the same is set aside. In view thereof, the writ petition is allowed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent to reconsider the petitioner’s application in Ext.P2 afresh. The petitioner is permitted to appear before the respondent along with all the relevant documents on 09.04.2024. Sd/- DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE SJ

WP(C) NO. 6219 OF 2024 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6219/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE

COPY

THE

PROVISIONAL REGISTRATION FOR 80G DATED 16.11.2021. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM 10AB FOR APPROVAL OF PROVISIONAL REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 80G DATED 17.5.2022. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 1.11.2022 CALLING FOR DETAILS ON THE 80G APPLICATION. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.11.2022 ON THE 12A REGISTRATION. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.11.2022. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 21.11.2022 PRODUCING THE DOCUMENTS IN REGARD TO THE 80G QUERY OF 1.11.2022. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER PRODUCING THE DOCUMENTS ON THE QUERY OF 10.11.2022 IN THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 12A. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.11.2022 ALLOWING 12A PERMANENT APPROVAL. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.11.2022 REJECTING 80G APPLICATION. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RESPONSE RECEIVED IN THE PORTAL DATED NIL EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE GRIEVANCE RESOLUTION DATED 30.09.2023. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT BY POST DATED 2.1.2024. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 03.01.2024.

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →