M/S INDO GLOBAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION SOCIETY vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX AND ANR

PDF · subscribers
CWP/8090/2013HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01095969201319 December 2013Author: MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH,MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL2 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the High Court again after the decision of the appeals by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, in case the petitioner's grievance subsisted after the Tribunal's decision. The court noted that the appeals pending before the ITAT related to the same assessment years (2003-04 to 2009-10) and that the petitioner had paid the entire tax. The court also dismissed an accompanying application (CM No.18039 of 2013) as not pressed. The primary issue of the revocation of exemption under Section 10(23C)(vi) was not decided on merits by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, M/s Indo Global Education Foundation Society, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated March 21, 2013, passed by the Director General of Income Tax (Investigation). This order revoked the exemption granted to the petitioner under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2009-10. The exemption had originally been granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax on February 27, 2007. The petitioner's counsel informed the High Court that appeals concerning these assessment years were pending before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, and that the department had also filed appeals/cross-appeals. The petitioner had already paid the entire tax.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the present writ petition should be adjourned sine die or permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to refile after the decision of the pending appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, given that the appeals cover the same assessment years and the petitioner has paid the entire tax. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that since appeals for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2009-10 were pending before the ITAT, and the department had also filed appeals/cross-appeals, it would be appropriate to either adjourn the writ petition sine die or allow its withdrawal with liberty to approach the court again after the ITAT's decision, should any grievance subsist. The petitioner also noted that the entire tax had been paid. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contention from the revenue regarding the procedural aspect of the writ petition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10(23C)(vi)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: December 19, 2013 M/s Indo Global Education Foundation Society, Mohali ...Petitioner... Versus The Director General of Income Tax (investigation), Chandigarh and another ...Respondents... CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH Present : Mr. Sanjay Bansal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

, J. (Oral)

The petitioner by way of filing present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has impugned order dated 21.03.2013 (Annexure P-1) whereby the Director General of Income Tax-respondent No.1 passed an order under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and revoked the exemption for the assessment years 2003-04 to 2009-10, which was granted by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax vide order dated 27.02.2007 (Annexure P-2).

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the appeals relating to the assessment years 2003-04 to 2009-10 are pending Sonika 2014.01.14 15:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh adjudication before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'A', Chandigarh whereby the department has also filed appeals/cross-appeals. He further submitted that the entire tax has already been paid and in case these appeals are adjudicated in favour of the assessee, it may not be necessary to adjudicate the question raised in the present writ petition. It was pointed out that the appeals are likely to take some time before the Tribunal for decision, therefore, it would be appropriate that either the writ petition may be adjourned sine die or the petitioner may be allowed to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach this Court again after the decision of the appeals by the Tribunal in case the grievance of the petitioner still survives.

3.

In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court again after the decision of the appeals by the Tribunal to challenge Annexure P-1 in case the petitioner has any grievance subsisting after the decision of the appeals by the Tribunal. CM No.18039 of 2013 Learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press the present application. Dismissed as not pressed. (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (JASPAL SINGH) December 19, 2013 JUDGE sonika Sonika 2014.01.14 15:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 10(23C)(vi)

All 517 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10(23C)(vi) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →