KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM TRUST vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/8727/2021HC KeralaKLHC01023002202108 July 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in view of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, quashed and set aside the impugned order at Ext.P5. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration to the 2nd respondent (The Commissioner of Income Tax). The petitioner was directed to appear before the 2nd respondent on July 19, 2021, at 11:00 AM and to abide by further directions. The Court noted that the petitioner shall cooperate with the 2nd respondent for expeditious decision-making. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly. No specific finding was made on the merits of the original dispute, as the matter was remitted.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Kizhakke Kovilakam Trust, represented by its Manager, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenged an order, marked as Ext.P5, passed by the respondents. The petitioner alleged non-compliance with the principles of natural justice. The respondents, represented by their Standing Counsel, acknowledged the petitioner's grievance regarding natural justice. They expressed a willingness to grant the petitioner one more opportunity to present their case and to decide the matter afresh. The specific assessment year(s) and the exact nature of the order under challenge are not explicitly detailed in the provided text.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order at Ext.P5, which the petitioner alleges violates principles of natural justice, should be quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner contended that principles of natural justice were not followed in the passing of the impugned order. Revenue's Contention: The respondents (Revenue) submitted that they were desirous of granting the petitioner one more opportunity to present their case and to decide the matter afresh. They agreed that the impugned order could be quashed with a direction to decide the matter afresh.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BADAR THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 8727 OF 2021 PETITIONER: KIZHAKKE KOVILAKAM TRUST, VIII KOVILAKAM, KOTTAKKAL, KOTTAPPADI, MALAPPURAM - 676 503, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, SRI. DILEEP KIZHAKKE COVILAKAM. BY ADV. DIVYA RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTION WARD, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE - 673 001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SANJUAN TOWER, BEHIND CR BUILDING, KOCHI - 682 018. SRI. CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM,SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C). No.8727 OF 2021 2

JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that as the petitioner is alleging non compliance of principles of natural justice, respondents are desirous of granting one more opportunity of giving to the petitioner and to decide the matter afresh. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that therefore the impugned order at Ext.P5 can be quashed with a direction to the respondents to decide the matter afresh.

3.

In view of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents, the impugned order at Ext.P5 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted for fresh consideration to the 2nd respondent. The petitioner to appear before the 2nd respondent on 19.07.2021 at 11.00 A.M and then to abide by further directions of the 2nd respondent. Needless to mention

WP(C). No.8727 OF 2021 3 that the petitioner shall co-operate with the 2nd respondent in getting the matter decided expeditiously. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. A.M.BADAR JUDGE SPR

WP(C). No.8727 OF 2021 4

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8727/2021 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE ACT DATED 21.10.2005. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 10G APPLICATION DATED 27.04.2020 SUBMITTED FOR SEEKING APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 80G (5) (VI) BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 04.09.2020 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILED NOTE DATED 07.02.2021 PREPARED BY THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE/CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER U/S 80G (5) (VI) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED 17.02.2021 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →