CHANKYA MANDAL vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

RNG    1                                                       wp1361.14 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1361 OF 2014 Chankya Mandal Pune .. Petitioner vs. Union of India & Ors .. Respondents Mr. D.J.Dalal i/b Mr.S.B.Deshmukh for Petitioner Mr.Vimal Gupta Sr.Advocate i/b Ms.Padma Divakar for Respondents ... CORAM : M.S.SANKLECHA AND G.S.KULKARNI,JJ

DATE : 10 JUNE 2014 PC. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the challenge is to three communications dated 13.1.2014 seeks information for scrutiny Assessment for the A.Y. 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 and a notice dated 28.11.2013 under section 143 (2) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act) for Assessment year 2011-12. 2. The Petitioner is an educational public charitable trust. The Petitioner was issued notices under section 148 of the Act, seeking to re- open the assessment for the Assessment years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. The Petitioners did not raise any objection to the notices issued under section 148 of the Act seeking to reopen the assessment for the

RNG    2                                                       wp1361.14 Assessment Years 2009-2010 to 2011-2012. Thereafter, the Petitioner was issued a notice under section 143 (2) of the Act dated 28.11.2013 in respect of Assessment year 2011-12 and called upon to attend the hearing before the Assessing Officer on 6.12.2013. Thereafter, on 13.1.2014 the petitioners received three communications all dated 13.1.2014 for Assessment Years 2009-2010 to 2011-2012 informing the Petitioner that the scrutiny assessment for three Assessment years are to be carried out and called upon the petitioners to furnish certain information. 3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that the three notices dated 13.1.2014 and notice under section 143 (2) of the Act on 28.11.2013 are without jurisdiction in as much as once the Petitioner has been granted registration under section 12A of the Act, it is not open to the Assessing officer to proceed for assessment under section 143 of the Act. In support, reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Hiralal Bhagwati Vs.Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 246 ITR 188 (Guj) and the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax vs Surat City Gymkhana reported in (2008) 14 Supreme Court Cases 169. Both the above decisions are inapplicable to the present facts. So far as Hiralal Bhagwati (supra) is concerned the challenge was to the notice issued under section 148 of the Act which proceeded in the face of section 12A certificate to contend that the petitioner is not for a charitable purpose. In that context it was held that assessment cannot be reopened in the face of registration under section 12A of the Act being valid and subsisting. So far as Surat

RNG    3                                                       wp1361.14 City Gymkhana (supra) is concerned, the same also dealt with the issue that where the assessee has a registration under section 12A of the Act, the Assessing Officer cannot re-examine the objects of the trust. This was by merely upholding the application of Hiralal Bhagwati (supra) to its facts. 4. In this case, the Petitioner has not contested re-opening of the notices issued under section 148 of the Act. The next logical step is for assessment proceedings to be completed on re-opening of the assessment under section 148 of the Act. The Petitioner's contention that once the trust is registered under Section 12A of the Act then no assessment proceedings can be carried out is in the face of the statutory proceedings provided under Sections 11,12 and 13 of the Act. In the present case no issue with regard to the registration of trust has been raised by the Assessing Officer under section 12A of the Act. 5. We find no merit in the challenge of the Petitioners to the three notice dated 13.1.2014 in respect of the A.Y. 2009-2010 to 2011-2012 and notice under section 143 (2) under the Act dated 28.11.2013 and for A.Y. 2011-12. Accordingly, Petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (G.S.KULKARNI, J.)

RNG    4                                                       wp1361.14