PEOPLE EDUCATION TRUST vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
WP/13081/2025HC KarnatakaKAHC01029774202501 December 2025Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the respondent violated the principles of natural justice by not providing the petitioner with a sufficient or reasonable opportunity to be heard and by not furnishing the Investigation Report. On this ground alone, the Court deemed it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order. The Court's reasoning was based on the fundamental right to a fair hearing. The ratio decidendi is that any order passed without adhering to the principles of natural justice, particularly by denying a party adequate opportunity to present their case and access relevant documents, is liable to be quashed. The operative directions were to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent on 12.01.2026, with liberty to submit replies and documents, and the respondent was directed to provide a sufficient and reasonable opportunity and hear the petitioner. The issue of continuation of registration under Section 12A was not decided on merits but was remitted for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, People Education Trust, an educational institution, filed an application for continuation of registration in Form No. 10AB. The case was assigned to the Assessing Officer, who submitted a report to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions). The Commissioner then passed an order dated 31.03.2025, relying on an Investigation Report and other documents. The petitioner alleges that this order was passed without providing them with a sufficient or reasonable opportunity to be heard and without furnishing the Investigation Report, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court of Karnataka seeking to quash the impugned order and direct the respondent to continue their registration under Section 12A of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the impugned order dated 31.03.2025 passed by the respondent violates the principles of natural justice by not providing the petitioner with a sufficient or reasonable opportunity to be heard and by not furnishing the Investigation Report? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that the respondent violated the principles of natural justice by passing the impugned order without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and without furnishing the Investigation Report. They sought to quash the order and direct the continuation of registration under Section 12A. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned counsel for the respondent appeared and was heard, but does not detail their specific contentions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

- 1 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50045 WP No. 13081 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.13081 OF 2025 (T-IT) BETWEEN:

PEOPLE EDUCATION TRUST 01, PET TRUST OFFICE BUILDING, PES ENGINEERING COLLEGE ROAD, MANDYA CITY, MANDYA – 571 401 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, SRI.SOMANAHALLI LINGAIAH SHIVAPRASAD, AGED ABOUT 80 YEARS, S/O.SOMANAHALLI CHIKKEGOWDA LINGAIAH, NATURE OF BUSINESS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

…PETITIONER (BY SRI. S PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE) AND:

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 027. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ARAVIND V.CHAVAN, ADVOCATE)

THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER BEARING NO.ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1075348211(1) DTD. 31.03.2025 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT (ANNX-D) AND ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

Digitally signed by CHANDANA B M Location: High Court of Karnataka

- 2 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50045 WP No. 13081 of 2025

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

In this petition, petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

“a) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or a direction in the nature of Writ of Certiorari quashing the impugned order bearing No.ITBA/EXM/F/EXM45/2024-25/1075348211(1) dated 31.03.2025 passed by the Respondent (Annexure-‘D’);

b) Issue a Writ of mandamus directing the Respondent to continue the registration of the Trust under Section 12A of the Act.

c) Issue a Writ of Prohibition or a direction in the nature of prohibition restraining the Respondent from initiating any subsequent proceeding to pass Assessment Order and raise impugned demand for the purpose of recovery.

d) Pass such other order, direction or writ as this Hon’ble Court deems fit, and

e) Direct the Respondents to award the costs of this Writ Petition.”

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record.

3.

A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner having filed an application seeking continuation of

- 3 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50045 WP No. 13081 of 2025

Registration in Form No.10AB, the case was assigned to the jurisdictional Assessing Officer for verification, in pursuance of which, the Assessing Officer proceeded to submit a report to the CIT (Exemptions), who proceeded to pass the impugned order by placing reliance upon the Investigation Report and other documents, without providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and not furnishing / providing the Investigation Report thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

4.

Under these circumstances, on this short ground alone for violation of principles of natural justice on the part of the respondent in not providing sufficient or reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, I deem it just and appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, I pass the following: ORDER

(i) The petition is hereby allowed.

(ii) The impugned order at Annexure – D dated 31.03.2025 passed by the respondent is hereby set aside.

- 4 -

HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:50045 WP No. 13081 of 2025

(iii) The matter is remitted back to the respondent for reconsideration of the matter afresh.

(iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondent on 12.01.2026 without awaiting further notice from the respondent.

(v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit replies, documents etc., which shall be considered by the respondent, who shall provide sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and hear it and proceed further in accordance with law.

(vi) In the event, the petitioner does not appear before the respondent on 12.01.2026 as stated supra, present order shall stand automatically recalled without further orders.

Sd/- (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE

SV List No.: 2 Sl No.: 36

More judgments on Section 12A

All 6,064 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →