ATTAKKALARI PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)

PDF · subscribers
WP(C)/30275/2013HC KeralaKLHC01073459201309 December 2013Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Kerala, in its order dated December 9, 2013, did not decide the merits of the case. Instead, the Court disposed of the writ petition with a specific direction. The Court ordered that the petitioner should first approach the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for redressal of their grievances. The Court noted that the petitioner had already filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Therefore, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to consider and pass appropriate orders on the pending appeal, expeditiously. No specific finding was made on the entitlement to exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as the matter was remitted to the appellate authority. The issue of whether the trust is entitled to exemption under Section 11 was expressly left to be decided by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Attakkalari Public Charitable Trust of Contemporary Performing Arts, represented by its Managing Trustee, filed a writ petition before the High Court of Kerala. The petition challenges an order passed by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Exemption), Range 4, Kochi, and seeks a direction against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Cochin, and the State of Kerala. The specific assessment year(s) and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history indicates that the matter came up for admission before the High Court on December 9, 2013.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the petitioner, a charitable trust, is entitled to exemption under Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for income derived from its activities. The petitioner likely argues that its activities are charitable in nature and fall within the scope of Section 11, entitling it to exemption. The revenue's contention, though not explicitly detailed, would likely be that the trust's activities do not meet the criteria for exemption or that there has been a violation of the conditions for exemption. The core issue revolves around the application and interpretation of Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the application of income for charitable purposes and the conditions for claiming exemption. The judgment does not record specific arguments from either side regarding any particular authorities, circulars, or precedents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2013/18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935 WP(C).No. 30275 of 2013 (H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- ATTAKKALARI PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST OF CONTEMPORARY PERFORMING ARTS KAUSTHUBHAM, MANNIKKATH ROAD, RAVIPURAM KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE JAYACHANDRAN.P BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SMT.NIVEDITA A.KAMATH SRI.R.SREEJITH SMT.T.S.VIKEESHA SMT.SULEKHA BEEVI C.S. SMT.ROSIE ATHULYA JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), RANGE 4 KOCHI - 682 005 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II, COCHIN, ERNAKULAM- 682 018 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, RERPESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY (TAXES) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 R1 & R2 BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, INCOME TAX R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MANOJ P. KUNJACHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-12-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: DCS

WP(C).No. 30275 of 2013 (H) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 21-08-2013 FOR THEYEAR 2011-12 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED U/S 220(6) DATED 21-11-2013 BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27-11-2013 ISSUED BY THE BANK TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GARNISHEE NOTICE DATED 31-10-2013 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE BANK EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT ON EXHIBIT P3 APPLICATION DATED 04-12-2013 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE STAY PETITION FILED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:-NIL --------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE DCS

V.CHITAMBARESH,J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.30275 of 2013 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of December, 2013

J U D G M E N T The petitioner has filed Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 order of assessment. The same is accompanied by Ext.P7 petition for stay of recovery of the disputed tax. The petitioner is aggrieved by the garnishee proceedings initiated in the meanwhile as evident by Ext. P5 notice. 2. I direct the second respondent to consider Ext.P7 petition with notice to the petitioner within a period of two months. The coercive steps pursuant to Ext.P1 order and Ext.P5 notice shall be put on hold and status quo maintained in the meanwhile. 3. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition with the judgment before the second respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of. SD/- V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE DCS

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →