THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. DESHPANDE EDUCATION TRUST

PDF · subscribers
ITA/5015/2013HC KarnatakaKAHC02015029201307 November 2016Bench: ASHOK B HINCHIGERI,P.S.DINESH KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order withdrawing the registration, following its earlier judgment in a similar case. The High Court decided to follow the Tribunal's order, granting liberty to the Revenue to revive the appeal if they succeed in a related Supreme Court case.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax withdrew the registration granted to an education trust under Section 12AA, citing changes in the definition of 'charitable purposes'. The trust appealed this decision to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the education trust's activities qualified as charitable purposes under the amended definition, and if the withdrawal of Section 12AA registration was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AA,Section 2(15)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHOK B.HINCHIGERI AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR I.T.A. No. 5015/2013 BETWEEN: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, HUBLI. - APPELLANT (BY SHRI Y.V. RAVIRAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S DESHPANDE EDUCATION TRUST, BVB COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, VIDYANAGAR, HUBLI-580 031. - RESPONDENT (BY SHRI CHYTHANYA K K, ADVOCATE) THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SEC. 260A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO. 857/BANG/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH ‘B’, ALLOWING THE APPEAL & ETC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

: 2 : JUDGMENT Heard. The respondent education trust was granted registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act vide order dated 28.01.2011. Subsequent thereto, in view of the change in the definition of ‘charitable purposes’ in Sec. 2(15) brought out in the amendment of Finance of Act 2008 with effect from 01.04.2009, a notice to withdraw the registration was issued on 15.03.2012. Thereafter, on verification of details furnished by the respondent the registration granted under Section 12AA was withdrawn by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubli, vide order dated 09.05.2012. It was held by the Commissioner that, the trust neither carried on any educational activity or any other object of the general public utility. Feeling aggrieved, appellant challenged the said order before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal set aside the order passed by the Commissioner withdrawing the registration under Section 12AA of the Act following it’s earlier judgment in ITA 1272/BANG/2011 dated 22.11.2012 in the case of Karnataka

: 3 : Badminton Association V. DIT (E), Bangalore. The said order in the case of Karnataka Badminton Association, was challenged by the Revenue in ITA No. 165/2013, which also came to be dismissed vide order dated 12.01.2015. Revenue has challenged the same in Civil Appeal No. 8290/2015 and the same is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 2. As on date, the order dated 12.01.2015 passed in I.T.A. No. 165/2013 attained finality. The matter, though pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we deem it appropriate to follow the earlier judgment of the Division Bench in ITA No. 165/2013 and grant liberty to the Revenue to file an application to revive this appeal in the event, Revenue succeeds in the Supreme Court. In the result, the following order. ORDER This appeal is dismissed granting liberty to the revenue to revive this appeal in the event the revenue succeeds in Civil

: 4 : Appeal No. 8290/2015 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE bvv

More judgments on Section 12AA

All 4,243 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →