SHIVA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYAMIT LIG-41/A, vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2012 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE AJIT J.GUNJAL WRIT PETITION No.65781/2012 (T-IT) BETWEEN: SHIVA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYAMIT LIG-41/A, MAHANTESH NAGAR, BELGAUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY IN-CHARGE. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANGRAM S KULKARNI, ADV.) AND 1. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), BELGAUM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS BELGAUM. 3. THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JEEVAN J NEERALAGI, ADV.) THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER AT ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 DATED:27/06/2012 AND ETC.

: 2 : THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Even though the matter is listed for preliminary hearing, with consent it is taken for final disposal. 2. The petitioner/Assessee a co-operative society filed its return for the assessment year 2009- 2010 and claimed exemption under Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessment Officer, it appears, rejected its demand for exemption and directed the petitioner to satisfy the demand raised by him. Aggrieved by the same, it appears an appeal was preferred. Since the appellate authority was not functioning, writ petition was filed before this Court. In the said writ petition, this Court directed the appellate authority to be constituted and further the application filed by the petitioner for grant of interim order to be disposed of within a period of twelve weeks from the

: 3 : that day and the appellate authority shall consider the guidelines laid down in UTI Mutual Fund Vs. ITO the decision rendered by the Bombay High Court. 3. Grievance of the petitioner is that on remand, the appellate authority has sent the said application to the assessing Officer for consideration under Section 240(6) of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Authority has directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the demand and the balance 50% shall be deposited after the conclusion of the appeal within a specified time. Aggrieved by the same, petitioner is before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mandate of this Court in the earlier writ petition has not been followed inasmuch as this Court had directed the assessing officer/appellate authority to

: 4 : consider the decision rendered by the Bombay High Court. 5. A perusal of the impugned order discloses that indeed it is so. It is also open for the Assessing Authority to rely on the law laid down by other High Courts and so also the Supreme Court. Consequently, Annexure “D” is quashed. Matter is remitted to the first respondent for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

Sd/-

JUDGE kmv