SRI. DEVENDRA PAI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav Writ Petition No. 52305/2018 (T-It) Between: Sri. Devendra Pai S/O. Late Narasimha Pai No. 1012, "Udaya", 2Nd Cross, Vivekananda Circle, Mysore - 23. … Petitioner (By Sri. S. Shankar, Senior Advocate As Amicus Curiae Sri. S. Parthasarathi, Advocate) And: 1. The Assistant Commissioner Of

condone the delay in filing the 2 same before him and grant exemption under Section 10(10C) of the Act as prayed for by petitioner vide Annexure-F. This Writ Petition coming on for preliminary hearing in 'B' group this day, the Court, made the following: ORDER At the hearing of the petition, the Court felt that the equity

SARVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST vs. THE UNION OF INDIA

Bench: The Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Ashok B. Hinchigeri

12. He relies on the Calcutta High Court’s decision in the case of SHEW BHAGWAN GOENKA v. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS reported in 1973 32 STC 368 Cal in support of his submission that the test of reasonableness should be applied to each individual statute impugned and no abstract standard or general pattern of reasonableness can be laid

SASTHAVU HALU UTHPADAKARA MAHILA vs. PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

BALKURU HALU UTHPADAKARA vs. PRL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

NAVANIDHI VIVIDHODDESHA vs. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

K M CREDIT SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD vs. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

THOMBATHU MILK PRODUCERS vs. PRL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

PADUMUNDU MILK PRODUCERS WOMEN vs. PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

BIDKALKATTE MILK PRODUCERS ' vs. PRL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

SHREE GURU NITHYANANDA SOUHARDA vs. PRL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

KERADI MILK PRODUCERS WOMEN S vs. PRL COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX

Bench: The Hon’Ble Mr. Justice P.B. Bajanthri

2. The gist of the matters are as under: Case No. Reason for condonation of delay WP No.28871/19 Balkuru Halu Utpadakara Sahakara Sangha Annexure “A” condonation of delay application. Delay is 134 days in filing Return. Newly Registered Society. First year of filing of Return. Unaware of provisions of the Income Tax Act. WP 28872/2019 Keradi Milk Producers Women

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/s KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA STATE STUDENTS WELFARE FUND

The appeal stands dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA - 10 - of the Income tax Act, the benefit

M/S N.M.D.C vs. THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING

Bench: R-1.

2) The order referred to in sub-section (1) shall be passed within a period % of ninety days from the date of filing of the appeal under section 100 or a reference under sub-section (5) of section 98. 13 (3) Where the members of the Appellate Authority differ on any point or points referred to in appeal or reference

M/S. THE KOLAR & CHICKBALLAPUR vs. THE ASST. COMMISSIONER

The appeal stands disposed of as indicated above

Bench: S.SUJATHA,RAVI V HOSMANI

delay of one day in filing the return ought to have been condoned and no powers under Section 154 of the Act would have been invoked. Referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of T.S. Balaram, - 7 - ITO vs. Volkart Brothers reported in (1971) 82 ITR 50 (SC) which has been quoted