By Advs.harisankar v. Menonmeera V.menonr.sreejith

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI MONDAY, THE 3 DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1945WP(C) NO. 11717 OF 2023 PETITIONER: M/S. SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT OF INDIA,1, CENTRAL COMMITTEE, KANJIKUZHY P.O, IDUKKI - 685606, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT (CHIEF FUNCTIONARY), T.K. THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI. BY ADVS.HARISANKAR V. MENONMEERA V.MENONR.SREEJITH K.KRISHNAPARVATHY MENON RESPONDENTS: 1THE INCOME TAX OFFICERINCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, RANGE 174, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, KOCHI – 682018.INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, RANGE 174, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, KOCHI – 682018. 2CENTRALISED PROCESSING CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 1ST FLOOR, BERATENAAGRAHARA BEGUR,HOSUR ROAD, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU – 560100.HOSUR ROAD, UTTARAHALLI HOBLI, BENGALURU – 560100. 3CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXESDEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OFINDIA, NEW DELHI – 110001.DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, GOVERNMENT OFINDIA, NEW DELHI – 110001. 4THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)C. R. BUILDING, I S PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI – 682018.C. R. BUILDING, I S PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI – 682018. SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON03.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAVI, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.11717 of 2023 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 03[rd ]day of April, 2023 JUDGMENT Admit. Standing Counsel takes notice for the respondents. 2.The grievance of the petitioner is that the benefit ofSection 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has not been extended tothe petitioner, which is a Charitable Society. The reason statedis that they failed to submit audit reports in time. 3.When the case is taken up today, the Standing Counselfor the respondents submitted that by a circular No.16/22 dated19.07.2022 the Commissioners of Income Tax have beenauthorised to admit applications for condonation of delay infiling Form No.10B for the relevant assessment years. 4.The petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 petition forcondonation of delay. In view of the above circular and the fact that thepetitioner has preferred an application, the 4[th] respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders within one monthand consequential changes are to be made in the assessmentwithin six months thereafter. The steps for recovery initiatedshall stand suspended till a decision is taken as aforesaid. mpm Sd/- T.R.RAVIJUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11717/2023 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF FILING OF AUDIT REPORT ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT DTD. 24-03-2022.Exhibit P2COPY OF INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143 (1) ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 23-08-2022.Exhibit P3COPY OF CIRCULAR NO. 16/2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 03-01-2020.Exhibit P4COPY OF PETITION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD. 07-10-2022.Exhibit P5COPY OF ORDER IN WPC NO. 6913/23 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DTD. 02-03-2023.