Ita/1012/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kannur v. St.teresas Convent, Anandagiri, Kolakkad
High Court
10 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · highcourtofkerala
Parties
Ita/1012/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kannur v. St.teresas Convent, Anandagiri, Kolakkad
Date of order
10 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Ita/1012/2009 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kannur v. St.teresas Convent, Anandagiri, Kolakkad, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Even though there is some pointin the argument that delay cannot be condoned for the reason that partywas not aware of the law, we are surprised to note that the Departmentalso has not cared to find out whether respondent has any tax liabilityfor the last three and a half years, when they did not ap...
Decision: Appeal is therefore dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
& THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM MONDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2009 / 19TH SRAVANA 1931
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
ITA.No. 1012 of 2009()
----------------------
ITA.272/COCH/2008 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH
....................
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT
----------------------------------------
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,
KANNUR.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)
SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX
RESPONDENT(S): APPELLANT
------------------------
ST.TERESAS CONVENT,
ANANDAGIRI, KOLAKKAD, KANNUR.
THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
--------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of August, 2009
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair,J.
Appeal is filed by the Department challenging the order of theTribunal, wherein they condoned the delay and entertained anapplication for continuation of registration of the respondent as areligious-cum-charitable institution. Even though there is some pointin the argument that delay cannot be condoned for the reason that partywas not aware of the law, we are surprised to note that the Departmentalso has not cared to find out whether respondent has any tax liabilityfor the last three and a half years, when they did not apply for renewalof registration as a charitable institution. So long as the department hasnot made any attempt to assess or demand tax, we do not find anythingwrong in the Tribunal condoning the delay and accepting theapplication. It is also conceded that later registration is granted andrespondent's entitlement for exemption is a conceded fact. Since thereis no demand of tax, we feel the appeal is only an academic exercise
against a church. Appeal is therefore dismissed.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR)Judge.
(C. K. ABDUL REHIM)
Judge.
kk
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue