Jan Jagaran Trust v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Exemption), Patna
High Court
29 Jan 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · patnahcucisdb94
Parties
Jan Jagaran Trust v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Exemption), Patna
Date of order
29 Jan 2018
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Jan Jagaran Trust v. The Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Exemption), Patna, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNACivil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6116 of 2016
======================================================
Jan Jagaran Trust through its Secretary Mohd. Safdar Imam having office invillage - Mohammadpur (Mianji Tola ) P.O. Teghra, District – Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Exemption), Patna.
2. The Income Tax officer ( Tech ), Bhagalpur.
3. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range - 2, Begusarai.
4. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 2, Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================Appearance :For the Petitioner/s: Mr. Kumar Praveen, AdvocateFor the Respondent/s: Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, Senior Standing Counsel
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAYORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
29-01-2018 Learned counsel prays for making correction in the causetitle and impleading parties. He may do so by impleadingcorrection during the course of the day.
From the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it isseen that the prayer made by the petitioner-trust for grant ofregistration under Section 12A(a) and 80G(5) (vi) of the Incometax Act, 1961 has been rejected by the competent authority videorder dated 09.07.2014 and that being the position, now, in thiswrit petition, no further indulgence can be made. In case, thepetitioner has any grievance with regard to the manner in whichthe application for registration has been considered and rejected,the petitioner may challenge the order in accordance with law as
Sunil/-
U
per the statutory provision.
With the aforesaid liberty to the petitioner, the petitionstands disposed of.
(Rajendra Menon, CJ)
(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)
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.