Case LawHigh Court › Mait/11/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income T...

Mait/11/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.k.d.f.educational Society

High Court 16 Jan 2014 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · mphc_db_jbp
Parties
Mait/11/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.k.d.f.educational Society
Date of order
16 Jan 2014
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Mait/11/2008 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. R.k.d.f.educational Society, the High Court (2014) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

MAIT No.11/2008 16.1.7014 Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate, for the appellant.|Heard on aamission. This appeal is directed against the order dated 10.8.2007.passed py tne Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench (in|Short, ‘the Tribunal’) whereby it has partly allowed therespondent's ITA No.98/IND/2007. Tne respondent-assesse is a society which was created on25.99.2003 with the main objects being educational and charitablefor the benefit of general public. The respondent applied for|registration on 18.10.2005 and the Commissioner of Income Tax|granted registration to it under section 12AA of the Income Tax|Act, 1961 vide order dated 31.5.2006. Tne Commissioner grantedregistration witn effect from 1.4.2005 instead of 1.4.2004.|Aggrieved, the respondent preferred an appeal before the Tribunal.Tne Tribunal, after considering the explanation of respondent andrelying upon number of decisions, directed the Commissioner of Income Tax to grant registration to the respondent with effect|from 1.4.2004 within two months. The Tribunal has held that the|Commissioner was. satisfied about tne respondent's” opjecregarding welfare of the public and, therefore, ought to have|granted registration with effect from the date of creation of Trust,otherwise the very purpose of such provision would be defeated. We find ourselves in complete agreement with the viewtaken by the Tribunal which is well-founded and unassailable. Tne|learned counsel for appellant could not point out any illegality in the impugned order. No substantial question of law arises in the|present appeal. — It is accordingly dismissed summarily. (AJIT SINGH) (SUBHASH KAKADE)JUDGE|JUDGE| Pps|
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan