Income Tax Case

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO W.P.No. 30288 of 2011 Dated 18-07-2012 Between: M/s. Sri Koundinya Educational Society,Chaitanya Nagar, Velugubanda (V),NH-5, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District,Rep., by its Secretary & Correspondent,K.V.V.Satyanarayana Raju, s/o Satyanarayana Raju. …Petitioner Vs. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax-II,Ayakar Bhavan, Dabagarden, Visakhapatnam andanother. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M. S. RAMACHANDRARAO W.P.No. 30288 of 2011 Dated: 18-07-2012 ORAL ORDER: (Per: GR,J) After a due process and compliance with the audialteram partem principle, on which score there is nocomplaint, the 1[st] respondent by the impugned orderbearing reference F.No. CC/VSP/Tech/10(23C)/45/2010-11, dated 10-12-2010 withdrew the approval granted tothe petitioner/society under Section 10(23C)(vi) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) for theAssessment Year 2004-05 onwards. Pursuant to its application, the petitioner/society, aneducational society was registered under the provisions ofthe Societies Registration Act, 1860 ( Act No. XXI of1860). Among the objects set out in its Memorandum ofAssociation are: to help the poor and distressed and tocreate awareness among wretched; to undertake projectsrelating to relief, rehabilitation, health and education; todiffuse useful knowledge, apart from imparting technicaleducation and allied educational objects. Pursuant to its application for exemption of incomeunder Section 10 of the Act, the 1[st] respondent on 09-03-2006 granted approval to the petitioner for availingbenefits, under Section 10 (23C)(vi) of the Act for theAssessment Year 2001-02 to 2003-04. Pursuant toanother similar application, the 1[st] respondent by the order dated 12-03-2008 granted a similar approval, tohave effect for the Assessment Year 2004-05 onwards. However, after issuing a notice dated 26-05-2010and considering the objections thereto, lodged by thepetitioner on 03-06-2010, the 1[st] respondent passed the impugnedorder inter alia for the reason that the petitioner is not aneducational institution existing solely for educationalpurposes and not for purposes of profit, duly noticingthose objects and reasons enumerated hereinabove,which do not pertain to educational purposes. Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Act enables approval bythe prescribed authority, for availing the benefits underSection 10 of the Act to any University or othereducational institutions existing solely for educationalpurposes and not for the purposes of profit. Since thepetitioner is not an educational institution existing solelyfor educational purposes, the impugned order withdrawingthe approval earlier granted for the Assessment Year2004-05 onwards, is impeccable and warrants nointerference. On the above premises, there are no merits in thewrit petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed afterhearing Sri A.V. Krishna Kaundinya, the learned counselfor the petitioner and Sri J.V. Prasad, the learned senior standing counsel circumstances no costs. for respondents, but in the __________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM _________________________________ JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO Dated: 18-07-2012 Pvks/*