Wp/4005/2010 Of The Agricultural Market Committee v. The Income Tax Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD(Special Original Jurisdiction) MONDAY, THE TWENTY SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARIAND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANARAO WRIT PETITION NO : 4005 of 2010 Between: The Agricultural Market Committee,Hyderabad, Rep. By its Selection Grade Secretary AND ..... PETITIONER The Income Tax Officer,Ward No. 5(1), Hyderabad and another .....RESPONDENTS The Court made the following : ORAL ORDER:(per THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI) Seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the action ofthe respondents in not refunding an amount ofRs.2,32,25,880/- to the petitioner Market Committee, whichwas withdrawn vide debit advice as illegal and arbitrary andto consequently direct the respondents to refund the said sum pursuant to the orders dated 7.3.2008 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.991/Hyd/2007, thepresent writ petition is filed. It is case of the petitioner that it is a Local Authorityentitled to exemptions under Sec. 10(20) of the Income TaxAct. The petitioner submitted returns under the Income TaxAct for the assessment year 2004-2005, whereupon the firstrespondent has passed an assessment order dated29.12.2006 assessing the tax liability at Rs.2,32,25,880/-.Against this assessment order, the petitioner preferred anappeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax,Hyderabad, who confirmed the assessment by order dated13.07.2007. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred anappeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.991/Hyd/2007. The Tribunal, pending appeal, grantedregistration under Sec. 12-A of the Income Tax Act and,therefore, in view of granting registration, the AppellateTribunal also set aside the order of assessment dated29.12.2006 and remanded the matter to the first respondentfor assessment afresh. It is also stated that during pendencyof the appeal, the first respondent, pursuant to theGarnishee order, frozen the bank account of the petitionerand withdrew the assessed tax. Hence, the present writpetition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and thelearned Standing Counsel for Income Tax. It is contended by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents that registration underSec.12-A of the Act does not ipso fact entitles for exemptionfrom payment of the tax. He further contends that pursuantto the order of the Tribunal, a notice under Sec. 143(2) of theAct was issued to the assessee on 1.12.2009 and16.1.2009, requiring it to produce the books of accounts andthe information relating to the assessment, which are yet tobe produced by the assessee. In the facts and circumstances of the case, suffice it todirect the petitioner to produce the books of accounts andother relevant information, as required by the respondentsfor making assessment, within a period of two months fromtoday, reserving liberty to it to raise all the objections beforethe concerned authorities and the respondents are directedto complete the assessment within a period of three monthsthereafter. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.No order as to costs. ____________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari April 26, 2010CC within a week//BO//MAS __________________________ Justice Nooty Ramamohana Rao