Case LawHigh Court › Wp/49/2016 Of National Education Society...

Wp/49/2016 Of National Education Society v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Pune And Ors

High Court 23 Mar 2016 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newas
Parties
Wp/49/2016 Of National Education Society v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Pune And Ors
Date of order
23 Mar 2016
Assessment year(s)
2010-11
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Wp/49/2016 Of National Education Society v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Ii, Pune And Ors, the High Court (2016) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Consequently, he isnot in a position to state whether the application dated 13[th] December,2005 has been allowed or rejected.

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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 49 OF 2016 National Education Society ..Petitioner. V/s.Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Pune& Others ..Respondents. Mr.Girish Dave with Mr. Sameer Dalal, for the Petitioner.Mr.Suresh Kumar with Ms. Samiksha Kanani, for the Respondents. P.C:- CORAM: M.S.SANKLECHA, & A.K.MENON, JJ.DATE : 23[rd ] MARCH, 2016. At the request of the Counsel, the Petition is being heardfinally at the stage of admission. 2This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,challenges non-disposal of the Petitioner's application dated 13[th]December, 2005 for registration as a Trust under Section 12A of theIncome Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), by the Commissioner of Income Tax. 3In terms of proviso to Section 12AA (2) of the Act, theCommissioner of Income Tax is obliged to pass an order, granting orrefusing an application for registration before the expiry of six monthsfrom the end of the month when the application was received. Further,where the Commissioner of Income Tax is inclined to refuse registrationof the trust, he can do so only after granting the Applicant a personalhearing. This is in terms of first proviso to Section 12AA(1) of the Act. 4In this case, Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel appearingfor the Revenue, on instructions, states that the Office of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) is unable to locate thePetitioner's application dated 13[th] December, 2005. Consequently, he isnot in a position to state whether the application dated 13[th] December,2005 has been allowed or rejected. 5In the above circumstances, we direct the Petitioner to furnisha copy of the application dated 13[th] December, 2005 for registration as atrust to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) within two weeksfrom today. On receipt of the application, the Commissioner of IncomeTax (Exemption), would decide the same within a period of four weeksfrom the receipt of the application, in accordance with law including thedecision of the Apex Court in CIT, Kanpur v/s. Society for the Promotionof Education, Allahabad (Civil Appeal No.1478 of 2016). In the abovecase, the Apex Court upheld the decision of the Allahabad High Court tothe effect that where an application for registration as a trust underSection 12AA of the Act, has not been disposed of within six month fromthe date of its filing, then the application would deemed to have beengranted. 6Needless to state that pending the disposal of the Petitioner'sapplication dated 13[th] December, 2005 for registration as a trust underSection 12AA of the Act by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption),the Revenue will not adopt any coercive proceedings consequent to itsnotice of demand dated 22[nd] March, 2013 for the Assessment Year 2010-11 and a period of further two weeks thereafter, if the application isrejected. 7 Petition disposed of in the above terms. No order as to costs. (A.K.MENON,J.) (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ Defend a reassessment (Sec 148) notice → 💬 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