Wp(C)/2359/2012 Of M/S.info Parks Kerala v. The Joint Director Of Income Tax (Osd)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2012/11TH MAGHA,1933 WPC.No. 2359 of 2012 (T) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------- M/S.INFO PARKS KERALA, KUSUMAGIRI P.O., KAKKANAD, KOCHI - 682 030. BY ADVS.SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1 THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (OSD) EXEMPTION, RANGE-4, KOCHI - 682018. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX svs THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-01-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO. 2359/2012 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1:COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION. P2:COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX DATED 29.10.2007TAX DATED 29.10.2007 P3:COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF OBJECTS. P4:COPY OF NOTES ON CLAUSE. P5:COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.11/2008 DATED 19.12.2008 ISSUEDBY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES.BY THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES. P6:COPY OF SUBMISSION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. P7:COPY OF REPORT NABARD. P8:COPY OF JUDGEMENT DATED 16.10.2009 IN WPC NO.6899/2009. P9:COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE UNDER SEC.156 OF THE INCOMETAX ACT DATED 26.12.2011.TAX ACT DATED 26.12.2011. P10:COPY OF JUDGEMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN ITA NO.869/2011. P11:COPY OF JUDGEMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN WPC.NO.1927/2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.2359 OF 2012(T) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31[st ] day of January, 2012 J U D G M E N T Petitioner challenges Ext.P9, an order of assessment under theIncome Tax Act for the assessment year 2009-2010. 2. According to the petitioner in spite of the proviso introducedto Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act with effect from 1.4.2008, itsactivities are charitable and qualify to be exempted from tax liabilityunder the Act. This claim of the petitioner has been turned down andExt.P9 assessment order has been passed, which is under challengein this writ petition. 3. Whether activities of the petitioner can be classified ascharitable or not is a question of fact and if the petitioner isaggrieved by Ext.P9 assessment order it is up to the petitioner towork out its remedies before the statutory authorities and I see noreason why the petitioner should invoke the extra ordinary jurisdictionof this court. Therefore, without prejudice to that right, the writpetition is disposed of. :2 : 4. However, it is directed that if the petitioner files an appeal against Ext.P9 within 2 weeks from today that will be entertained bythe appellate authority as one validly filed. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. vi/ (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE