Wp(C)/31520/2022 Of Indian Red Cross Society v. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI WEDNESDAY, THE 12 DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 31520 OF 2022 PETITIONER: 1INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETYRED CROSS TOWER, NAGAMBADAM, PIN - 686002KOTTAYAM, REP. BY SECRETARY JOBY THOMASBY ADVS.P.RAGHUNATHANRAMANARAYANAN G. RESPONDENTS: 1DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCENTRALISED PROCESSING CENTER, ELECTRONIC CITY POST OFFICE, BANGALORE, PIN - 5601002INCOME TAX OFFICER PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD ,KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001BY ADV CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.04.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAVI, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C.) No.31520 of 2022------------------------------------Dated this the 12[th] day of April, 2023JUDGMENT The petitioner, a Charitable Society, claims benefit of Section 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 withregard to the assessment year 2015-16. Admittedly,the registration under Section 12A was obtained onlyin the year 2019. The petitioner has produced theintimation under Section 143(1) of the Income TaxAct issued on 27.03.2017 which shows that the claimfor deduction had been rejected. The petitionersubmits that no reason is forthwith coming in Ext.P1.However, there is no explanation for the delay in nothaving taken up the matter after 2017. 2. True, the petitioner applied and got registration in 2019. Much later, the petitioner applied for arectification of the order issued with regard to the WPC No.31520 of 2022 assessment year 2015-16, which has been rejectedas per Ext.P4 stating that once the petitioner hadfiled a return under the status of Trust without havingregistration under Section 12A and the same hasbeen processed by the CPC, it is not possible for theofficer to change the status. 3. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, yet another reason stated is that theapplication for rectification is delayed. 4. The counsel for the petitioner submits that asfar as the delay is concerned, that may not applysince sufficient extension of time had been grantedduring the Covid situation. 5. After having heard the counsel on either side, I do not think the writ petition can be entertainedafter five years of the rejection of the claim fordeduction as seen from Ext.P1. The petitioner had thestatutory remedy of appeal, which according to thepetitioner, was not pursued since the petitioner had pursued the remedy of rectification. 6. Considering the fact that, the petitioner is aCharitable Society and the fact that an application forrectification was being pursued after gettingregistration under Section 12A, interest of justicewould be served if the petitioner is permitted to filean appeal with an application for condonation of delayand the same is directed to be considered. The writ petition is hence disposed of directingthe petitioner to prefer an appeal against therejection of the claim for deduction as a CharitableSociety and if such appeal is filed within two weeksfrom today along with petition for condonation ofdelay, the same shall be considered by the competentauthority keeping in mind the fact situation. Sd/- T.R.RAVI JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31520/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT-P-1PHOTOCOPY OF INTIMATION U/S 143[1][A] DT. 27.03.2017 FOR 2015.16EXHIBIT-P-2PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT DT. 31.03.2019EXHIBIT-P-3PHOTOCOPY OF APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION U/S 154 DT. 22.11.2021 EXHIBIT-P-4PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DT. 05.01.2022 REJECTING EXT. P-3 APPLICATIONEXHIBIT-P-5PHOTOCOPY OF APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION U/S 154 DT. 08.01.2022 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE