Wp(C)/36377/2015 Of Laxmi Meghan Educational Trust v. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 36377 of 2015 (V) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- LAXMI MEGHAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST, SURGICARE CENTRE AND HOSPITAL, BALLA VILLAGE, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD-671315 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN. BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.SREEDHARAN PILLAI SRI.T.K.SANDEEP SRI.ARJUN SREEDHAR SRI.ARUN KRISHNA DHAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), KANNUR, PIN:670 006. KANNUR, PIN:670 006. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673001. AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE-673001. BY SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PJ WP(C).No. 36377 of 2015 (V) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: A TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.3.20145 ISSUED BY IST RESPONDENT.IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE DDEMAND NOTICE DATED 30.3.2015 ISSUED BY IST RESPONDENT.IST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 22.4.2015 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE STAY APPLICATION DATED 22.4.2015 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.10.2015 PASSED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6: THE TRUE COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT FROM 1.4.2015 TO 2.10.2015.TO 2.10.2015. EXHIBIT P7: A TRUE COPY OF ATTACHMENT NOTICE DATED 7.10.2015 ISSUED BY DEPUTY TAHSILDAR KASARAGOD.DEPUTY TAHSILDAR KASARAGOD. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL. / TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.36377 OF 2015 (V)-----------------------------------Dated this the 7[th] day of December, 2015 J U D G M E N T The petitioner, who is aggrieved by Ext.P1 assessment orderpassed under the Income Tax Act, preferred Ext.P3 appeal and Ext.P4stay petition before the 2[nd] respondent Appellate Authority. The 2[nd]respondent considered Ext.P3 stay application and found that thepetitioner was entitled only to a conditional stay of recovery of theamounts confirmed against him by the assessment order pendingdisposal of the appeal, and offered the petitioner an option of paying50% of the loan in installments. Since this proposal was notacceptable to the petitioner, the petitioner informed the Appellateauthority of the same and therefore the Appellate authority proceededto dismiss the stay petition without granting any stay. In the writpetition, Ext.P5 order of the Appellate authority is impugned. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as alsothe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as alsothe learned Standing counsel for the respondents. On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case asalso the submissions made across the bar, I find that the issueinvolved in the appeal pertains to the entitlement of the petitioner forthe benefit of an exemption in terms of Section 10(23C) (6) read with10(23C) (iiiad) of the IT Act. It is the specific case of the petitionerthat the total income for the previous year was less than one crore,and therefore, he would be entitled to the exemption contemplated inthe aforesaid provision. Taking note of the said contention of counselfor the petitioner, and finding that the appeal against Ext.P1assessment order is pending before the 2[nd] respondent, I am of theview that the interests of justice would be served by directing the 2[nd]respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 appeal preferred bythe petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receiptof a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. I make itclear that coercive steps for recovery of amounts confirmed againstthe petitioner by Ext.P1 assessment order shall be kept in abeyancetill such time as orders are passed by the 2[nd] respondent, as directed,and communicated to the petitioner, on condition that the petitionerpays 25% of the amounts confirmed against him by Ext.P1 assessmentorder within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petitionalong with a copy of this judgment before the 2[nd] respondent, forfurther action. The writ petition is disposed as above. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE prp/8/12/15