High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Aligarh Development Authority v. Commissioner Of Income Tax & Others - WRIT TAX No. - 1545 of 2007  RD-AH 17585 (12 November 2007)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Writ Petition (Tax) No. 1545 of 2007
Hon'ble Sushil Harkauli, J.
Hon'ble Rakesh Sharma, J.
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Bharatji Agrawal, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Ashok Kumar, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department.
The petitioner contends that the Income Tax Tribunals have held, in respect of other Development Authorities constituted under the same Act under which the petitioner has been constituted, that such Authorities are entitled to be registered under section 12AA. No decision to the contrary has been shown to us so far.
The petitioner further contends factually that the petitioner had applied for such registration but neither the registration was granted nor it was refused by the Commissioner as required by section 12AA(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, within the time prescribed under section 12AA(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the petitioner submits that the subsequent refusal (after the said period of six months) by the Commissioner is non-est being contrary to the decision of the Income Tax Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in the case of Karnataka Golf Association Versus Director of Income Tax, (2004) 91 ITD 1, inasmuch as, upon failure to pass an order granting or refusing registration within six months, the registration should be deemed to have been granted.
We are also not inclined to express our opinion upon this aspect of deemed registration in this writ petition. Further, whether the petitioner has pursuant to such deemed registration complied with the rest of the formalities go get exemption is a question of fact. But, it is obvious that the Appellate Authority will have to take all these factors and submissions into consideration and to deal with them while deciding the appeal or while deciding the stay application, which is pending along with the appeal, before the Appellate Authority.
However having regard to what has been stated above, we are of the opinion that the petitioner Aligarh Development Authority, is not such a body against which such impugned demand should be allowed to be enforced before the appeal or at least the stay application is decided by the C.I.T. (Appeals) (respondent No. 3).
In these circumstances, we direct the C.I.T. (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal of the Aligarh Development Authority finally as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 15 days from the date on which the certified copy of this order is presented before the C.I.T. (Appeals). We also expect the petitioner not to take and not to be granted any frivolous or long adjournment in the appeal. If an adjournment becomes absolutely necessary, it may be granted for a day or two at the most, at a time, keeping in mind the time frame given above for decision of the appeal.
If the C.I.T. (Appeals) find that he is, for any good reason, unable to dispose of the appeal finally, at least the stay application of the petitioner will be disposed of, with reasons, by the C.I.T. (Appeals) within the time suggested above.
The demand raised by the impugned order dated 13.12.2006 will not be enforced against the petitioner till the decision of the appeal or the stay application, whichever is earlier.
This writ petition is finally disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
Dated : November 12, 2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.