9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 9X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed educational charitable trust, and its primary object is to provide and promote the education and research in various fields. In furtherance of its object to provide education, the petitioner has established educational institutions including Engineering and Medical Colleges. The petitioner moved an application in Form 56-D seeking approval of the prescribed Authority, viz. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow under sub-clause (vi) of Section 10 (23-C) of the Income Tax Act. Said application was accompanied with income expenditure statement of the assessee for the financial years ending on 31.03.206, 31.03.2005 and 31.03.2004. On the said application being moved, report was submitted by the Income Tax Officer Ward II (3) Lucknow on 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion was not at all running for profit. After pleadings inter se parties have been exchanged, present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties, as institution in question is not at all being run for profit. Sri Mudit Agrawal, Advocate, holding brief of Sri J.N. Mathur, Advocate, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case impugned order has been passed without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as such the order in question is in breach of the principles of natural justice, and further on merits also said order is not at all sustainable. Countering the said submission, Sri D.D. Chopra, learned counsel appearing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er. Apart from this, as the institutions were located at Bareiilly. Letter was also sent to Bareilly on 20.12.2007 and it was served on Sri Atul Kumar Misrha, the Accounts Officer through an officer of the office of the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bareilly. Petitioner in the writ petition as well as in rejoinder affidavit has tried to contend that notice was served on the petitioners. It has been reiterated that the petitioners have got its head office at Lcuknow and the petitioner is assessed at Lucknow, as such there was no occasion for serving notice at Bareilly. The fact of the matter remains that in the present case opportunity of hearing was sought to be provided to the petitioner by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an application, ventilating its grievances. In the event of any such application being made, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the application along with a certified copy of this order. At the point of taking decision, sufficiency of cause furnished by the petitioner for non-appearance on 27.12.2007 as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the cases of Aditnar Educational Institution vs. Additional C. I. T. 1997 (224) ITR 310 (SC) and American Hotel and Lodging Association Educational Institute vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes (2008) 10 SCC 509, shall also be taken into account. Subject to above observation, present writ petition is dismissed. No or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
