THE MALANKARA MARTHOMA SYRIAN CHURCH V. TE INCOME TAX OFFICER

WP(C)/9519/2016

AI Insights

The case involves the Malankara Marthoma Syrian Church Sabha Office, represented by its secretary, Rev. Oommen Philip, who filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officers of Alappuzha. The petitioner was aggrieved by the non-consideration of their applications (Exts.P6 and P7) for a general exemption from tax deduction at source on rent and interest payments, which were being deducted by lessees and creditor banks. The petitioner had previously been granted tax exemptions under the Income Tax Act, 1961, but faced issues with the current tax deductions. The court's decision focused on procedural compliance, directing the petitioner to reapply correctly to the appropriate officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 755556 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 14-03-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: K M V PANDALAI
• Assessee Lawyers: RAMESH JOHN
• Keywords: Income tax exemption; Tax deduction at source; General Exemption Application
• Section: 10(23)(C)(V)

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/24TH PHALGUNA, 1937 WP(C).No. 9519 of 2016 (L) --------------------------- PETITIONER : --------------------- THE MALANKARA MARTHOMA SYRIAN CHURCH SABHA OFFICE, SCS COMPOUND THIRUVALLA -689 101 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY REV. OOMMEN PHILIP. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENT(S) : ---------------------------- 1. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER AYAKAR BHAVAN BEACH ROAD, ALAPPUZHA – 688 001. 2. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) AYAKAR BHAWAN AARATTU KULANGARA COMPLEX A.N. PURAM, ALAPPUZHA – 688 011. R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 9519 of 2016 (L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL NOTIFICATION DATED 29.1.1980 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT NOTIFYING THE PETITIONER AND THE PARISHES AND THE INSTITUTIONS UNDER IT FOR THE EXEMPTION U/S. 10 (23) (C) (V) OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 1978 – 79 TO 1980 - 81. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 1.7.1982 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.11.2009 PASSED BY THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 7 OF 2010 DT. 27.10.2010. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT. 28.8.2014. EXT.P5A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DT. 28.8.2014. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT. 30.5.2015 FILED BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 19-9-2015. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 7.10.2015. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P(C) No.9519 of 2016 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of March, 2016 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved with the non consideration of Exts.P6 and P7 application. The admitted fact is that the petitioner has been granted exemption under the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the petitioner is prejudiced insofar as the petitioner's lessees and creditor banks, deduct tax at source from the rent and interest due to the petitioner. The petitioner hence filed an application for general exemption from deduction of tax at source, as is seen at Ext.P6 which is said to be forwarded to the Income Tax Officer (TDS) before whom the Chartered Accountants have made an application at Ext.P7. The petitioner seeks consideration of the same. 2. The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent would contend that Ext.P6 is filed before the Assessing Officer and WPC.9519/2016 : 2 : he is not competent to grant such an exemption. The application filed before the Income Tax Officer, TDS is by the Chartered Accountant and not by the petitioner. In such circumstance, the only thing to be done now is for the petitioner to make an application properly before the Income Tax officer TDS, the 2nd respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment and the same shall be considered within one month from the date of filing. Writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- (K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jma //true copy// P.A to Judge "