Viswa Bharati Foundation Trust V. The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue & others

WP(C)/32429/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Viswa Bharati Foundation Trust, a charitable trust, which challenged the competency and authority of the Assessing Officer in issuing a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2023-24. The trust, having received a provisional registration certificate under Section 12AA, argued that the subsequent correction to this certificate should have precluded the application of 'Compulsory Scrutiny Assessment'. An ex parte assessment order was passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B, which the trust contested. The Assessing Officer's rejection of the trust's application under Section 154 was deemed arbitrary as it was decided without a mandatory hearing, leading to the High Court's intervention.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 823803 (HC-ODISHA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961, Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Applicant
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUBASH MOHANTY; AVINASH KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: JAGAMOHAN PATTANAIK
• Keywords: Assessment Order; Charitable Trust; Compulsory scrutiny assessment; Ex-parte; Exemption; Natural Justice
• Section: 144; 143(2); 154; 144B; 12AA(2)

Judgement Text

" Page 1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.32429 of 2025 Viswa Bharati Foundation Trust …. Petitioner Mr. Jagamohan Pattanaik, Advocate -versus- The Chairman, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue & others …. Opposite Parties Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, Senior Standing Counsel along with Mr. Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department CORAM: THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN Order No. ORDER 18.12.2025 01. 1. Questioning the competency, authority and jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer (for short, “AO”) in issuing notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “IT Act”) without specific approval of concerned authorities pertaining to the assessment year 2023-24 that too during the existence of 12AA(2) of the IT Act, the present writ petition has been filed under the provisions of Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner, a Charitable Trust, on the strength of certification of exemption under Section 12AA of the IT Act has been availing benefit on expenditure. On the application of the petitioner, provisional registration certificate in Form 10AC (Section 12AA) was granted in its favour vide No.AAATV7720QE20206 dated 27th May, 2021. Due to mistake in the said certificate, petitioner had sought for correction. Pursuant to the same, the Authority concerned granted correction in Form Printed from counselvise.com Page 2 of 4 10AC, Registration Certificate on 7th August, 2023 bearing No.AAATV7720QE20211 from the assessment year 2022-23 to 2026-27. 2.1. It is further case of the petitioner that in view of the aforesaid correction, the case of the petitioner ought not to have been made under the provision of ‘Compulsory Scrutiny Assessment”. However, the assessment order was passed under Section 144 read with Section 144B of the IT Act ex parte and in absence of participation by the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said assessment order, the petitioner filed an application on dated 29th April, 2025 under Section 154 of the IT Act, but the Assessing Officer rejected the said application vide order dated 18th July, 2025 by holding that as there is no clerical or arithmetical mistake apparent from the record. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Jagamohan Pattanaik, learned counsel for the petitioner that for consideration of petition under Section 154 of the IT Act, as per sub-section (3) of Section 154 of the IT Act, reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee is mandatory. He draws attention of this Court to Annexure-14, wherein the Authority has fixed the date of personal hearing on 28th July, 2025 at 11.00 AM., but the said Authority had passed the order advancing the date so scheduled. 3.1. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that since order rejecting the application under Section 154 has been passed on 18th July, 2025 prior to the said date fixed for hearing, i.e., 28th July, 2025, thereby the hearing as mandatorily required under Section 154(3) of the IT Act is denied to the petitioner. Such an action of the Authority concerned is, urged by the counsel for the petitioner, arbitrary, whimsical and untenable. Printed from counselvise.com Page 3 of 4 4. Mr. Subash Chandra Mohanty, learned Senior Standing Counsel being assisted by Mr. Avinash Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department has conceded that the record reveals the correct position as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department. 6. Faced with aforesaid situation, having perused the record, this Court is satisfied that the concerned Authority has antedated the date of hearing to 18th July, 2025 and passed the assessment order. When the Authority fixed date of hearing on 28th July, 2025, it was incumbent upon him to ascertain whether the date advanced was made known to the assessee before passing the order in his absence. Section 154(3) of the IT Act obligates the Authority to afford opportunity of hearing. Since the order passed under Section 154 affecting the claim of the petitioner-assessee prior to the date fixed for hearing, the same cannot be sustained for want of adherence to the principles of natural justice. Therefore, indulgence in the matter is warranted. 6.1. This Court, hence, sets aside the order dated 18th July, 2025 (Annexure-15) and remit the matter to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, BBN (opposite party no.4) to proceed further and pass order afresh after affording the petitioner opportunity of hearing. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The authority concerned is free to pass reasoned order thereon without being influenced by any of the observation made supra. The entire Printed from counselvise.com Page 4 of 4 exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Interlocutory Application(s) pending, if any, shall also stand disposed of. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge MRS/Laxmikant Printed from counselvise.com Digitally Signed Signed by: LAXMIKANT MOHAPATRA Designation: Senior Stenographer Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 19-Dec-2025 19:10:20 Signature Not Verified "