Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur&Ors. vs Society For the Promn.of Edn.,Allahabad

Supreme Court16 February 2016Rohinton Fali Nariman · Kurian Joseph

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an application for registration under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act is made but the Income Tax authority does not respond within six months from the date of the application, the application is deemed to be registered, and such deemed registration takes effect from the date six months after the date of the original application.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIACIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1478 of 2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO. 9705 OF 2009]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANPUR & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS

SOCIETY FOR THE PROMN.OF EDN., ALLAHABAD Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. There is no appearance on behalf of the sole respondent despite service of notice and adjournment sought for on a couple of occasions earlier.

3. The short issue is with regard to the deemed registration of an application under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act. The High Court has taken the view that once an application is made under the said provision and in case the same is not responded to within six months, it would be taken that the application is registered under the provision.

4. The learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellants, has raised an apprehension that in the case of the respondent, since the date of application was of 24.02.2003, at the worst, the same would operate only after six months from the date of the application.

5. We see no basis for such an apprehension since that is the only logical sense in which the Judgment could be understood. Therefore, in order to disabuse any apprehension, we make it clear that the registration of the application under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act in the case of the respondent shall take effect from 24.08.2003.

6. Subject to the above clarification and leaving all other questions of law open, the appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs.

.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]

.......................J. [ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]

New Delhi;

February 16, 2016.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free