Case Law Details
CIT Vs Gettwell Health and Education Samiti (Rajasthan High Court)
Where the Commissioner does not pass any order even after six months from receipt of Tribunal’s order remitting the matter to him, the registration under section 12AA will be deemed to have been granted. This is subject to exercise of Commissioner’s power under Section 12AA(3) of the Act in appropriate cases.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT
This Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) has been filed by the Revenue against judgment dated 28.09.2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) whereby the appeal filed by the respondent-assessee has been allowed.
Facts of the case are that the respondent-assessee is a society registered under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958 vide registration certificate dated 03.01.2008. Its main object is to provide medical facilities in the State of Rajasthan. The respondent-assessee is running a hospital at Sikar in the name of Gettwell Hospital & Research Centre. The respondent-assessee filed an application in Form 10A of the Act seeking registration under Section 12AA of the Act on 19.01.2010. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), [for short ‘the CIT(E)] rejected that application vide order dated 23.07.2010. The respondent-assessee challenged that order by filing appeal before the Tribunal which vide order dated 22.07.2011 set aside order dated 23.07.2010 and remanded the matter back to the CIT(E) on the premise that it had not communicated the assessing officer’s report to the assessee and therefore restored the issue of registration back on the file of the CIT (E) with direction that the assessee should be given an opportunity before deciding the issue of registration and should be confronted with all the materials which are considered adverse to him. After remand of the matter, the CIT (E) passed fresh order on 09.10.2015 and rejected application of the respondent-assessee holding that the assessee was running the hospital for the benefit of family members of Shri B.L. Ranwa and there was no charity in it. Being aggrieved, the respondent-assessee again filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which was allowed vide impugned judgment dated 28.09.2018. Hence, this appeal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
