2012 (10) TMI 608 - HC - Income Tax

Validity of Notice for rejection of application made by the petitioner under Section 10(23C) (vi) - Held that - The relief prayed for by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition cannot be granted - However it would be open to the petitioner to raise all its objections before the first respondent pursuant to the show cause notice dated 10.09.2012 issued by the first respondent including the grounds raised in the present Writ Petition on or before 3.10.2012. Thereafter it is for the first respondent to consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon on merits and in accordance with law.

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Division Bench in Tax Case No. 665 of 2011.
2. Validity of the show cause notice issued by the first respondent.
3. Petitioner's right to raise objections before the first respondent.

Analysis:
1. The main issue raised in the judgment pertains to the jurisdiction of the Division Bench in Tax Case No. 665 of 2011. The petitioner contended that the issue raised in the show cause notice by the first respondent should be decided by the Division Bench, as per the pending case. The Court acknowledged the contention but ruled that the relief sought in the Writ Petition cannot be granted. The petitioner was, however, allowed to raise all objections before the first respondent, including those in the Writ Petition.

2. The validity of the show cause notice dated 10.09.2012 was challenged by the petitioner. The notice directed the petitioner to show cause as to why their application under Section 10(23C)(vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should not be rejected. The petitioner argued that the first respondent should not pass an order while the Tax Case was pending. The respondents, on the other hand, asserted that the petitioner could raise objections before the first respondent, who would then consider and decide on the same.

3. The Court concluded that the petitioner could indeed raise objections before the first respondent within a specified timeline. The petitioner was instructed to file any objections by 3.10.2012. It was clarified that the first respondent would review the objections, pass appropriate orders based on merits and law, and provide an opportunity for a personal hearing to the petitioner's authorized representative. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these directions, emphasizing that the petitioner's right to raise objections before the first respondent was upheld.