2017 (8) TMI 569 - HC - Income Tax

Private parties seeking information u/s 138(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act 1961 about the assessee trust - Disclosure of information respecting assessee - petitioner s grievance appears to be with regard to functioning of a public charitable trust - Held that - The petitioner has filed an application under Section 138 (b) of the Income Tax Act dated 21.03.2016. This application is stated to have been sent by sped post and shown to have been received by the office of the third respondent on 22.03.2016 vide postal Acknowledgment card. Thus considering the limited relief sought for by the petitioner and without going into the allegations made by the petitioner against those private parties there will be a direction to the competent authority of the third respondent department to consider the petitioner s representation dated 21.03.2016 purported to be an application for information under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act and pass a speaking order on merits and in accordance with law after notice to all concerned including the said Trust and its Trusties within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Summary

Issues:
1. Relief sought under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Allegations against private parties and their relevance in the writ petition.
3. Consideration of representation under Right to Information Act.
4. Application filed under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought relief directing respondents to consider an application under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act. The High Court noted the petitioner's grievance regarding a charitable trust's functioning under Section 12-A of the Registration Act. Private parties' allegations were not addressed as they were not impleaded, and the writ petition focused on the Income Tax Department's response to the application.

2. The petitioner had made allegations against family members and others related to the trust's affairs. However, the court stated these could not be adjudicated in the writ petition as the private parties were not respondents. The court emphasized that the writ petition was solely about the direction sought from the Income Tax Department regarding the application under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act.

3. The petitioner had previously filed a writ petition for a direction on a representation dated 30.06.2015, which led to a reply from the Income Tax Officer. Pursuing remedies under the Right to Information Act, the petitioner submitted an application under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act in 2016. The court acknowledged the petitioner's efforts and directed the competent authority to consider the 2016 representation within eight weeks.

4. Considering the limited relief sought, the court directed the competent authority to review the petitioner's 2016 application under Section 138 (1) (b) of the Income Tax Act, involving the charitable trust and its trustees. The court's order emphasized the need for a speaking order on merits and in accordance with the law, ensuring all concerned parties are duly notified within the specified timeframe.

This detailed analysis highlights the key legal aspects and procedural steps taken in the judgment, focusing on the relief sought, allegations made, representation consideration, and application under the Income Tax Act.