Madras High Court
M/S.Arulmigu Devi Karumariamman ... vs The Assistant Commissioner Of Income ... on 11 November, 2025
Author: C.Saravanan
Bench: C.Saravanan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.11.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.No.23801 of 2022
and
W.M.P.Nos.22784, 22786 & 29101 of 2022
M/s.Arulmigu Devi Karumariamman Thirukoil
Rep by its Executive Officer
Ms.G.Jayapriya
Karumariamman Thirukoil, Sannathi Street
Thiruvekadu
Chennai 600 077 ...Petitioner
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions)
121, Nungambakkam High Road,
Nungambakkam , Chennai 600034 ...Respondent
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the
respondent and quash
i) the impugned order passed by the respondent under Section 148A(d) of
the Act in PAN: AADTA3737H, DIN & Order No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2022-
____________
Page No. 1 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm )
23/1044228755(1) dated 28.07.2022 for the AY 2013-14.
ii) the impugned notice No.1 under Section 148 of the Act issued by the
respondent under Section 148 of the Act in PAN: AADTA3737H, DIN &
Notice No.ITBA/AST/S/148/2021-22/1032372552(1) dated 12.04.2021 for the
AY 2013-14 and
iii) the impugned notice No.2 under Sectin 148 of the Act issued by the
respondent in PAN: AADTA3737H dated 28.07.2022 for the AY 2013-14
communicated through intimation letter dated 28.07.2022 in
DIN:ITBA/AST/S/91/2022-23/1044249763(1).
For Petitioner : Mr.N.V.Balaji
For Respondents : Mr.V.J.Arulraj
Senior Standing Counsel
ORDER
Mr.V.J.Arulraj, learned Senior Standing Counsel, takes notice for the Respondent.
2. This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Senior Standing ____________ Page No. 2 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) Counsel for the Respondent.
3. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 28.07.2022 passed under Section 148 A (d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) and a notice issued under Section 148 of the Act under the new regime with effect from 01.04.2021.
4. The petitioner claims that the petitioner was earlier granted an exemption under Section 10(23-C)(iv) of the Act vide approval order dated 03.11.2016 with effect from Assessment Year 2016-2017 and that all along, the petitioner was exempted from the payment of income tax. However, the petitioner failed to renew the same and therefore, the petitioner was confronted with re-asessment proceedings for the Assessment year 2013-14.
____________ Page No. 3 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm )
5. In this background, the petitioner appears to have approached the Commissioner of Income tax (Exemption ) for renewal of exemption under Section 10 (23C)(iv) of the Act. The facts on record reveal that earlier, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) had passed an order dated 03.11.2016 which came to be later modified vide order dated 28.12.2017.
6. By the aforesaid order, dated 28.12.2017 the benefit of Section 10 (23C)(v) of the Act was confined for the tax period starting from the Assessment Year 2016-17. This was therefore challenged by the petitioner before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA.No.1090/CHNY/2018. The Tribunal vide order dated 16.11.2018 ordered as under:
“10(23C) any income received by any person on behalf of-
(i) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(ii) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iii) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iiia) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iiiaa) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
____________
Page No. 4 of 14
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm )
(iiiaaa) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iiiab) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iiiac) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iiiad) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iiiae) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(iv) …. …. …. …. …. …. …. .…
(v) any trust (including any other legal obligation) or institution wholly for public religious purposes, (which may be approved by the prescribed authority), having regard to the manner in which the affairs of the trust or institution are administered and supervised for ensuring that the income accruing thereto is properly applied for the objects thereof.”
14. Therefore, in view of Section 10(23C) (v) of the Act, the assessee being a public religious temple/institution is entitled for approval by the Commissioner (Exemption). In fact, the Commissioner (Exemption) granted approval under Section 10(23C) (iv) of the Act by an order dated 03.11.2016 from the assessment year 2016-17 which was subsequently modified by an order dated 28.12.2017 as if the approval was granted under Section 10(23C) (v) of the Act. From the material available on record it appears that the approval under Section 10(23C) of the Act was granted from 08.05.1989 by Notification No.8354.
Therefore, the assessee is seeking only renewal of earlier approval. Hence, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the Commissioner (Exemption) is not justified in restricting the approval from assessment year 2016-17. Therefore, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Exemption) dated 03.11.2016 as modified vide order dated 28.12.2017 is modified. The Commissioner (Exemption) is directed to grant ____________ Page No. 5 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) approval under Section 10(23C) (v) from assessment year 2015- 16, so that the approval under Section 10(23C) (v) of the Act can be continued provisions of Income-Tax Act, they are all independent taxable units. Therefore, it is for the income-tax authorities to bring all the temples, churches, mosques, wakf, endowments, math, Kattlai and whatever other name they are called,including Gurudwara, Sikh, Jain Buddhist temple to the tax net. If no action was taken so far in respect of other temples, mosques, wakf, churches, math, endowments, Kattalai, trusts, Gurudwara, Sikh, Jains or Buddhist temple, etc., the concerned income-tax authorities shall enforce the provisions of Income- tax Act immediately. While enforcing the provisions of Income- tax Act, the assessing authority and Commissioner (Exemption) shall keep in mind the religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution, more particularly, under Article 25 and 26 of Constitution of India. Without affecting the individual freedom guaranteed under Article 25 and 26 of the Constitution, the Commissioner (Exemption) and other authorities shall take immediate action to bring all the temples and other religious institution such as mosque, wakf, church, math, endowment Kattlai, Gurudwara, Sikh, Jain or Buddhist temple, etc., within the tax net.
16. With the above observation, the impugned order of the Commissioner (Exemption) is modified and the Commissioner (Exemption) is directed to grant approval under Section 10(23C) (v) of the Act from the assessment year 2015-16.
17. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is ____________ Page No. 6 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) allowed.”
7. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner and as well as the Income Tax Department preferred separate appeals before the Division Bench of this Court in TCA.No.141/2023 and TCA.No.81/2020. As far as the petitioner's appeal in TCA. No.141/2023 is concerned, the appeal was admitted on 16.03.2023 and the following substantial questions of law were framed:-
“1. Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in directing the CIT(E), Chennai, to grant approval under section 10 (23C)
(v) of the Act from the AY 2015-16, instead of from the year in which the earlier approval under the said section expired?'
8. As far as the department's appeal against the same order in TCA No.81 of 2020 is concerned, the appeal was dismissed on 18.02.2020 holding ____________ Page No. 7 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) that no substantial questions of law arises for consideration out of the said Tax case Appeal. However, liberty was given to the Income Tax Department to proceed against the Trustees and the Committee Members of the Temple who were concerned with the administration and the monies of the Temple, for mis-
appropriation and mis-management leading to loss of public money and government revenue, if any.
9. Relevant portion of the order dated 18.02.2020 of this court in TCA No.81/2020 is reproduced below:-
7. There is no question of law arising for consideration as the appeal is devoid of merits. However, liberty is given to the Department to proceed against the trustees and committee members dealing with administration and the monies of the temple for the mismanagement and misappropriation leading to loss of public monies and the Government revenue, if any.
10. It is noticed that at the time when the orders came to be passed rejecting the application for renewal of exemption of the Petitioner under Section, 10 (23 c) (iv), of the Act, no proceeding had been initiated against the ____________ Page No. 8 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) petitioner for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
11. Reading of the records indicate that after the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was amended with effect from 01.04.2021 and notice dated 12.04.2021 under Section 148 of the Act was issued under the old regime and pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs Asish Agarwal (2023) 1 SCC 617, a fresh notice dated 27.05.2022 was issued under Section 148-A (b) of the Act which has now culminated in the impugned order dated 28.07.2022 under Section 148 A (d) of the Act and impugned Notice dated 28.07.202 passed under Section 148 of the Act under the new regime.
12. Challenge in the writ petition is primarily on the ground that the jurisdictional Assessing Officer has no authority to pass the impugned order dated 28.07.2022 or issue the notice dated 28.07.2022 under Section 148 of the Act under the new regime in the light of the decision of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) ____________ Page No. 9 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) Vs. Hexaware Technologies Ltd and Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2024]162 Taxmann.com. 225 Bombay.
13. That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner's claim for exemption under Section 10 (23 C) (v) is still pending before this court in TCA No.141/2023. It is therefore submitted that the proceedings are being speed tract in view of limitation to issue Notice under Section 148 and order under Section 148 A (d) under the Act.
14. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the writ petition is pre-mature and therefore liable to be dismissed.
15. Having considered the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel, the writ petition is disposed by directing the respondent to keep the proceedings re-assessment in abeyance pending disposal of the Tax Case Appeal in TCA.No.141 of 2023 filed by the ____________ Page No. 10 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) Petitioner before Division Bench of this Court
16. As far as the issue relating to the jurisdiction of the Officer to issue the impugned order and notice is concerned, the issue has already been answered by this court in D. Tamilselvi Vs. Income Tax office- MJR Hospitality Service Apartment vide order dated 15.09.2023 in WP(MD)Nos.30938, etc., batch
17. The time during which the re-assessment proceedings are directed to be kept in abeyance shall be excluded for the purpose of computation of limitation under Section 153 of the Act, in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashish Agarwal case (referred to supra) and Union of India Vs. Rajeev Bansal case (referred to supra) . At that stage, in case an adverse order is passed against the petitioner, the petitioner is at liberty to raise defences that are available at that point of time.
____________ Page No. 11 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm )
18. On merits, the benefit of exemption under Section 10 (23C ) (v) of the Act claimed by the Petitioner for the Assessment Year 2013-14 is dependent on the order to be passed by the Division Bench of this Court in TCA.No.141 of 2023.
19. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
11.11.2025 Neutral Citation gv To The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) ____________ Page No. 12 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) 121, Nungambakkam High Road, Nungambakkam , Chennai 600034 C.SARAVANAN.J gv ____________ Page No. 13 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm ) W.P.No.23801 of 2022 and W.M.P.Nos.22784, 22786 & 29101 of 2022 11.11.2025 ____________ Page No. 14 of 14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/12/2025 04:51:41 pm )