Gujarat High Court
Parul Arogya Seva Mandal Trust vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 25 March, 2019
Author: Harsha Devani
Bench: Harsha Devani, Bhargav D. Karia
C/SCA/5745/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5745 of 2019
==========================================================
PARUL AROGYA SEVA MANDAL TRUST
Versus
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, EXEMPTION
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR S.N. SOPARKAR SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
Date : 25/03/2019
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
1. Mr. S.N. Soparkar, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner, invited the attention of the Court to the impugned order dated 13.03.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income tax (Exemptions), Ahmedabad to submit that the same is totally bereft of any reasons and is totally based upon the Office Memorandum dated 31.07.2017. Reference was made to the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of L.G. Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT rendered on 08.08.2017 in W.P.(C) No.6778 of 2017 wherein, the Court has set aside the order passed by the PCIT and restored the application to the file of Page 1 of 2 C/SCA/5745/2019 ORDER the PCIT for being heard on merits and without reference to the Office Memorandum dated 31.07.2017. Reference was also made to the decision of the Supreme Court in the civil appeal filed against the abovereferred order of the Delhi High Court wherein, the Supreme Court has clarified that in all cases like the said case, it would be open to the authorities, on the facts of individual cases, to grant deposit orders of a lesser amount than 20%, pending appeal.
2. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, issue Notice, returnable on 02.04.2019.
By way of adinterim relief, the respondents are restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioner.
Direct service is permitted.
(HARSHA DEVANI, J) (BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) PRAVIN KARUNAN Page 2 of 2