Facts of the Case

The petitioner, The Northern India Zonal Assembly of the Mar Thoma Church, challenged the assessment order dated 28.03.2022 concerning AY 2013–14. The impugned order was based on a reassessment order dated 31.12.2016 passed in respect of another entity, Caruna Bal Vikas (CBV).

It was contended that the Assessing Officer relied only on selective portions of the CBV reassessment order while ignoring relevant findings, particularly those relating to restricted grants.

Further, the petitioner had already filed a statutory appeal against the impugned order, which remained pending since February 2019 without adjudication.

 Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Assessing Officer erred by selectively relying on parts of the reassessment order of CBV.
  2. Whether non-disposal of the statutory appeal for over four years justified judicial intervention.
  3. Whether denial of exemption under Sections 11 and 12 by invoking Section 13(1)(b) was valid in the context of restricted grants.

 Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The assessment order was flawed as it relied on incomplete extraction of the CBV reassessment order.
  • Paragraph 12 of the reassessment order (which supported exemption due to restricted sub-grant) was ignored.
  • The petitioner was eligible for exemption under Sections 11 and 12 as the grant received was restricted in nature.
  • The prolonged pendency of the statutory appeal caused serious prejudice.

 Respondent’s Arguments

  • The petitioner had knowledge of the CBV reassessment proceedings and approached the Court after delay.
  • The writ petition was liable to be dismissed on grounds of delay and laches.
  • The petitioner should pursue the statutory appellate remedy.

 Court Findings / Observations

  • The Court identified two core grievances:
    1. Selective reliance on the CBV reassessment order.
    2. Inordinate delay in disposal of the statutory appeal.
  • The Court held that the delay in appeal disposal justified intervention and negated the objection of delay and laches.
  • It observed that while deciding the appeal, the authority must consider:
    • The entire reassessment order of CBV
    • Judicial precedents relied upon by the petitioner
  • The Court also noted reliance on:
    Director of Income Tax vs Society for Development Alternatives (2012 SCC OnLine Del 225)

 Court Order / Directions

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition with the following directions:

  1. The appellate authority shall dispose of the pending appeal within three months.
  2. The authority must consider:
    • Entire reassessment order dated 31.12.2016 (CBV case)
    • Legal position regarding restricted grants
  3. A personal hearing must be granted to the petitioner before final decision.

 Important Clarification

  • The Court clarified that where grants are routed through intermediary entities (e.g., Compassion International → CBV → Petitioner), the nature of restricted grant must be properly examined before denying exemption.
  • Selective reading of assessment records is impermissible.
  • Delay in appellate adjudication can justify writ jurisdiction.

 Sections Involved

  • Section 11 – Income from property held for charitable or religious purposes
  • Section 12 – Income of trusts or institutions
  • Section 13(1)(b) – Denial of exemption in certain cases

Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/RAS08052023CW58892023_145809.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.