Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
,
Petitioner – Appellant
Versus
1st Respondent – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts and procedural history regarding accumulation and assessment order. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. arguments by petitioner supporting specific purpose for accumulation under section 11(2). (Para 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondent’s argument that purpose was general and writ petition not maintainable. (Para 7) |
| 4. court’s observations on maintainability and requirement of specific purpose under section 11(2). (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. ratio decidendi: clarificatory resolution suffices for purpose specificity; impugned order set aside. (Para 12 , 13) |
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed, challenging the order of the 1st Respondent in DIN:ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2023-24/1063425411 (1) dated 26.03.2024 for the assessment year 2022-23 in PAN:AAACCS9035J and direct the 1st Respondent to accept the application filed in Form 10 on 29.09.2022 for accumulation of income u/s.11(2) of the Act in terms of Clarificatory Resolution passed by the Board on 08.03.2024.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner is a Religious and Charitable Institution and since the petitioner was not able to utilise 85% of the income in the Assessment Year 2017-2018 which comes to Rs.64,00,00,0
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
