Case Details

Citation(s)
2009 SLG 968 2009 SLD 968 (2009) 318 ITR 102 (2010) 187 TAXMAN 263
Bombay High Court
WRIT PETITION No. 4879 OF 2009, JULY 10, 2009
J.H. BHATIA AND FERDINO I REBELLO, JJ.
S.C. Tiwari for the Appellant. Parag Vyas and P.S. Sahadevan for the
Respondent.

Indian Planetary Society

v.

Central Board of Direct TAX es

Law:

Section:

Section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Scientific research expenditure - - Assessee-society, engaged in research in planetary science, astronomy, astrophysics, solarphysics, etc., made an application for recognition as Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (SIRO) to Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India and also made an application for approval under section 35(1)(ii) - Ministry of Science and Technology had accorded its approval - However, CBDT rejected assessee's application for approval under section 35(1)(ii) without assigning any reason - Whether in view of provisions of section 35(1)(ii), authority to grant permission is Government of India and CBDT has not been allowed to discharge functions of Government of India - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, order of CBDT rejecting application of assessee for approval was liable to be set aside and matter was to be referred to Government of India for necessary consideration - Held, yes FACTS The assessee-society was engaged in research in planetary science, astronomy, astrophysics, solarphysics and allied subjects. It made an application for recognition as Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (SIRO) to the Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India. That application was followed by an application for approval under section 35(1)( ii). The Ministry of Science and Technology had accorded its approval. However, the CBDT rejected the assessee's application stating that the basic requirement under section 35(1)( ii) of undertaking adequate scientific research activity was not fulfilled. The review application filed by the assessee was also rejected. On writ petition : HELD On perusal of provisions of section 35(1)(ii ) and the proviso thereto, it would be clear that the authority to grant permission is the Government of India. In the instant case, rejection had been made by the CBDT. Nothing had been shown to show that the CBDT, under the Business Rules of the Government of India, had been allowed to discharge functions of the Government under section 35(1)( ii). If the provisos to section 35(1) are seen, then the CBDT is the prescribed authority in certain cases.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492