High Court Of Orissa
Kalinga Foundation Trust vs. CIT
Section 80G
A.K. Ganguly & I. Mahanty, JJ.
Writ Petn. No. 3550 of 2005
25th October, 2006
JUDGMENT
A.K. Ganguly, J. :
This writ petition has been filed by Kalinga Foundation Trust, which was heard along with the miscellaneous cases. On the factual aspect, there is a great deal of common area between the writ petition and those miscellaneous cases. In the course of argument it was admitted by learned counsel for the parties that save and except prayer No. (iii) nothing remains to be considered in the writ petition. The said prayer No. (iii) is set out below : “(iii) after hearing the parties direct opposite party No. 1 to grant approval to the petitioner under s. 80G of the IT Act, and/or.”
Learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the said prayer No. (iii) cannot be granted since the same is sub judice before the Tribunal. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to an order passed by the CIT(A)-I, Bhubaneswar. In the said order, the relevant facts of the case which formed the subject matter of miscellaneous cases were all considered and the CIT came to the conclusion that the Kalinga Award has earned an important place in the galaxy of International Awards. It was also held in that order that considering that fact the Central Government as well as the State Government have patronized the Kalinga Foundation Trust, financially, as well as, infra-structurally and there is no sense in treating such an institution as an uncharitable and benami concern of late Biju Patnaik. As such, the learned CIT passed the following order : “……. I hereby direct the AO to treat the Kalinga Foundation Trust, as a charitable trust, having independent identity and entity, which is required under s. 12A of the Act and delete the addition made in the status of AOP on protective basis. Thus, all the grounds of appeal are allowed.
In the end the appeal is allowed.
“Pursuant to the said order of the CIT(A), 19 orders relating to various assessment years were passed by the AO giving effect to the order of the CIT(A). Those orders were produced before the Court by learned counsel for the Revenue. Learned counsel for the Revenue also submitted that the Department has filed a further appeal against the order of the CIT(A) and this Court has been informed that the said appeal is still pending. As such it would be difficult for this Court to reach a final conclusion in view of the pendency of such proceedings before the Tribunal. This Court however directs that the said appeal may be disposed of in the light of the facts discussed in the miscellaneous cases, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of service of a copy of this order upon the said authority. With this direction the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
[Citation : 296 ITR 733]
