THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 13.01.2015 + W.P.(C) 5635/2014 ST. STEPHENS HOSPITAL SOCIETY ... Petitioner versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .. Respondent Advocates who appeared in this case: For Petitioner : Ms Surekha Raman For Respondent : Mr N.P. Sahni with Mr Nitin Gulati. CORAM:- HON BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) 1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 02.06.2014 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 51 (1), New Delhi, whereby application for lower deduction certificate under section 197 of Income-tax Act, 1961 for Financial Year 2014-15 has been rejected. rejection order reads as under:- OFFICE OF DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRLCE 51(1), Aayakar Bhawan, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. Tel. 011-22447347 W.P.(C) No. 5635/2014 Page 1 of 4 F. No. DCIT/Cir.51(1)/2014-15/827 Dated: 02.06.2014 To Principal Officer, M/s Stephens Hospital Society Tis Hazari Delhi- 110054 Sir, Sub: Issue of lower deduction certificate of Tax u/s 197 of IT Act, 1961 for FY 2014-15- reg. Please refer to your pending application in above context. In this regard, it is informed that having regard to provisions contained in section 197 of Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 28AA of Income Tax Rule, 1962 vis- - vis and overall facts of your case, it has not been found to be justified to issue certificate u/s 197(1) to you for FY 2014- 15. Therefore, application filed in Form No. 13 is rejected. Yours faithfully, (Amit Mohan Mittal) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. Circle 51(1), New Delhi. It is evident from above that provision which was considered by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax was section 197 of Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 28AA of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 2. learned counsel for petitioner submitted that Rule 28AA would not apply and it is Rule 28AB which would be applicable. This is so because petitioner is trust wholly for charitable purposes. W.P.(C) No. 5635/2014 Page 2 of 4 learned counsel for petitioner also states that petitioner has exemption under sections 11, 12 and 10(23C)(vi) of said Act. 3. We have heard counsel for parties. We agree with submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner that Rule 28AA which would generally apply would not apply in present case because petitioner s case is covered under specific instances provided under Rule 28AB. Therefore, consideration which was given by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax under section 28AA was under wrong provision. parameters which have to be examined under Rule 28AA and parameters under Rule 28AB are entirely different. result is that application of petitioner has been examined under parameters which were not applicable to petitioner and therefore rejection based thereupon would be liable to be set aside. 4. Consequently, we set aside impugned order of rejection and remit matter to concerned DCIT for consideration afresh under Rule 28AB after giving opportunity of hearing to petitioner/ representative of petitioner. Since Financial Year is coming to close, we direct that application under section 197 read with Rule 28AB be dealt with expeditiously. 5. In first instance, petitioner shall appear before concerned DCIT on 19.01.2015 at 11.30 a.m. order disposing of application shall be passed within two weeks thereafter. W.P.(C) No. 5635/2014 Page 3 of 4 6. writ petition is allowed as above. 7. Dasti under signature of Court Master. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JANUARY 13,2015 kb W.P.(C) No. 5635/2014 Page 4 of 4 St. Stephens Hospital Society v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax