IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 06.04.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.1619 of 2011 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 M/s.Researh Foundationof Jainology "Sugam House" No.18, Ramanuja Iyer Street, Sowcarpet, Chennai – 600 079. .. Petitioner. Versus 1.Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 2.Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Union of India, Represented by the Under Secretary (ITA-II), CBDT Dept. of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. .. Respondents. Prayer: Petition filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in F.No.225/70/2009/ITA.II of the first respondent and quash the order dated 30.09.2010 and direct the first respondent to grant renewal of approval under Section 35(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act 1961 for the period from 01.04.2006 onwards. For Petitioner : Mrs.Pushya Seetharaman Senior Advocate for Mr.C.V.Rajan For Respondents : Mr.J.Narayanasamy O R D E R Heard the learned Senior Counsel representing the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The main contention of the learned Senior Counsel representing the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that, sufficient opportunity had not been given to the petitioner to put forth its submissions to the first respondent, as no opportunity of personal hearing had been given to it, as per Rule 5C (12) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Therefore, it has been submitted that it would sufficie, if the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 30.09.2010, is set aside and the petitioner is permitted to submit the relevant documents, if any, and if the petitioner is given an opportunity of personal hearing, before an order is passed by the first respondent, with regard to grant of renewal of approval of exemption, from 01.04.2006 onwards. 3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that sufficient opportunity had been given to the petitioner, as per the directions issued by this Court, by its order, dated 23.04.2010, made in W.P.No.995 of 2010. However, he had admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing had been given to the petitioner, as per Section 5C (12) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 4. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the first respondent, dated 30.09.2010, is set aside. The petitioner is permitted to produce all the necessary documents in support of its claims, before the first respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On production of such documents, the first respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks, thereafter, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //true copy// Sub Asst.Registrar cse To 1. The Central Board of Direct Taxes, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) 121 Mahatma Gandhi Road, Chennai – 600 034. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The Under Secretary (ITA-II), CBDT Dept. of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, North Block, New Delhi. 1 cc to Mr.J.Narayanasamy, Advocate, Sr.No.24354 1 cc to Mr.C.V.Rajan, Advocate, Sr.No.24903 Writ Petition No.1619 of 2011 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 KSJ {CO} TP/25.4.2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/