The Delhi High Court in the case Oxfam India v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, (Central), Delhi-2 and Anr and other connected matters observed and has stayed the order passed by the Income Tax department wherein it cancelled the tax exemption status of two non-government organisations, Oxfam India and CARE India.
The Division bench comprising of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav in the case observed and has passed the order identical to an interim order passed on August 25 last year in favour of leading public policy think tank, Centre for Policy Research and said that the two NGOs shall also be entitled to identical interim reliefs.
The bench in the case clarified that the donations that may be accepted by Oxfam India and CARE India pursuant to the interim directions shall be confined to domestic contributions only.
The court in its order also stated that the interim order passed in favour of Centre for Policy Research will continue till February 27, the next date of hearing.
The Co-ordinate bench stayed the Income Tax department’s order cancelling CPR’s tax exemption status on August 25, 2023 wherein it is noted that the cancellation will entail severe consequences as the NGO will not be able to accept any contributions from domestic donors.
In the present case, the petition was moved by the three NGOs challenging the cancellation of their tax exemption status by the IT department.
The court was informed by the counsel, by Senior Advocate Arvind P. Datar, appearing for the three NGOs, that a Special Leave Petition challenging the interim order passed in the NGOs favour was dismissed by the Supreme Court on January 05.
The counsel appearing for the IP department raised the preliminary objection to the maintainability of the writ petitions and contended that the impugned order is appealable in terms of Section 253(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the appeal is liable to be tried by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
The bench in the case observed that the said matter raised a substantial jurisdictional question and that there is a need to adopt a uniform and consistent approach regarding the interim orders.
The court stated that since an identical challenge has been duly entertained by a coordinate Bench of this Court and interim protection accorded. Thus, the said court also bears in mind that pleadings wherein it already stands completed and thus the issue can be decided finally on a short date. The court in the case observed and has hold that the petitioners shall be entitled to interim reliefs in terms identical to those provided in paragraphs 17-19 of the aforenoted order of 25 August 2023 passed in W.P.(C) 11270/2023, which being subject to the clarification that the donations that may be accepted by the petitioners pursuant to the aforenoted interim directions shall be confined to domestic contributions only. The counsel, Advocates Mr. Arvind P. Datar, Sr. Adv with Mr. Sachit Jolly, Mr. Rishabh Malhotra, Ms. Disha Jham, Ms. Soumya Singh and Mr. Devansh Jain appeared for the Petitioner.
The counsel, Mr. Hossain, Sr.SC, Mr. Vipul Agrawal, Sr.SC with Mr. Sanjeev Menon, Jr.SC represented the respondent.
