$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision : 14 th August, W.P.(C) 7727/2015 and C.M.No /2015.

Similar documents
$~R 66, 67 & 68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of Decision : 15 th May, 2012.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER Judgment delivered on: W.P.(C) 2331/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT W.P.(C) 1254/2010 DATE OF DECISION :

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 CEAC 2/2012 DATE OF DECISION : FEBRUARY 01, 2012

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: versus

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : FINANCE ACT, 1994 Judgment delivered on: W.P.(C) 4456/2012 & C.M.No.9237/2012( for stay)

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: ITA 232/2014 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-VI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INTEREST ON THE AMOUNT OF LEAVE ENCASHMENT Judgment delivered on W.P.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 9. + W.P.(C) 6422/2013 & CM No.14002/2013 (Stay) versus. With W.P.(C) 4558/2014.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT :INCOME TAX ACT W.P.(C) 5467/2010 Date of Decision : 2nd February, 2012.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. SUBJECT : Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, LPA No.399/2007

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CENTRAL EXCISE ACT, 1944 Judgment delivered on: W.P.(C) 5636/2010. versus W.P.

$~1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % DECIDED ON: versus

$~23. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 7131/2015 % Judgment dated 29 th July, versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT. THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AND. STRP Nos OF 2013*

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPENSAION MATTER Date of decision:20th July, 2012 MAC.APP. 375/2012

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. versus CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA PALLI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N.KUMAR AND THE HON BLE MRS.JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N. KUMAR AND

* THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Decided on GROUP 4 SECURITAS GUARDING LTD. Versus AND. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU BEFORE THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY. WRIT PETITION Nos OF 2015 AND

ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, REGIONAL BENCH, LUCKNOW. Original Application No. 06 of 2018

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. LPA No.101/2010 and LPA No.461/2010 & CM Appl. Nos /2010. Date of Hearing:

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Reserved On: 3 rd August, 2010 Judgment Delivered On: 6 th August, W.P.(C) NO.

- 1 - W.P.Nos /2012

+ LPA 330/2005 & CM No.1802/2005 (for stay) Versus J U D G M E N T

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI CENTRAL -III. Mr. P Roy Chaudhuri, sr. standing counsel for revenue Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Adv.

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI. Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 32 & 50 of 2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER W.P.(C) No.5282/2012 DATE OF DECISION : 2nd July, 2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3 OF 2013 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION ACT, 1951 CO. APP. 104/2005 DATE OF DECISION : July 08, 2013

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(C) 5818/2013. versus THE AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE. With + W.P.(C) 7788/2013 & CM 16560/2013

Decided on: 08 th October, 2010

Bar & Bench (

CWP No of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Companies Act CO.APP. 12/2005 Date of decision : 22 nd November, 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Date of decision : 26 th November, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD. Through Mr.P.K.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ACT, Reserved on : October 30, Date of Decision : November 6, 2006

IN WP No.22770/2016 BETWEEN:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT. INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 171/2001. Date of decision: 18th July, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT Date of decision: 9th July, 2013 ITA 131/2010

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment delivered on: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. - versus M/S ZORAVAR VANASPATI LIMITED

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No. 7 OF 2019 [Arising out of SLP (C) No of 2014] Versus

01 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI.... Respondent Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj, Advocate.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SUIT FOR PERPETUAL INJUNCTION FAO (OS) NO. 157 OF Date of Decision : 10th July, 2007.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO.360 of 2016 (Arising from the SLP(Civil) No.

versus CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R %

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS OF Versus. The State of Bihar & Ors. Etc...

IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT, Date of Decision: 23rd February, ITA 1222/2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE N KUMAR THE HON BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA

DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Through: Mr Ajay Verma, Adv. Through: Mr R.K. Saini, Adv with Mr Sitab Ali Chaudhary, Adv. AND LPA 709/2012.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, WP(C) No.987/2010. Reserved on : 16th January, 2012.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL. Date of decision: 4th December, 2012 MAC.APP.

Capgemini India Pvt. Ltd. } Petitioner versus Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax } Circle 14(1)(2), Mumbai and Ors. } Respondents

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : THE DELHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION ACT, 1957 Date of decision: 31st July, 2012 LPA. No.48/2006.

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. Advocate. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX MATTER. Date of decision : November 28, 2007 ITA 348/2007

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : COMPANIES ACT, Date of decision: 21st December, LPA No.550/2011

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9310/2017 (Arising from Special Leave Petition(s)No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT, Date of Decision : 29th February, ITA 401/2011

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CUSAA 4/2013. Versus

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT. Reserved on: 19th March, Date of Decision: 25th April, 2014

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

ITA No. 140 of had been sold on , had been handed over to him. The assessee furnished the desired information and documents, including

WP(C) No.3034/2008 BEFORE THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY THE HON BLE MR JUSTICE L.S. JAMIR. For the respondents : Mr. S. Saikia. SC, Finance.

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:

In this petition short point is involved which is. with respect to the petitioner s right to get the benefit of

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.683 OF 2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : Central Excise Act, 1944 DECIDED ON: CEAC 22/2012

W.P.No.39548/2012 (T-IT)

REPORTED * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Date of Decision : December 06, 2010 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No OF Food Corporation of India.Appellant(s) VERSUS

it has been received or not. We have heard Ms. Pinky Anand, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the appellant herein. She has brought t

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : INCOME TAX ACT ITA Nos. 12/2012 & 18/2012 DATE OF ORDER :

HIGH COURT, BOMBAY AND COMPANY SCHEME PETITION NO. 707 OF 2016 CONNECTED WITH COMPANY SUMMONS FOR DIRECTION NO. 533 OF And

STATUS OF THE CASES OF PRE 2006 PENSIONERSS IN VARIOUS COURTS : AS ON COMPILED BY M. L. KANAUJIA, IRSSE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Tax Appeal No. 7 of 2005

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. % Judgment Reserved on: 09 th October, 2015 Judgment Delivered on: 16 th February, 2016

+ W.P.(C) 5709/2017 & CM No (stay)

Fertiliser Association Of India... vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 March, 2015

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI. + LPA 506/2015 & CM No.13852/2015 (stay)

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr.SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HON'BLE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD : PRESENT : THE HON BLE MR. VIKRAMAJIT SEN, CHIEF JUSTICE

VERSUS M/S. BHAGAT CONSTRUCTION CO. PVT. LTD... Respondent. VERSUS M/S. M.R.G. PLASTIC TECHNOLOGIES AND ORS... Respondent

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : SERVICE MATTER. Judgment reserved on: Judgment pronounced on:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITA No. 217 of 2002 Date of decision Commissioner of Income Tax(Central) Ludhiana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL Date of decision: 29th November, 2012 MAC.APP.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGNAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1017 OF 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DILIP B.BHOSALE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.MANOHAR ITA NO.

Transcription:

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision : 14 th August, 2015. + W.P.(C) 7727/2015 and C.M.No.15149-15150/2015 DELHI EPDP COOPERATIVE GROUP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD.... Petitioner Through: M.Qayam-ud-din, Advocate. versus REGISTRAR, COOP. SOCIETIES & ANR... Respondents Through: Mr.Gautam Narayan, ASC for R-1 & R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE I.S.MEHTA GITA MITTAL, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner assails the order dated 18 th April, 2011 passed by the Assistant Registrar (Audit) holding that the petitioner-society had violated the provisions of Section 60(1) of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 by not getting its audit conducted for the period 2009-10 within the stipulated time and levying a fine of Rs.1,500/- under Rule 167 of the DCS Rules, 2007. The petitioner has also assailed the order dated 7 th August, 2015 passed by the Financial Commissioner, Delhi in the Revision Petition being (case No.215/2011) which was filed by the petitioner herein under Section 116 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 against the W.P.(C) 7727/2015 Page 1 of 6

aforesaid order dated 18 th April, 2011. 2. There is no dispute to the material facts giving rise to the instant petition. The petitioner has contended that for the year 2009-10, its audit was concluded as mandated on 31 st August, 2010, however, such report was submitted by the Auditor on 3 rd December, 2010. 3. We find that there is also no controversy that the Auditor was appointed in accordance with the applicable rules from the panel of auditors approved by the office of Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The question which has been pressed for our consideration is as to what would be the relevant date by which the audit for such accounts could have been completed. According to the impugned orders, the audit could have been completed by 29 th July, 2010 and that the petitioner-society had failed to do so. 4. The adjudication by this Court rests on the consideration of Section 60(1) of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act as well as the Rule-38 of the Delhi Co-operative Societies Rules, 2007. For the sake of convenience, we extract hereunder the relevant portion of the statutory provision, which reads as under:- 60. Audit (1) A co-operative society shall get its accounts audited annually by an auditor selected from the panel prepared by the Registrar in the prescribed manner within the period of [one hundred twenty days from the prescribed date for making up its account for the year]. 5. The statute thus requires that the Society is mandatorily required to get its accounts audited annually by an Auditor selected from the panel W.P.(C) 7727/2015 Page 2 of 6

which has been prepared and approved by the office of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies within a period of 120 days from the prescribed date for making up of its accounts for the year. 6. We, therefore, have to examine the Rules whereunder such prescription is contained. Learned counsel for the parties have drawn our attention to the provisions of Rule 38 which is concerned with the closing of accounts of the society, which reads as under:- 38. Closing of Accounts Every co-operative society shall maintain accounts and books for the purpose of recording business transactions by it and close them every year on 31 st March, by the 30 th April. Each closing entry in the cash book, in each ledger account shall be signed by the president or secretary or the treasurer or any other authorized officials of the society authorized by the committee in this behalf. The closing balances, which are thus authenticated, shall be carried forward to the following year commencing on the 1 st April. For the purpose of calling the annual general body meeting as provided in section 31 of the Act, the date fixed for making up the accounts, for the year shall be 30 th April of each year. The closing accounts shall be signed by the secretary or the treasurer or any other officers of the society/bank authorized by the committee. (Emphasis by us) 7. A clear distinction has been drawn by the Legislature while enacting the rule. It has been made mandatory that the accounts books of the society shall be closed on the 31 st March. However, the Rule provides for a grace period of 30 days for the society to make up its accounts. The Rule itself stipulates that the closure of accounts on 31 st March shall be effected by the 30 th April. 8. Such reading of the Rule is supported by the latter part of Rule 38 as well as by Section 31 of the statute which mandates that every Co-operative W.P.(C) 7727/2015 Page 3 of 6

Society shall within a period of 180 days, after the date fixed for making up of its accounts for the year under the rules which are in force, call for the general body meeting. 9. Rule-38, heretofore extracted, also clarifies that for the purposes of calling the general body meeting as provided in Section 31 of the Act, the date fixed for making up of the accounts for the year shall be 30 th April of each year. It needs no further elaboration that the statute makes a distinction between the date on which the accounts must have been closed, i.e. 31 st March of the year concerned and the date by which the accounts need to be made up, i.e. by 30 th April of the year concerned. 10. This writ petition is concerned with the accounts of the petitionersociety for the year 2009-10. The accounts, therefore, had to be closed by 31 st March, 2010 and the accounts had to be made up by 30 th April, 2010. Thereafter, in accordance with the provisions of Sub-Section (1) of Section 60, the accounts for the year 2009-10 had to be audited within a period of 120 days from 30 th April, 2010 from the date of making up of its accounts, i.e. 120 days from 30 th April, 2010. It is not disputed before us that such period of 120 days would have come to an end on or around 27 th August, 2010. 11. The impugned orders dated 7 th August, 2015 and the order of the Registrar of Co-operative Societies dated 18 th April, 2011, to the extent that they hold that the audit of the accounts for the year 2009-10 of the petitioner-society could have been completed by 29 th July, 2010, are erroneous and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. 12. There is yet another aspect of the matter. Section 31 of the DCS Act, W.P.(C) 7727/2015 Page 4 of 6

2003 mandates that the society must call the general body meeting of its members within a period of 180 days next after the date fixed for making up of its accounts for the year under rules for the time being in force to, inter alia, as prescribed in Sub Section (c), consider the audit report along with audited accounts and the annual report. This period of 180 days from 30 th April, 2010 comes to an end on or about 27 th October, 2010. The petitionersociety was, therefore, required to have held its annual general meeting on the 27 th October, 2010. As per the writ petition, the petitioner-society had held the annual general meeting on the 27 th October, 2010 in which the accounts of the petitioner-society were placed and approved. 13. Our attention, however, is drawn to the audit report of the petitionersociety for the year 2009-10. This shows that the auditor has signed this report on the 31 st August, 2010 and not on 27 th August, 2010 as he was required to do so. The petitioner has complained that no fault can be attributed to it for the delay of three days for the reason that the office bearers of the managing committee of the society had taken every step to ensure that the audit of the society was completed within the stipulated period and the delay was on the part of the auditor who had been appointed in accordance with the law from the panel approved by the office of Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The petitioner prays that this delay of three days be condoned in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case. 14. The impugned orders made no reference on this aspect and the orders are premised primarily on the misreading of the requirements of Sub-Section 1 of Section 60 of the Act. No such objection has been raised by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies as well. However, in the peculiar facts W.P.(C) 7727/2015 Page 5 of 6

and circumstances of the present case, in order to meet the ends of justice, we are inclined to accept the prayer for condonation of three days delay in submitting the audited accounts of the petitioner-society with the RCS. 15. In view of the above discussion, this writ petition has to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. The impugned orders dated 18 th April, 2011 and 7 th August, 2015 are hereby set aside and quashed. 16. There shall be no order as to costs. GITA MITTAL (JUDGE) AUGUST 14, 2015 dc I.S.MEHTA (JUDGE) W.P.(C) 7727/2015 Page 6 of 6