Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

CIT Vs. Paramhans Ashram Trust (1993) 203 ITR 711 (Raj.) The relevant extract from Para 4 of the order is reproduced as under:-

"4. According to the main objects, the maintenance of the existing Dharamshalas, help of Agarwal and other widows and children, feeding of mendicants and construction of new dharamshalas and schools, and help of the destitutes cannot be said to be restricted in respect of a particular individual or group of them. The use of word "object of general public utility" can be interpreted to cover such trust where the intention is to give the benefit to sizeable number of public in contrast of to an individual or group of individuals. The expenses in constructing the new Dharamshala were considered in advancement of the charitable object of the trust which was held entitled to exemption under s. 11 of the said Act in the case of Satya Vijay Patel Hindu Dharamshala Trust vs. CIT (1972) 86 ITR 683 (Guj) and this Court in Raghunath Das Parihar Dharamshala vs. CIT (1986) 158 ITR 432 (Raj) has held that the sole purpose of the trust was to run a dharamshala which is an object of general public utility and so when this was the sole object, the income derived therefrom in shape of rent from the income of dharamshala is exempt under s. 11 r/w s. 2(15) of the Act. Similarly, the other objects of help of Agarwals, widows and children, feeding of mendicants and help of destitutes are of general public utility and the Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the assessee is a public charitable and religious trust and its income is entitled to exemption under s. 11 of the IT Act, 1961."

Jamiatul BanaatTankaria Vs. CIT(E) (2024) 205 ITD 673 (Ahd.) (Trib.) The relevant Para 5 to 12 of the order reads as under:-

5. We have gone through the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dawoodi Bohara Jamat (supra) and we find that the ld. CIT(Exemption) has totally mis-appreciated the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the said case. The Hon'ble Apex Court, we find, in the said case had categorically held that Trust with charitable objects, which existed for the benefit of a particular religious community qualified as charitable entity serving the public at large and this was sufficient for grant of registration under section 12A of the Act, and the provisions of section 13(1)(b) of the Act would be attracted only at the time of granting exemption to the assessee, wherein if it was found that the trust existed for the benefit of a particular religious community only, the exemption under section 11 was to be denied to the assessee. The Hon'ble Apex Court, therefore, categorically found that as per the provisions of law, section 13(1)(b) could not be applied for denying the grant of registration, but was to be applied only while granting/denying exemption to the assessee.

41. Therefore, the objects of the trust exhibit the dual tenor of religious and charitable purposes and activities. Sec. 11 of the Act shelters such trust with composite objects to claim exemption from tax as a religious and charitable trust subject to provisions of s. 13. The activities of the trust under such objects would therefore be entitled to exemption accordingly.

42. We would now proceed to examine the objects under the provisions of s. 13(1)(b) of the Act. It becomes amply clear from the language employed in the provisions that s. 13 is in the nature of an exemption from applicability of ss. 11 or 12 and the examination of its applicability would only arise at the stage of claim under ss. 11 or 12. Thus, where the income of a trust is eligible for ITA No. 695 & 696/JPR/2024 Vardhman Sathanakvasi Jain Sravak Sangh exemption under s. 11, the eligibility for claiming exemption ought to be tested on the touchstone of the provisions of s. 13. In the instant case, it being established that the respondent-trust is a public charitable and religious trust eligible for claiming exemption under s. 11, it becomes relevant to test it on the anvil of s.

ITA No. 695 & 696/JPR/2024 Vardhman Sathanakvasi Jain Sravak Sangh Unless objective of the charitable trust in question itself is for spending its income for a particular religion and it is so found in the trust deed, the Income-tax Department cannot reject the renewal of the Trust as Charitable Trust under section 80G of the Act merely because one particular expenditure is for an activity which may be termed as spending for a particular religion. In the present case the repair and renovation of Lord Vishnu's temple does not necessarily mean that expenditure in question was for a particular religion only. All people who have faith in Lord Vishnu's temple belong to different sects and have faith in different religions and also visit such temple of Lord Vishnu. The revenue has not shown that entry in the said temple was restricted to the persons of one particular community or sect prasticing one religion. Hinduism is not one particular religion and different sects following Hindu philosophy do visit temples of Lord Vishnu, be that Jains, Sikhs, Brahmins etc. There is no water tight compartment between different castes or sects following one particular religion. Freedom of religion is guaranteed in the Constitution of India under article 25 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, taking such a pedantic and narrow approach, it cannot be said that character of the Charitable Trust is lost if one particular expenditure is made for repair and renovation of Lord Vishnu's temple and that too by way of contribution to another trust. A perusal of the trust deed of the petitioner produced on record shows that objective of the trust was clearly charitable and was not for any particular religion even wholly or substantially. Nothing has been pointed out in the impugned order that the petitioner-trust has been constantly spending money for a particular religion. One should discern and imbibe with great respects the observations of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sri Jagannath Jew's case (supra).