Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: charitable trust objects in Jaipur National University Society For ... vs Cit (Exemption), Jaipur on 20 February, 2025Matching Fragments
(a) Whether such receipts are eligible for assessee as per its deed
(b) Whether receipts are commercial of donations.
(c) TDS deduction prima facially business nature.
(d) Assessee failed to prove the same are not bogus.
Jaipur National University Society for Social Welfare Above mentioned activities are primarily commercial or for-profit making rather than charitable activities. Although the applicant has earned huge profit from these activities as evident from the I/E account. Charitable trusts are typically established for specific charitable objects/ activities that benefit the public at large, and their resources are generally intended to be used exclusively for those purposes. Organizing of conference of doctors are activities of business nature which are not within the ambit of charitable spirit of an institution and are also not incidental to any of the objects of the institution. Thus, these objects are not charitable in the light of section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act. No details of actual work done by the trust and not proves that such expenses are in charitable nature.
Therefore, there is no observation as to the activities are charitable in nature or not. The assessee made the payment to the payee after complying with the provision of withholding tax on the payment and thereby merely the payment made to professional the genuineness of the activities of the trust cannot be doubted. The ld. CIT(E) has not doubted the fact that the object of the trust are not charitable and in nature. The ld. CIT(E) has to measure the object of the trust and not the receipt and payment whether are commercial nature or not. The ld. CIT(E) is measuring the payment are disproportionate or not but he has not commented upon the activities are charitable or not.
9. Now coming to the second observations of the ld. CIT(E) for the Genuineness of the activities of the trust we note that ld. CIT(E) noted that the assessee has not given the details of professional fees at point no. 4 of camps, but these expenses do not prove that expenses are genuinely for this purpose. He further noted that assessee - appellant made the payment to employees and only meagre amount is being incurred in scholarship which was considered negligible compared to professional fees and that is why the doubt was raised on nature of charitable activities carried out the assessee trust. There is no doubt about the nature of activities as per the object of the trust is to provide education and medical facilities and relief to the poor. As we note from the observation as recorded in the order under challenge that ld. CIT(E) noted that the assessee has spent the amount on professional fees to doctors. It is emphasized that the assessee Jaipur National University Society for Social Welfare provides services to general public free of cost without any charges and donations received by the assessee are utilized for the welfare of the general public. Therefore, merely the receipt and payment are used to pay the doctor does not disentitle the assessee of not engaged in the charitable activities as the activities conducted are for the benefit of general public and charitable in nature. In fact that support the case of the assessee that the assessee received the donation and has been used for arranging the best doctors and thereby the poor get the medical advice and that activities itself is a charitable in nature and therefore, there is no substance on this reasons advanced by the ld. CIT(E) while dealing with the registration application of the assessee trust characterizing professional fee payments as revenue-generating instead these doctors are providing the services to public at large without any cost. The ld. CIT(E) did not prove that the expenditure incurred on the camps is not charitable and not as per the object of trust. Even the four camps and the volume of expenditure that does not define the activities are not charitable in nature.
For the reasons stated earlier, we are of the view that the object of the provision in question is to ensure that the activities undertaken by the Trust are not contrary to its objects and that a commissioner is entitled to refuse registration if the activities are found contrary to the objects of the Trust. In the present case, what has been found is that the Trust had not spent any amount of its income for charitable purposes. This is a case of not carrying out the objects of the Trust and not carrying on activities contrary to its object. These circumstances may arise for many reasons including not finding suitable circumstances for carrying on activities. Undoubtedly the inaction in carrying out charitable purposes might also become actionable depending on other circumstances; but we are not concerned with such a case here.