Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.20 seconds)

Dharmaposhanam Co. Kerala vs Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kerala on 24 July, 1978

5. As regards the first contention, a similar argument was raised before the Tribunal but was negatived with the observations that if the public at large had its faith in the samadhs then their maintenance would not be for private purpose nor holding of the mela of any private utility. We fully agree with the view of the Tribunal. The contention of the learned counsel for the revenue would have certainly prevailed if the samadhs were those of ordinary persons having no sanctity for the general public. But where the samadhs are held in reverence and people at large come to pay homage and worship at the samadhs, the maintenance of the same would certainly be a public purpose of religious nature. Similarly, the purpose of holding of mela at such samadhs is to propagate and remind the people of the teachings of the Guru in whose memory the mela is held. This, again, would be a religious and not a secular purpose as advocated by Mr. Awasthy. We are, therefore, unable to agree with the learned counsel for the revenue that the maintenance of the samadhs and the holding of the mela is a non-religious and secular purpose. But even if it may be accepted for the sake of argument that these are secular purposes still the trust cannot be held to be a non-charitable trust because as held in Sri Jagannath Jew's case [1977] 107 ITR 9 (SC), the purpose of the trust is to be determined from the dominant intention of its creator and not from its one or two isolated objects. From the perusal of the various objects mentioned in the memorandum of association, we fully agree with the view of the Tribunal that the paramount purpose of the trust is to establish educational institutions and give relief to the poor people. The second limb of the argument that there being no direction as to what proportion of the income was to be utilised for the various objects of the trust and that the trustees may utilise the whole of the income for non-religious purposes has, therefore, no bearing on the present question. Otherwise also, even though the maintenance of the samadhs and the holding of the mela are mentioned as two of the objects of the trust, the trustees are not bound to spend any income on these objects.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 41 - R S Pathak - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs D.D. Deshpande on 26 June, 1975

In CIT v. D. D. Deshpande [1976] 102 ITR 390 (Bom), a provision had been made in the trust deed where the settlor had expressed a desire to give financial aid to the poor members of the family of the settlor and their descendants but as the dominant object of the trust was found to be of religious and charitable nature, it was held that the express desire of the trustees to give financial aid to the poor members of the family of the settlor and their descendants without any fetter on the powers of the trustees to utilize the income for charitable purpose would not be sufficient to hold that the trust was not a religious or a charitable one. The paramount object of the trust having been found to be of religious and charitable nature, mentioning of the said two objects would not, therefore, render the trust to be non-charitable.
1