9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee should be deemed to have been met out of the income derived from property held under trust, despite receiving voluntary contributions from non-charitable institutions. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Tribunal's Justification on Expenditure Allocation: The primary issue was whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee, a charitable trust, should be deemed to have been met out of the income derived from property held under trust, despite receiving voluntary contributions from non-charitable institutions. The assessee received voluntary contributions amounting to Rs. 2,20,000 during the relevant accounting year. The ITO argued that these contributions should be included in the composite income fund of the trust and that the expenditure should be allocated proportionately between the income from property and the voluntary contributions. However, the Tribunal observed that the assessee had a common pool of funds and that the entire expenditure incurred had been met out of the income of the year and the income of the earlier year. The Tribunal held that the ITO could not disallow the expenditure on a pro rata basis and that the contributions received did not form part of the income as section 12 had no application. The Tribunal concluded that the expenditure incurred should be deemed to have been met out of the income derived from property held under trust for charitable and religious purposes. 2. Legal Provisions and Interpretation: The relevant sections of the I.T. Act, 1961, were examined, particularly sections 11 and 12. Section 11(1)(a) exempts income derived from property held under trust for charitable or religious purposes to the extent to which such income is applied to such purposes in India. Section 12(1) states that any income of a trust derived from voluntary contributions and applicable solely to charitable or religious purposes shall not be included in the total income of the trustees or the institution. The Tribunal and the court referred to these sections to determine whether the voluntary contributions should be treated as part of the income for the purposes of section 11. 3. Precedents and Judicial Reasoning: The court referred to several precedents, including the decision of the Court of Appeal in IRC v. Sterling Trust Ltd. [1925] 12 TC 868, which established that where expenditure is incurred out of a composite fund, the theory of apportioning the expenditure in accordance with the proportionate income could not be applied. The court also referred to decisions of the Mysore High Court in Siddaramanna Charities Trust v. CIT [1974] 96 ITR 275 and the Orissa High Court in Raja Shri Sailendra Narayan Bhanja Deo v. CIT [1959] 36 ITR 94, which supported the view that apportionment of expenditure was not necessary when there was a composite fund. 4. Revenue's Contention and Court's Response: The revenue contended that the expression "to the extent to which such income is applied" in section 11(1)(a) required a factual determination of the entirety of the expenditure and its source. However, the court held that once the disbursement or expenditure comes out of a composite fund, the theory of apportioning in accordance with a proportion does not apply. The court reiterated that the Tribunal was justified in holding that the expenditure incurred should be considered to have been met out from the income derived from property held under trust. Conclusion: The court concluded that the Tribunal was justified in holding that even though the assessee received voluntary contributions from non-charitable institutions, the expenditure incurred should be deemed to have been met out of the income derived from property held under trust. The answer to the question posed was in favor of the assessee, and the parties were directed to pay and bear their own costs.
|
