9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its liability limited by guarantee. The settlor made an initial contribution of Rs. 5 lakhs and created a fund called 'Silk and Rayon Textile Export Promotion Council Staff Welfare Fund'. The purpose of the fund was to provide benefit and assistance to the employees of the settlor-company in accordance with the scheme framed by it. The object of the scheme was such that it would benefit the staff of the settlor-company only. The case of the assessee, before the ITO, was that the assessee was a charitable trust, the income of which was exempt under section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The ITO did not agree, and refused to allow the benefit of exemption under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first two contentions of the assessee and confirmed the finding of the ITO that the assessee-trust was not entitled to exemption under section 11 as it did not come under section 2(15). As the assessee's income was not exempt under section 11, there was no question of the applicability of the provisions of section 13(1)(c). Hence, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected these two grounds. 6. Coming to the third ground raised by the assessee before her, the Commissioner (Appeals) found force in the same. She found that the assessee received Rs. 5 lakhs as initial contribution and subsequently another sum of Rs. 1 lakh to be used towards the same purpose of the trust, namely, the welfare of the employees of the settlor-company. The Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Income, . . . connotes a periodical monetary return 'coming in' with some sort of regularity, or expected regularity, from definite sources . . . ." This definition has also been referred to by the Supreme Court in the case of E. D. Sassoon Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1954] 26 ITR 27. In the case of Rani Amrit Kunwar v. CIT [1946] 14 ITR 561 and H. H. Maharani Shri Vijaykuverba Saheb of Morvi v. CIT [1963] 49 ITR 594, the Allahabad High Court and the Bombay High Court, respectively, held that 'income' need not necessarily arise from any business activity, investment or outlay, or any enforceable obligation to pay, --- it may be voluntary or [may be] attributable to some custom, usage or traditional obligation, but mere casual payments or windfa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses of Rani Amrit Kunwar and H. H. Maharani Shri Vijaykuverba Saheb of Morvi, a receipt cannot be treated as an income unless it is expected with some sort of regularity as a matter of right, and which a practical man would consider as coming from a definite-source. On going through the trust deed under which the assessee came into existence, we do not find anything therein to bind the settlor to go on paying regularly and periodically definite amount to the assessee-trust. Hence, the learned representative for the assessee was quite correct in his contention that the receipts by the assessee-trust depended entirely on the sweet will of the settlor-donor. Under the circumstances, the receipts do not come within the accepted notion of income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
