9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion under section 12A has been rejected by the impugned order which has been assailed in the present writ petition. 2 Shri Sumit Nema, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that in view of the objects described in the memorandum of association contained in annexure P-2, the petitioner is entitled to the registration under section 12A of the Act. Per contra, Shri Rohit Arya learned senior counsel contended that the impugned order contained in annexure P-10 has been rightly passed and no interference is warranted. 3 Considered the submissions and perused the record. 4 Sections 11 and 12 of the Act would be made applicable only if the trust or institution is registered under section 12A of the Act. Section 11 deals with the income from property held for charitable or religious purposes and section 12 deals with the income received by the trust or institutions from contributions. This court is here concerned with the charitable purpose , since, Shri Nema has contended that the petitioner-association is covered by this term as defined in section 2(15) of the Act. 5 The definition of charitable purpose as contained in section 2(15) is of inclusive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds 'not involving the carrying on of any activity for profit' which qualify or govern the last head of charitable purpose. In CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722; AIR 1965 SC 1281, a case decided by this court under the 1922 Act where the restrictive words were absent- this court laid down that if the primary or dominant purpose of a trust or institution was charitable, any other object which by itself might not be charitable but which was merely ancillary or incidental to the primary or dominant purpose would not prevent the trust or institution from being a valid charity. After the addition of the restrictive words in the definition in the 1961 Act, this court in Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association [1980] 121 ITR 1AIR 1980 SC 387 affirmed that the aforesaid test of primary or dominant purpose of a trust or institution still holds good, that the restrictive words qualify object and not the advancement or accomplishment thereof and that the true meaning of the restrictive words was that when the purpose of a trust or institution was the advancement of an object of general public utility it was that object of general public u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uction and though they may sometimes afford help or guidance, cannot relieve the Indian courts from their responsibility of applying the language of the Act to the particular circumstances that emerge under conditions of Indian life'. 7 In view of the amendment in the definition of charitable purpose with effect from April 1, 1984, I do not find it proper to burden this decision unnecessarily by discussing various authorities like Dharmaposhanam Co. v. CIT [1978] 114 ITR 463 (SC), Addl. CIT v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers Association [1980] 121 ITR 1 (SC) ; AIR 1980 SC 387 wherein the interpretation of charitable purpose was made in the light of the definition as it stood prior to April 1, 1984. In the case of CIT v. Andhra Chamber of Commerce [1965] 55 ITR 722 (SC); AIR 1965 SC 1281, 1284) it has been held that (page 728) In the promotion of trade, commerce and industries of India the public is vitally interested and if by the activities of the assessee that object is achieved, it would be within the meaning of section 4(3)(i) of the Act and advancement of an object of general public utility. In enacting the last paragraph of section 4(3) the Le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttled by the hon'ble Supreme Court that an object beneficial to a section of the public is an object of the general public utility and to serve a charitable purpose it is not necessary that the object should be to benefit the whole of mankind or all persons in a country or State It is sufficient if the intentionto benefit a section of the public as distinguished from a specified individual is present. In the case of CIT v. Sardar Bahadur Sardar Indra Singh Trust reported in [1956] 29 ITR 781 (Cal) it was held that the trust wouldbe treated for charitable purpose even though the choice of the particularcharitable purpose or purposes was left to the discretion of the trustees. 9 The object of the petitioner-association has been mentioned in clause 3 of the memorandum of association as well as the rules of association contained in annexure P-3. They being identical are described hereunder (i) Promotion of local business of silver, gold and ornaments. (ii) Protection of legitimate rights of the businessmen and to relieve them from the problems arising from the Government or third party and to make endeavour for maintaining unity between silver and gold brokers, manuf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
