9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (5) TMI 12X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inally but a claim for refund of Rs. 3,300 was made of tax deducted at source from interest earned by the trust. The income-tax Officer had accepted the claim and allowed the refund of Rs. 3,300. Subsequently, a supplementary claim for refund of Rs. 755 being tax deducted at source from dividend was also allowed by the Income-tax officer. The dividend and interest income had been claimed as exempt under section 11 of the Income-tax Act. Subsequently, the Income-tax Officer found that the trustees of Birla Jan Kalyan Trust had received certain assets (shares) from the trustees of Raja Baldeodas Birla Santotikosh Trust in March, 1964, as a gift. According to the Income-tax Officer, the trustees of Raja Baldeodas Birla Santotikosh Trust had no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer withdrew the refund of Rs. 4,055 on the tooting that the assessee was not entitled to the credit for the tax deducted at source. The Income-tax Officer also held that the entire income of Rs. 6,42,783 was not exempt under section 11 inasmuch as the trustees of Birla Jan Kalyan Trust had not complied with the terms and conditions prescribed in section 11 (2) in respect of the entire balance of Rs. 2,57,547 left after spending Rs. 3,85,236 on charity. The Income-tax Officer's argument was that the aggregate income of the assessee-trust was Rs. 6,42,783 and Rs. 3,85,236 was spent on charities and, as such, this amount was exempt under section 11 (1) (a). The balance left was Rs. 2,57,547 which was more than .25 % of the income. But the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missed as infructuous. At the hearing Mr. Bajoria, learned counsel, has relied on the decision of this court in Baijnath Saboo [1978] 113 ITR 303 which has also been relied on by the Tribunal in holding that the proceedings have become infructuous. In that case, the petitioners were the trustees of Birla Jan Kalyan Trust which is the respondent in this case. In that case, the assessment year involved was 1968-69. In that case, the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1968-69 was challenged. As the trust is a public charitable trust, the income of the said trust was also exempt. The said trust also claimed that it has received as gift certain shares from a private trust and, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot assessable to tax. Therefore, there is no question of any income escaping assessment because the income was not assessable, nor was there any question of any under-assessment or assessment at too low a rate. In this case, there is also no question of excessive loss or depreciation allowance being computed. If that was the position, then the only ground on which the assessment could have been reopened was that the income chargeable to tax had been made the subject of excessive relief. The income being not chargeable to tax, being the income of a public charitable trust, there was no question of that income being given excessive relief. Therefore, the fact that the petitioners got away with refund which the petitioners were not entitled in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
