SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Commissioner of Income Tax - Appellant
Versus
India Trade Promotion Organisation - Respondent
ITA 3 of 2022 & CM Appl. 1577 of 2022, ITA 4 of 2022 & CM Appl. 1694 of 2022 and ITA 5 of 2022 & CM Appl. 1695 of 2022
Decided On : 11-01-2022




Interpretation of 'charitable purpose' under tax law should prioritize the dominant objective of an institution to avoid taxation, aligning with constitutional principles of equality.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 2(15) and 10(23C)(iv) - Challenge to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's order regarding charitable status of respondent - Tribunal's finding that activities do not qualify as charitable purpose is erroneous - The dominant activity of the institution is promotional for trade and commerce which is charitable in nature, thus exempt from taxation under said provisions. (Paras 3, 58, 59)

(B) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Interpretation of statutory provisions must align with constitutional values to avoid discrimination - Provisions of income tax law should not lead to violation of equality clause provided by the Constitution. (Para 58)

Facts of the case:
The Income Tax Authority appealed against the ITAT’s ruling that the respondent’s activities were charitable, as per an earlier Division Bench’s direction granting exemption under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act.

Findings of Court:
The current appeals are dismissed, adhering to the earlier judgment which recognized the charitable intent of the respondent’s activities exempting them from taxation.

Issues: The central issues concern the interpretation of 'charitable purpose' under tax law and the implications of the Proviso to Section 2(15) as it pertains to the principal activities of the institution.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the interpretation of 'charitable purpose' must not be restrictive and should align with constitutional principles, thereby validating the respondent’s claim for reliefs under tax exemptions.

Result: Appeals dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The appeals have been heard by way of video conferencing.

2. Present appeals have been filed challenging the order dated 13th September, 2019 passed by Delhi Bench 'D' of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'ITAT') in ITA Nos. 1919/Del/2016 for the assessment year 2009-10, 2508/Del/2016 for the assessment year 2010-11 and 3135/Del/2016 for the Assessment Year 2011-12.

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant states that the Tribunal erred in ignoring the fact that the activities of the respondent/assessee do not qualify for charitable purpose in view of the Proviso to Sec 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') and hence the assessee does not qualify for the exemption under Section 10(23C)(iv)/11/12 of the Act.

4. It is pertinent to mention that in a writ petition being India Trade Promotion Organization vs. Director General of Income Tax (Exemptions) & Others in WP(C) 1872/2013, the learned predecessor Division Bench issued a Mandamus to the appellant herein to grant approval to the respondent herein under Section 10(23C)(iv) of the Act. The relevant portion of the said judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench is reproduced hereinbelow:

    "53.From the said decision, it is apparent that merely because a fee or some other consideration is collected or received by an institution, it would not lose its character of having been established for a charitable purpose. It is also important to note that we must examine as to what is the dominant activity of the institution in question. If the dominant activity of the institution was not business, trade or commerce, then any such incidental or ancillary activity would also not fall within the categories of trade, commerce or business. It is clear from the facts of the present case that the driving force is not the desire to earn profits but, the object of promoting trade and commerce not for itself, but for the nation - both within India and outside India. Clearly, this is a charitable purpose, which has as its motive the advancement of an object of general public utility to which the exception carved out in the first proviso to Section 2(15) of the said Act would not apply. We say so, because, if a literal interpretation were to be given to the said proviso, then it would risk being hit by Article 14 (the equality clause enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution). It is well-settled that the courts should always endeavour to uphold the Constitutional validity of a provision and, in doing so, the provision in question may have to be read down, as pointed out above, in Arun Kumar (supra).

    xxx xxx xxx xxx

    58. In conclusion, we may say that the expression "charitable purpose", as defined in Section 2(15) cannot be construed literally and in absolute terms. It has to take colour and be considered in the context of Section 10(23C)(iv) of the said Act. It is also clear that if the literal interpretation is given to the proviso to Section 2(15) of the said Act, then the proviso would be at risk of running fowl of the principle of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution India. In order to save the Constitutional validity of the proviso, the same would have to be read down and interpreted in the context of Section 10(23C)(iv) because, in our view, the context requires such an interpretation. The correct interpretation of the proviso to Section 2(15) of the said Act would be that it carves out an exception from the charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility and that exception is limited to activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business or any activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business for a cess or fee or any other consideration. In both the activities, in the nature of trade, commerce or business or the activity of rendering any service in relation to any trade, commerce or business, the dominant a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top