Cows' Welfare Trust, Coimbatore V. CIT-I, Coimbatore

ITA 990/CHNY/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64616 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-12-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 07-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR S MOHARANA
• Assessee Lawyers: T S V RAJAGOPAL
• Keywords: Charitable institution
• Section: 12A; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O. K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ------- ITA NO. 990/MDS/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : - M/S. COWS WELFARE TRUST, 598, KAVERI HOUSE, TELUGU BRAHMIN STREET, COIMBATORE-641 001. V. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, COIMBATORE. (PAN : AABTC3189M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SRI T.S.V RAJAGOPAL, CA RESPONDENT BY : DR. S. MOHARANA, CIT DATE OF HEARING : 10-12-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10-12-201 2 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, COIMBATORE DATED 23-0 2-2012. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST FILED AN APPLICATION ON 16-09-2011 SEEKING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12 A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ('THE ACT' FOR SHORT). THE TR UST WAS ITA NO.990/MDS /2012 : 2 : CONSTITUTED BY A DEED EXECUTED ON 05-08-2011 AND RE GISTERED WITH REGISTRAR, COIMBATORE. THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE TRUST ARE AS FOLLOWS : I) TO PROTECT THE WELFARE OF COWS AND BOVINE CATTLE IN GENERAL AND IN PARTICULAR TO PROTECT THEM FROM CRUELTY, NEGLECT, DETERIORATION AND DESTRUCTION OF ALL KINDS; II) TO OPEN AND RUN GOSHALAS AND PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO OTHER GOSHALAS FORMED FOR SIMILAR OBJECTS; III) TO PROVIDE MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TO AGED, INFIRM, HARASSED AND SICK COWS AND BOVINE CATTLE HOUSED ION THE GOSHALAS; IV) TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR PROVISION OF FODDER TO COWS AND BOVINE CATTLE FOR THEIR WELL BEING; V) TO PROPAGATE AND DISSEMINATE THE KNOWLEDGE OF UTILITY AND MEDICINAL VALUES OF COW DUNG AND COW URINE IN CURING MANY AILMENTS OF THE HUMAN BODY; AND VI) IN GENERAL TO ENSURE THE WELFARE AND PROTECTION OF THE COWS IN INDIA BY TAKING CARE OF THEM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND TO EXECUTE ALL ACTIVITIES CONNECTED FOR THE ABOVE PURPOSE; ITA NO.990/MDS /2012 : 3 : 3. THE CIT AFTER CONSIDERING THE OBJECTS OF THE ASS ESSEE TRUST CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST OF PROTECTING THE WELFARE OF THE COWS AND BOVINE CATTL E IN GENERAL AND OTHER ACTIVITIES FOR THE WELFARE OF THE COWS DO NOT COME UNDER THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND A CCORDINGLY REJECTED THE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A AS CLAI MED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE HAS COME UP IN A PPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. BEFORE US THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT HYPER-TECHNICALLY REJECTED TH E REGISTRATION AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEES ACTIVITY IS COVERED BY WORDS THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY IN SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. FURTHER HE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE ORDER OF T HE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. SNEKALAYA FOR ANIMALS V. ITO IN IT A NO. 687/MDS/2012 DATED 29-05-2012. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE RECORD S AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT. THE ITA NO.990/MDS /2012 : 4 : LEARNED CIT REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT AS THE ACTIVITIES FOR THE WELFAR E OF THE COWS DO NOT COME UNDER THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 2(15) OF T HE ACT. THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. SNEKALAYA FOR ANIM ALS (SUPRA) HAS CONSIDERED SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT AND HELD TH AT ADVANCEMENT OF ANIMAL WELFARE DIRECTED TOWARDS PRE VENTION OR SUPPRESSION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OR PREVENTION OR RELIEF OF SUFFERING BY ANIMALS ARE NOTHING BUT CHARITY. ASSO CIATIONS PROMOTING KINDNESS AND PREVENTING OR SUPPRESSING CR UELTY TO ANIMALS, ASSOCIATIONS PROVIDING VETERINARY CARE AND TREATMENT, ASSOCIATIONS CONCERNED WITH CARE AND RE-HOMING OR A NIMALS THAT ARE ABANDONED OR MISTREATED OR LOST, ASSOCIATI ONS DOING FERINE ANIMAL CONTROL, ARE EXTENSION OF CHARITIES. THIS WOULD DEFINITELY, IN OUR OPINION, FALL WITHIN THE OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY . 7. THUS THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALREADY CONSIDERED THE ISS UE IN THE ABOVE CITED CASE AND HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THA T WELFARE OF ANIMALS COMES WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF GENERAL PUB LIC UTILITY. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRI BUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. SNEKALAYA FOR ANIMALS (SUPRA) IS EXTRA CTED BELOW : 5. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDER OF CIT AND HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE ONLY REASON WHY CIT DENIED REGISTR ATION TO THE ITA NO.990/MDS /2012 : 5 : ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT IS THAT THE O BJECT OF THE ASSESSEE INCLUDED WELFARE OF DOGS AND TAKING CARE O F SICK ANIMALS. THE QUESTION HERE IS WHETHER DEFINITION OF CHARITA BLE PURPOSE UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT CAN INCLUDE SUCH AN OBJECT. CHARITABLE PURPOSE HAS BEEN GIVEN AN INCLUSIVE DE FINITION UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. HENCE APART FROM THE ITEM S MENTIONED THEREIN WHICH ARE TO BE INVARIABLY CONSIDERED CHARI TABLE, THERE COULD BE OTHER ITEMS OF CHARITY ALSO, AS PER THE NORMAL C ONNOTATION THAT WORD CAN HAVE. CHARITIES ARE MORE THAN A GOOD THIN G AND, AS THEIR SUPPORTERS RECOGNIZE, ARE SPECIAL. NOT ALL ORGANIZA TIONS CAN BE CHARITIES. TO BE A CHARITY IS A MIXTURE OF WHAT YOU ARE, WHAT YOU DO AND HOW YOU DO IT. THE CORE CHARACTERISTIC IS PUBLI C BENEFIT. THIS WHAT IS ALSO MEANT BY THE WORDS ADVANCEMENT OF ANY OTHER OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY IN SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT . WHILST THE CHARITABLE SECTOR IS ENORMOUS AND VERY DIVERSE, THE AIMS OF EACH AND EVERY CHARITY, WHATEVER THEIR SIZE, MUST BE FOR PUB LIC BENEFIT. PUBLIC BENEFIT IS THEREFORE CENTRAL TO THE WORK OF ALL CHA RITIES. ALTHOUGH THE TERM PUBLIC BENEFIT HAS NEVER BEEN DEFINED AS SUC H, IT HAS GATHERED A PARTICULAR MEANING IN LAW. THERE IS A KIND OF COV ENANT THAT CHARITIES HAVE WITH SOCIETY: CHARITIES BRING PUBLIC BENEFIT AND, IN THEIR TURN, ARE ACCORDED HIGH LEVELS OF TRUST AND C ONFIDENCE AND THE BENEFITS OF CHARITABLE STATUS. THESE MUTUAL BENEFIT S ARE CONSIDERABLE: CHARITIES RECEIVE SIGNIFICANT TAX ADVANTAGES; THEY CAN ACCESS FUNDS WHICH OTHERS EVEN OTHER VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATIONS CANNOT; VOLUNTEERS AND DONORS GIVING THEM RESPECT, TIME AND MONEY. SOCIETY IS ENRICHED IMMEASURABLY BY THE ACTIVITIES OF CHARI TIES. BEING A CHARITY IS NOT THE SAME AS BEING AN ORGANIZATION TH AT DOES GOOD THINGS. CHARITY HAS AN OUTWARD, INCLUSIVE NATURE: IT IS NOT INWARD- LOOKING, FOR PRIVATE BENEFIT. ONLY ORGANISATIONS WI TH AIMS THAT ARE CHARITABLE FOR PUBLIC BENEFIT ARE ACCORDED THE CHAR ITY LABEL. THIS GUIDANCE IS A GREEN LIGHT FOR CHARITIES TO CONTINUE THEIR INNOVATIVE AND UNIQUE ROLE AT THE HEART OF OUR SOCIETY WHILE E NSURING THAT THE PUBLIC CAN SEE THAT CHARITIES ARE DOING UNDER THAT BANNER AND WITH THEIR SUPPORT. IN THE LIGHT OF THIS, WE HAVE TO ANS WER TO THE QUESTION WHETHER CHARITY WILL INCLUDE WELFARE OF ANIMALS. IT WILL BE DESIRABLE TO HAVE A LOOK AT CHARITIES ACT, 2006 OF UNITED KIN GDOM. DESCRIPTIONS OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE IN THE CHARITI ES ACT, 2006 ARE AS UNDER:- (A) THE PREVENTION OF RELIEF OF POVERTY; (B) THE ADVANCEMENT OF EDUCATION; (C) THE ADVANCEMENT OF RELIGION. (D) THE ADVANCEMENT OF HEALTH OR THE SAVING OF LIV ES; (E) THE ADVANCEMENT OF CITIZENSHIP OR COMMUNITY DE VELOPMENT; (F) THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE ARTS, CULTURE, HERITAGE OR SCIENCE; (G) THE ADVANCEMENT OF AMATEUR SPORT; (H) THE ADVANCEMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, CONFLICT RESOL UTION OR RECONCILIATION OR THE PROMOTION OF RELIGIOUS OR RAC IAL HARMONY OR EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY; (I) THE ADVANCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION OR IMPROVEMENT; ITA NO.990/MDS /2012 : 6 : (J) THE RELIEF OF THOSE IN NEED, BY REASON OF YOUT H, AGE, ILL HEALTH, DISABILITY, FINANCIAL HARDSHIP OR OTHER DISADVANTAG E; (K) THE ADVANCEMENT OF ANIMAL WELFARE; (L) THE PROMOTION OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ARMED F ORCES OF THE CROWN OR OF THE POLICE, FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICES OR AMBULANCE SERVICES; (M) OTHER PURPOSES CURRENTLY RECOGNIZED AS CHARITA BLE AND ANY NEW CHARITABLE PURPOSES WHICH ARE SIMILAR TO ANOTHE R CHARITABLE PURPOSE. THUS, ADVANCEMENT OF ANIMAL WELFARE DIRECTED TOWARD S PREVENTION OR SUPPRESSION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OR PREVENTION OR RELIEF OF SUFFERING BY ANIMALS ARE NOTHING BUT CHARITY. ASSOCIATIONS PR OMOTING KINDNESS AND PREVENTING OR SUPPRESSING CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, A SSOCIATIONS PROVIDING VETERINARY CARE AND TREATMENT, ASSOCIATIO NS CONCERNED WITH CARE AND RE-HOMING OF ANIMALS THAT ARE ABANDON ED OR MISTREATED OR LOST, ASSOCIATIONS DOING FERINE ANIMA L CONTROL, ARE EXTENSION OF CHARITIES. THIS WOULD DEFINITELY, IN O UR OPINION, FALL WITHIN THE OBJECT OF GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. THE CIT FELL IN ERROR IN REFUSING REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. ORDER OF THE CIT IS QUASHED AND HE IS DIRECTED TO GRANT ASSESSEE REG ISTRATION SOUGHT UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 8. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. SNEKALAYA FOR ANIMALS (SUPRA), WE QUAS H THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT AND DIRECT HIM TO G RANT THE ASSESSEE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON MONDAY, THE 10 TH OF DECEMBER, 2012, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (DR. O. K. NARAYANAN) (V.DURGA RAO) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 10 TH DECEMBER, 2012. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT(A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE