Mere Allegations of Harassment Do Not Constitute Abetment of Suicide: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail to Wife in Matrimonial Suicide Case 'Convenience Of Wife Not A Thumb Rule, But Custody Of Minor Child Is A Weighing Aspect': Punjab & Haryana HC Transfers Divorce Case To Rohtak MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Cooperative Society Is A “Veritable Party” To Arbitration Clause In Flat Agreements, Temple Trust Entitled To Arbitrate As Non-Signatory: Bombay High Court State Government Cannot Review Its Own Revisional Orders Under Section 41(3): Allahabad High Court Affirms Legal Bar on Successive Reviews When Several Issues Arise, Courts Must Answer Each With Reasons: Supreme Court Automatic Retention Trumps Lessee Tag: Calcutta High Court Declares Saregama India ‘Raiyat’, Directs Reconsideration of Land Conversion Application Recovery of Valid Ticket Raises Presumption of Bona Fide Travel – Burden Shifts to Railways: Delhi High Court Restores Railway Accident Claim Failure to Frame Issue on Limitation Vitiates Award of Compensation Under Telegraph Act: Gauhati High Court Sets Aside Order, Remands Matter Compassionate Appointment Is Not a Heritable Right: Gujarat High Court Rejects 9-Year Delayed Claim, Orders Re-Issuance of ₹4 Lakh Compensation Court Cannot Rewrite Contracts to Suit Contractor’s Convenience: Kerala High Court Upholds Termination of Road Work Under Risk and Cost Clause Post-Bail Conduct Is Irrelevant in Appeal Against Grant of Bail: Supreme Court Clarifies Crucial Distinction Between Appeal and Cancellation Granting Anticipatory Bail to a Long-Absconding Accused Makes a Mockery of the Judicial Process: Supreme Court Cracks Down on Pre-Arrest Bail in Murder Case Recognition as an Intangible Asset Does Not Confer Ownership: Supreme Court Draws a Sharp Line Between Accounting Entries and Property Rights IBC Cannot Be the Guiding Principle for Restructuring the Ownership and Control of Spectrum: Supreme Court Reasserts Public Trust Over Natural Resources Courts Cannot Convict First and Search for Law Later: Supreme Court Faults Prosecution for Ignoring Statutory Foundation in Cement Case When the Law Itself Stood Withdrawn, How Could Its Violation Survive?: Supreme Court Quashes 1994 Cement Conviction Under E.C. Act Ten Years Means Ten Years – Not a Day Less: Supreme Court Refuses to Dilute Statutory Experience Requirement for SET Exemption SET in Malayalam Cannot Qualify You to Teach Economics: Supreme Court Upholds Subject-Specific Eligibility for HSST Appointments Outsourcing Cannot Become A Tool To Defeat Regularization: Supreme Court On Perennial Nature Of Government Work Once Similarly Placed Workers Were Regularized, Denial to Others Is Discrimination: Supreme Court Directs Regularization of Income Tax Daily-Wage Workers Right To Form Association Is Protected — But Not A Right To Run It Free From Regulation: Supreme Court Recalibrates Article 19 In Sports Governance S. Nithya Cannot Be Transplanted Into Cricket: Supreme Court Shields District Cricket Bodies From Judicially Imposed Structural Overhaul Will | Propounder Must Dispel Every Suspicious Circumstance — Failure Is Fatal: : Punjab & Haryana High Court Electronic Evidence Authenticity Jeopardized by Unexplained Delay and Procedural Omissions: MP High Court Rejects Belated 65B Application Not Answering to the Questions of the IO Would Not Ipso Facto Mean There Is Non-Cooperation: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Undertaking to Satisfy Award Is Not Waiver of Appeal: Supreme Court Restores Insurer’s Statutory Right

Delhi High Court affirms charitable trust’s right to accumulate and donate surplus funds, reinforcing exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 of Income Tax Act.

07 December 2024 4:23 PM

By: sayum


The Delhi High Court has upheld the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in favor of M/S Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation, confirming the trust's entitlement to deductions under Section 11(1) of the Income Tax Act. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justices Yashwant Varma and Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, emphasized the legality of utilizing accumulated income for donations to other charitable trusts, even when deemed income provisions are triggered.

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) challenged the ITAT's decision, which allowed M/S Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation a deduction under Section 11(1) on deemed income, despite the funds being transferred to other charitable trusts. The trust, registered under Section 12A and enjoying benefits under Section 80G, had filed a revised return in 2011 after transferring Rs. 20 crores accumulated under Section 11(2) for corpus donations.

The court highlighted that donations to other charitable trusts constitute a valid application of accumulated income for charitable purposes. "The handing over of accumulated income to another trust with similar objects is considered application of income for charitable purposes," the bench noted, referencing several precedents including CIT v. Natwarlal Chowdhury Charity Trust and CIT v. J.K. Charitable Trust.

Justice Yashwant Varma, writing the judgment, elaborated on the interplay between Sections 11(1) and 11(2), and the deemed income provisions under Section 11(3). The court noted that Section 11(2) allows charitable entities to accumulate up to 85% of their income, provided it is invested as per specified modes. Donations to other charitable entities, as long as they are in line with the original charitable purpose, do not violate the provisions of Section 11(3)(c) or (d).

The court reaffirmed that extending donations to other charitable institutions meets the test of application of income for charitable purposes, even if such donations temporarily attract deemed income provisions. "Section 11(3) would be attracted if the accumulated income is not utilized for the specified charitable purposes, but temporary application for donations does not constitute such a diversion," the court stated.

Citing the Supreme Court's decision in Additional Commissioner of Income Tax v. A.L.N. Rao Charitable Trust and judgments from the Madras High Court and Allahabad High Court, the bench elucidated that accumulated income used for charitable donations maintains its tax-exempt status. The court also referenced Explanation 2 to Section 11(1), introduced by the Finance Act, 2017, to illustrate that contributions forming part of the corpus of another trust are not treated as application of income.

Justice Yashwant Varma remarked, "Donations to other charitable trusts do not lose the protection of tax exemption merely because they temporarily constitute deemed income. The core objective remains the application of income for charitable purposes, which the law seeks to uphold."

The Delhi High Court's judgment reinforces the legal provisions allowing charitable trusts to accumulate and donate income without forfeiting tax exemptions. This decision is significant for charitable entities, affirming their ability to support other charities while maintaining compliance with tax regulations. The ruling provides clarity on the application of Sections 11 and 12, setting a precedent for future cases involving charitable donations and tax exemptions.

Date of Decision: May 31, 2024

Latest Legal News