Mr. R. Chimanka, Senior Standing Counsel v. …. Sri Guru Nanak Devji Religious & Respondent Charitable Trust

Order No. 01. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK ITA No.4 of 2022 …. Appellant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Mr. R. Chimanka, Senior Standing Counsel -versus- …. Sri Guru Nanak Devji Religious & Respondent Charitable Trust CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN ORDER08.02.2023 Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. 1. This appeal by the Revenue challenges an order dated 24[th] May 2021 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (ITAT) allowing ITA No.384/CTK/2018 filed by the Respondent against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad [CIT(E)] dated 29[th] June 2018 dismissing an application filed by the Respondent under Section 80G (5) (vi) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act). 2. The short ground for consideration before the ITAT was whether the Respondent, which is admittedly a religious charitable public trust, fulfills all the condition for grant/approval of the exemption applied for. 3. The stand of the Department was that the Respondent was engaged in “religious activities” and therefore, violated Section 80 Page 1 of 3 G (5) (iii) of the Act. The ITAT noted that the aforementioned Section 80G (5) (iii) stipulates that “the institution or fund is not expressed to be for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste”. In this regard, the ITAT pointed out that the CIT (E) had in the instant case not rendered any finding regarding the genuineness of the activity carried out by the Respondent. The ITAT was shown material that demonstrated that the Respondent-Trust provided food to the pilgrims and tourists visiting Puri without any discrimination based on gender, caste, creed or religion. It had also carried out the development of the park and plantations for children and citizens of Puri. It had undertaken relief and rehabilitation work in Puri during the ‘Fani’ cyclone. This by itself proved that the Respondent-Trust was carrying out the activities that were truly charitable and not for any particular religion or followers of a particular religion. 4. The ITAT has also referred to a large number of decisions of the co-ordinate Benches of the ITAT at Nagpur and elsewhere dealing with similar applications by other charitable institutions. The ITAT was satisfied that the Respondent-Trust “is not conducting activities only towards Sikhs but also for the benefit of all human beings belonging to all religious communities and all castes without any discrimination and not working for the benefit of a particular community”. 5. Having heard Mr. Chimanka, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department and having carefully perused the order of the CIT (E) and the impugned order of the ITAT, the Court is satisfied S.K. Guin that the ITAT has committed no error in reversing the order of the CIT (E) and directing him grant the approval under Section 80G (5) (vi) of the Act. 6. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. (Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge