Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Chhattisgarh Urology Society (Chhattisgarh High Court)
Appeal Number : Taxc No. 159 of 2017
Date of Judgement/Order : 17/01/2018
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Chhattisgarh Urology Society (Chhattisgarh High Court)

Indisputably, the respondent has moved the application before the expiry of one year from the date of its creation. In course of processing of the application, the trust was noticed to submit the books of accounts for FY 2013-14. While rejecting the application, the CIT has opined that the trust having failed to produce the books of accounts and further that the charitable activity is for promoting the Urologist so that more and more patients visit these Urologists, therefore, the society is basically in the nature of club of Urologist Doctors for the mutual benefit of Doctors who are its members, it is not entitled for registration.

The provision contained under Section 12A nowhere empowers the CIT to assess the objects vis-a-vis the books of accounts. Even otherwise, it is not to be seen at this stage as to whether the fulfillment of the charitable trust would eventually benefit the members of the society. If the constituent of the trust engage in some genuine charitable activity which may benefit them in some other aspect of their personality which may include their vocation in life, it would not affect the genuineness of the objects of the trust. A person does not engage in charity for not doing anything in the other walks of life. A charity for one particular object is not for destroying the career for an individual which he is otherwise entitled to profess. If this ground is considered to be affecting the genuineness of the trust, people successful in different walks of life would never engage in charitable activity.

In the case at hand, the order passed by the CIT does not say in definite terms, that the objects of the society are not charitable in nature. Merely because the trust consists of Urologist Doctors and the charitable activity may mutually benefit those members, the object itself would not cease to be charitable in nature.

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT / ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031