9911796707🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Follow us:
|
Home
2025 (7) TMI 969 - AT - Income TaxExemption u/s 11 - accumulation of income - Addition on account of donation not being corpus donation as claimed by the assessee trust - nature of activity and classification of the activity is clarified as others - as argued assessee cannot be subjected to tax for failure to apply or accumulate the income which was not actually available meaning thereby that the assessee has not received the sum during the impugned year; there was no real income available with it which could have been applied or accumulated HELD THAT - Considering the donation receivable and current liabilities of the assessee of Rs. 323, 40, 000/- and Rs. 191, 99, 479/- as it appearing from the balance sheet filed before us the total receipts available for application remains at Rs. 13, 70, 18, 903/-. The 85% of the total receipts available for application thus become Rs. 11, 64, 66, 068/- whereas the actual application as per the income and expenditure account is only Rs. 11, 54, 61, 387/-. Now admittedly there is a short application of Rs. 10, 04, 681/- which has not been able to be satisfied by the assessee s counsel neither the records made available before us. Thus having regard to the entire aspect of the matter the short application to the tune of Rs. 10, 04, 681/- is found to be liable to be taxed in the hands of the assessee. Hence the addition is restricted to Rs. 10, 04, 681/- in the hands of the assessee. Appeal preferred by the assessee is partly allowed.
The core legal questions considered by the Tribunal in this appeal are:
1. Whether the assessee trust can be subjected to tax for failure to apply or accumulate income that was not actually received during the assessment year, particularly concerning donation receivables accounted on an accrual basis but not yet realized in cash. 2. Whether the donations received by the trust qualify as corpus donations under Section 11(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, based on the presence or absence of specific directions from donors that the amounts form part of the corpus. 3. The correctness of the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] on account of alleged short application of income by the trust in the relevant assessment year. Issue 1: Taxability of Accrued but Unreceived Income The legal framework governing the exemption of income of charitable trusts is primarily found in Sections 11 and 12 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 11 allows exemption to income derived from property held for charitable purposes if such income is applied or accumulated for such purposes. The question arises whether income which is accounted on an accrual basis but not actually received during the year can be considered as income available for application or accumulation. The Tribunal examined the assessee's contention that the sum of Rs. 3.23 crore was recorded as donation receivable and not actually received during the assessment year under consideration. The assessee argued that since the income was not in fact available, it could not be subjected to tax for failure to apply or accumulate it. The Tribunal noted that the Department did not controvert this submission. The balance sheet of the trust showed the donation receivable as a current asset, and the total current liabilities were also disclosed, which cannot be treated as application of funds for charitable purposes. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's argument that the income not actually received cannot be treated as income available for application or accumulation under Section 11 of the Act. Thus, the Tribunal held that the accrual basis accounting of future receivable income does not create a tax liability if such income was not actually received during the year. This interpretation aligns with the principle that tax liability under Section 11 is linked to income actually available for application or accumulation. Issue 2: Nature of Donations - Corpus or Non-Corpus Section 11(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act stipulates that corpus donations are those received with specific directions that the amount shall form part of the corpus of the trust and not be spent. Such donations are not treated as income for the purpose of exemption. The AO disallowed the claim of corpus donation of Rs. 3 crore on the ground that the assessee failed to produce letters from donors containing specific directions that the donations be treated as corpus. The AO noted that the donations were received during the financial year 2017-18, and no Covid-19 lockdown period was applicable to excuse the absence of such letters. Before the CIT(A), the assessee produced letters from donors. The CIT(A) found that letters from Oil India Limited and Thiruveni Earth Mover (P) Limited explicitly mentioned the corpus nature of donations of Rs. 50 lakh each, but letters from Indian Oil Corporation and Cairn for Rs. 1 crore each did not mention corpus designation. Accordingly, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs. 2 crore as non-corpus donation income, disallowing exemption on that amount. The Tribunal did not disturb the CIT(A)'s finding on this issue, implicitly affirming that in the absence of specific directions from donors, the donation cannot be treated as corpus donation. Issue 3: Computation of Short Application of Income and Resulting Tax Liability The AO recomputed the income of the trust by treating the entire Rs. 3 crore as non-corpus donation, adding it to other voluntary contributions and income, and then applying the statutory minimum application limit of 85% of total receipts. The AO found a short application exceeding Rs. 2 crore and accordingly assessed that amount as income taxable in the hands of the trust. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition of Rs. 2 crore, as discussed above. However, the Tribunal, after accepting the assessee's submission that Rs. 3.23 crore was donation receivable and not actually received, adjusted the total receipts by excluding such receivables and adding current liabilities, thereby reducing the total receipts available for application to Rs. 13.7 crore approximately. Applying the 85% minimum application limit on this adjusted figure, the Tribunal found the short application to be only Rs. 10,04,681/- rather than the Rs. 2 crore-plus assessed by the AO and CIT(A). Since the assessee failed to satisfactorily explain or prove the application of this shortfall amount, the Tribunal held this amount liable to tax. The Tribunal thus restricted the addition to Rs. 10,04,681/- and partly allowed the appeal. Additional Procedural and Legal Considerations The assessee sought to raise the ground regarding non-taxability of unreceived income for the first time before the Tribunal. The Tribunal considered the precedents laid down by the Apex Court in National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. CIT and Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT, which emphasize the appellate authority's role in rectifying errors and ensuring justice, including admitting legal grounds not raised earlier if based on facts on record and no fresh investigation is required. Accordingly, the Tribunal admitted the additional ground, finding it purely legal and supported by facts on record, and not barred by procedural rules. Significant Holdings and Core Principles Established "The assessee cannot be subjected to tax for failure to apply or accumulate the income which was not actually available." This principle clarifies that accrual accounting of donation receivables does not create immediate tax liability under Section 11 if the amount is not actually received during the year. Further, the judgment reinforces that corpus donations must be supported by specific directions from donors to be exempt under Section 11(1)(d), and absence of such directions results in the donations being treated as income liable to minimum application requirements. The Tribunal also emphasized the statutory requirement of minimum 85% application of income for charitable purposes and held that any shortfall, even if minimal, is taxable unless satisfactorily explained. Finally, the appellate authority's discretion to admit additional legal grounds based on existing facts, without fresh investigation, was upheld, ensuring substantive justice over procedural technicalities. In conclusion, the Tribunal modified the tax liability of the assessee trust by:
|
