Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas) v. Addl. DIT

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2017 TaxPub(DT) 0680 (Del-Trib) : (2017) 163 ITD 0323 : (2017) 185 TTJ 0001 : (2017) 054 ITR (Trib) 0616 Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas) v. Addl. DIT INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Charitable trust--Exemption under section 11Providing medical relief through yoga--Whether eligible for exemption. --Where assessee engaged in providing medical relief through several methods and Yoga being one of such methods, AO was not justified in denying exemption to assessee for being engaged in Yoga since propagation of yoga itself was a charitable purpose and charging of fee to meet a part of cost for rendering charitable services would not alter charitable character of services. --Assessee, a public charitable trust, was registered under section 12A and was also approved under section 80G(5)(vi). Its predominant objectives which had been carried out over the years were : (a) providing medical relief through Yoga Prayanam (b) imparting education in the field of yoga; and (c) providing relief to the poor. Yoga Shivirs and camps were organised across the country on daily, weekly and monthly basis in a systemised or organised manner to provide and impart yoga education and its practical application to millions of people who could not afford modern medical methods or have been subjected to ill effects of modern medicine. AO denied exemption under sections 11 and 12 holding that: (a) the predominant objective of the assessee, being propagation of yoga, did not qualify as medical relief or imparting of education but fell whitin the residuary category of advancement of any other object of general public utility; (b) the assessee undertook commercial activities in relation to construction of cottages under the Vanprasth Ashram Scheme. *Held:* To examine whether or not the character of an assessee was charitable, the predominant objects of the assessee were to be examined to define its character. There were several methods by which the medical relief is achieved. These methods are allopathy, homeopathy, naturopathy, ayurvedic, unani, Yoga, etc, and a person suffering from any disease including chronic diseases approaches these pathologies and method for the relief and for such person the method from which he gets relief is the medical relief from the method followed by him. In other words, the ultimate goal of all these methods is to achieve relief and certainly yoga is the one of such methods. The practice of yoga gives positive relief in the cases of asthma, migraine, hypertension, stress, etc. The assessee had been continuously undertaking these activities. Thus, the authorities below were not right in denying the claimed exemption under sections 11 and 12 since the activities undertaken by assessee comes under charitable activities. Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 11 *REFERRED :* Divya Yog Mandir Trust v. Joint CIT (I.T.A. No. 387/Del/2013, dt. 27-8-2013); Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC); Ananda Marga Pracharaka Sangha v. CIT (1996) 218 ITR 254 (Cal); Bharatiya Janta Party v. Deputy CIT (2002) 258 ITR (AT) 1 (Del); Birla Vidhya Vihar Trust v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 445 (Cal); Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. v. DIT (Exemptions) (I.T.A. No. 319/Mum/2012, dt. 30-5-2012); Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (Exemptions) (2013) 358 ITR 78 (Del); CIT (Addl.) v. Aditanar Educational Institution (1979) 118 ITR 235 (Mad) and CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd. (2006) 281 ITR 346 (Del). FAVOUR : The assessee favour A.Y. : 2009-10 INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 --Charitable trust--Anonymous donationMaintained record of name and address of person attending the camp or Shivir----Where assessee had maintained names and addresses of the person attending the Yoga Camps and Shivirs as communicated by them and maintained record, AO was not justified in adding the income under section 115BBC as anonymous donations without bothering to verify the details even on test-check basis. --During the relevant year assessee had organised various Yoga Camps and Shivirs and also telecasted shivirs on televisions. AO was of view that the assessee had not maintained record consisting of names and addresses of the donors and the amount received through sale of coupons from 22 Yoga Camps, which were organised publically as well as telecast on television channels, the identity of donors was not verifiable. Accordingly he made addition of total money as anonymous donation. *Held:* There was no dispute on organising Yoga Shivirs or camps by the assessee nor was there any dispute that the assessee had noted names and addresses of the donors. There was no doubt that these yoga camps were attended by persons in thousands still the assessee had maintained names and addresses communicated by the donors, however AO without verifying the details had summarily concluded that the donations were in the nature of anonymous donations as defined under section 115BBC. The assessee had also furnished affidavits of organisers of ad hoc committees through whom the assessee had organised yoga camps made available but AO did not bother to verify the details even on test-check basis. In the absence of such efforts by AO, the authorities below were not justified in making and sustaining the treatment of receipt as anonymous donation. Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 115BBC *REFERRED :* Sevagram Ashram Pratisthan v. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Nagpur) 506; Shri Dhakad Samaj Dharamshala Bhawan Trust v. CIT (2008) 302 ITR 321 (MP); Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v, CIT (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC) and Sonepat Hindu Educational and Charitable Society v. CIT (2005) 278 ITR 262 (P&H). FAVOUR : The assessee favour A.Y. : 2009-10 IN THE ITAT, DELHI F BENCH I.C. SUDHIR, J.M. & L.P. SAHU, A.M. Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas) v. Addl. DIT ITA No. 2267/Del/2013 A.Y. 2009-10 9 February, 2017 Appeal Allowed CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC)--Relied on. *Cases referred to:* Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC) Ananda Marga Pracharaka Sangha v. CIT (1996) 218 ITR 254 (Cal) Bharatiya Janta Party v. Deputy CIT (2002) 258 ITR (AT) 1 (Delhi) Birla Vidhya Vihar Trust v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 445 (Cal) Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. v. DIT (Exemptions) (I.T.A. No. 319/Mum/2012, dt. 30-5-2012) Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (Exemptions) (2013) 358 ITR 78 (Delhi) CIT (Addl.) v. Aditanar Educational Institution (1979) 118 ITR 235 (Mad) CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd. (2006) 281 ITR 346 (Delhi) CIT v. Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. (1972) 83 ITR 377 (SC) CIT v. Eternal Science of Mans Society (1981) 128 ITR 456 (Delhi) CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC) CIT v. Harish Chandra Gupta (1981) 132 ITR 799 (Orissa) CIT (Deputy) (Exemptions) v. Help Age India (2010) 133 TTJ (Delhi) 590 CIT (Asst.) v. Idicula Trust Society (Regd.) (2012) 52 SOT 1 (Delhi) CIT v. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation (1987) 164 ITR 439 (Raj) CIT v. Neo Poly Pack (P) Ltd. (2000) 245 ITR 492 (Delhi) CIT v. P. Krishna Warrier (1994) 208 ITR 823 (Ker) CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation (1997) 228 ITR 620 (Ker) SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2017 TaxPub(DT) 0680 (Del-Trib) : (2017) 163 ITD 0323 : (2017) 185 TTJ 0001 : (2017) 054 ITR (Trib) 0616

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas) v. Addl. DIT

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Charitable trust--Exemption under section 11Providing medical relief through yoga--Whether eligible for exemption. --Where assessee engaged in providing medical relief through several methods and Yoga being one of such methods, AO was not justified in denying exemption to assessee for being engaged in Yoga since propagation of yoga itself was a charitable purpose and charging of fee to meet a part of cost for rendering charitable services would not alter charitable character of services. --Assessee, a public charitable trust, was registered under section 12A and was also approved under section 80G(5)(vi). Its predominant objectives which had been carried out over the years were : (a) providing medical relief through Yoga Prayanam (b) imparting education in the field of yoga; and (c) providing relief to the poor. Yoga Shivirs and camps were organised across the country on daily, weekly and monthly basis in a systemised or organised manner to provide and impart yoga education and its practical application to millions of people who could not afford modern medical methods or have been subjected to ill effects of modern medicine. AO denied exemption under sections 11 and 12 holding that: (a) the predominant objective of the assessee, being propagation of yoga, did not qualify as medical relief or imparting of education but fell whitin the residuary category of advancement of any other object of general public utility; (b) the assessee undertook commercial activities in relation to construction of cottages under the Vanprasth Ashram Scheme. Held: To examine whether or not the character of an assessee was charitable, the predominant objects of the assessee were to be examined to define its character. There were several methods by which the medical relief is achieved. These methods are allopathy, homeopathy, naturopathy, ayurvedic, unani, Yoga, etc, and a person suffering from any disease including chronic diseases approaches these pathologies and method for the relief and for such person the method from which he gets relief is the medical relief from the method followed by him. In other words, the ultimate goal of all these methods is to achieve relief and certainly yoga is the one of such methods. The practice of yoga gives positive relief in the cases of asthma, migraine, hypertension, stress, etc. The assessee had been continuously undertaking these activities. Thus, the authorities below were not right in denying the claimed exemption under sections 11 and 12 since the activities undertaken by assessee comes under charitable activities.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 11

REFERRED : Divya Yog Mandir Trust v. Joint CIT (I.T.A. No. 387/Del/2013, dt. 27-8-2013); Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC); Ananda Marga Pracharaka Sangha v. CIT (1996) 218 ITR 254 (Cal); Bharatiya Janta Party v. Deputy CIT (2002) 258 ITR (AT) 1 (Del); Birla Vidhya Vihar Trust v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 445 (Cal); Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. v. DIT (Exemptions) (I.T.A. No. 319/Mum/2012, dt. 30-5-2012); Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (Exemptions) (2013) 358 ITR 78 (Del); CIT (Addl.) v. Aditanar Educational Institution (1979) 118 ITR 235 (Mad) and CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd. (2006) 281 ITR 346 (Del).

FAVOUR : The assessee favour

A.Y. : 2009-10

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

--Charitable trust--Anonymous donationMaintained record of name and address of person attending the camp or Shivir----Where assessee had maintained names and addresses of the person attending the Yoga Camps and Shivirs as communicated by them and maintained record, AO was not justified in adding the income under section 115BBC as anonymous donations without bothering to verify the details even on test-check basis. --During the relevant year assessee had organised various Yoga Camps and Shivirs and also telecasted shivirs on televisions. AO was of view that the assessee had not maintained record consisting of names and addresses of the donors and the amount received through sale of coupons from 22 Yoga Camps, which were organised publically as well as telecast on television channels, the identity of donors was not verifiable. Accordingly he made addition of total money as anonymous donation. Held: There was no dispute on organising Yoga Shivirs or camps by the assessee nor was there any dispute that the assessee had noted names and addresses of the donors. There was no doubt that these yoga camps were attended by persons in thousands still the assessee had maintained names and addresses communicated by the donors, however AO without verifying the details had summarily concluded that the donations were in the nature of anonymous donations as defined under section 115BBC. The assessee had also furnished affidavits of organisers of ad hoc committees through whom the assessee had organised yoga camps made available but AO did not bother to verify the details even on test-check basis. In the absence of such efforts by AO, the authorities below were not justified in making and sustaining the treatment of receipt as anonymous donation.

Income Tax Act, 1961 Section 115BBC

REFERRED : Sevagram Ashram Pratisthan v. CIT (2010) 129 TTJ (Nagpur) 506; Shri Dhakad Samaj Dharamshala Bhawan Trust v. CIT (2008) 302 ITR 321 (MP); Sole Trustee, Loka Shikshana Trust v, CIT (1975) 101 ITR 234 (SC) and Sonepat Hindu Educational and Charitable Society v. CIT (2005) 278 ITR 262 (P&H).

FAVOUR : The assessee favour

A.Y. : 2009-10

IN THE ITAT, DELHI F BENCH

I.C. SUDHIR, J.M. & L.P. SAHU, A.M.

Patanjali Yogpeeth (Nyas) v. Addl. DIT

ITA No. 2267/Del/2013

A.Y. 2009-10

9 February, 2017

Appeal Allowed

CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC)--Relied on.

Cases referred to:

Aditanar Educational Institution v. Addl. CIT (1997) 224 ITR 310 (SC)

Ananda Marga Pracharaka Sangha v. CIT (1996) 218 ITR 254 (Cal)

Bharatiya Janta Party v. Deputy CIT (2002) 258 ITR (AT) 1 (Delhi)

Birla Vidhya Vihar Trust v. CIT (1982) 136 ITR 445 (Cal)

Bombay Presidency Golf Club Ltd. v. DIT (Exemptions) (I.T.A. No. 319/Mum/2012, dt. 30-5-2012)

Bureau of Indian Standards v. DGIT (Exemptions) (2013) 358 ITR 78 (Delhi)

CIT (Addl.) v. Aditanar Educational Institution (1979) 118 ITR 235 (Mad)

CIT v. Dalmia Promoters Developers (P) Ltd. (2006) 281 ITR 346 (Delhi)

CIT v. Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. (1972) 83 ITR 377 (SC)

CIT v. Eternal Science of Mans Society (1981) 128 ITR 456 (Delhi)

CIT v. Excel Industries Ltd. (2013) 358 ITR 295 (SC)

CIT v. Harish Chandra Gupta (1981) 132 ITR 799 (Orissa)

CIT (Deputy) (Exemptions) v. Help Age India (2010) 133 TTJ (Delhi) 590

CIT (Asst.) v. Idicula Trust Society (Regd.) (2012) 52 SOT 1 (Delhi)

CIT v. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation (1987) 164 ITR 439 (Raj)

CIT v. Neo Poly Pack (P) Ltd. (2000) 245 ITR 492 (Delhi)

CIT v. P. Krishna Warrier (1994) 208 ITR 823 (Ker)

CIT v. Programme for Community Organisation (1997) 228 ITR 620 (Ker)