THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD vs. GUJARAT CRICKET ASSOCIATION, AHMEDABAD

So far as this grievance of the assessee is concerned, the relevant material facts are like this. The assessee before us is a cricket association, registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860, and is engaged in promotion of cricket in specified areas of Gujarat State. In the course of the reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that assessee has received a sum of Rs 1,58,00,000 from the Board of Cricket Control of India (BCCI, in short) as towards the TV rights. When he probed the matter further, it was explained by the assessee that nomenclature of the receipt apart, what has been received by the assessee is a corpus donation and the assessee did not have any right to get the said money from the BCCI, under a contract or otherwise. It was also explained that similar amounts received in the earlier years have been treated all along as corpus donations, and, therefore, the corpus donation received by the assessee, though termed as TV Rights, is not taxable. The Assessing Officer noted this contention as also the fact that under section 11(1)(d), what cannot be included as total income of the assessee is “income by way of voluntary contributions made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust or the institution”. The Assessing Officer was of the view that what has been paid to the assessee is a share out of earnings by the BCCI, out of proceeds of sale of TV rights, and is, as such, taxable as income of the assessee. It was observed that it cannot be said to be voluntary contribution by the BCCI. The Assessing Officer also shows that as accepted by the auditor of the company the amount is relatable to the TV rights and it cannot, therefore, be treated as voluntary contribution in the nature of corpus donations. He also noted that as registration of the assessee, under section 12AA, stands cancelled, the assessee is anyway not eligible for the benefit of Section 11(1)(d). On the basis of this line of reasoning, the Assessing Officer treated the said amount of Rs 1,58,00,000 as income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but without any success. It was pointed out to the CIT(A) that the BCCI has passed a specific resolution that the amount computed as TV subsidy is given to the Member associations as corpus donation. The CIT(A), identified the core issue for adjudication as follows: “the fundamental question which now arises is whether the specific direction once issued is sufficient for the purpose of section 11(1)(d) or specific direction is required for each year individually”. He then proceeded to answer this question by observing as follows:

The assessee is not satisfied and is in further appeal before us.

We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position.

We find that, at pages 46 and 47 of the paperbook, the assessee has filed specific confirmations to the effect that these amounts were corpus donations. We have also perused the BCCI resolution no 5 dated 29th September 2001 which specifically states that the TV subsidies should henceforth be sent to the Member Associations towards “corpus funds”. There is no dispute that the TV subsidy in question is sent under this resolution. On these facts, and in the light of the provisions of Section 11(1)(d) which only require the income to be “by way of voluntary contributions made with a specific direction that they shall form part of the corpus of the trust or the institution”, we are of the considered view that any payments made by the BCCI, without a legal obligation and with a specific direction that it shall be for corpus fund- as admittedly the present receipt is, is required to be treated as corpus donation not includible in total income. We are unable to find any legal support for learned CIT(A)’s stand that each donation must be accompanied by a separate written document. The contribution has to be voluntary and it has to be with specific direction that it will form corpus of the trust’. These conditions are clearly satisfied. Any payment which the assessee is not under an obligation to make, whatever be the mode of its computation, is a voluntary payment, and, any payment which is with a specific direction that it for corpus fund is a corpus donation. In our considered view, even without the two specific confirmations filed by the assessee, in the light of the BCCI resolution under which the payment is made and in the light of the payment not being under any legal obligation, the conditions under section 11(1)(d) are satisfied. We, therefore, uphold the plea of the assessee. The Assessing Officer is accordingly directed to delete this addition of Rs 1,58,00,000.