OMFED TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, BHUBANESWAR

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1,

Bhubaneswar, dated 29.1.2015, for the assessment year 2002-03.

“1. That the order dated 29.01.2015 passed by the learned CIT(Appeals) in dismissing the appeal is against principles of natural justice, unjustified, erroneous, arbitrary, contrary to facts and bad in law.

a. the appellant has not produced necessary details and evidences; b. no arguments have been made against the factual findings of the AO;

2 ITA No. 186/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year :20 02- 03

c. the conclusion of the AO that the expenses made through commercial organizations have not been proved to have been made for charitable purposes has not been contradicted; and d. the AO's findings that the expenses incurred are not in furtherance of charitable activities and objective of the trust have not been contradicted . is arbitrary, unjustified, erroneous, and bad, both in the eye of law and on facts. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) has erred both on facts and in law in dismissing the grounds by ignoring/ not considering the documents filed in the Paper Book before him. 4. That the payments made by the appellant: a. to Cuttack Milk Union for cyclone shelter homes for of Rs.21,61,933/-; and b. Rs.13,99,804/-towards cattle feed subsidy to farmer's are for charitable purpose' and hence the denial of claim of exemption u/s.11 of the Act is on mis-appreciation of facts, arbitrary, erroneous, and bad, both in the eye of law and on facts.

7 . That the learned AO in treating the entire interest on fixed deposits of Rs.41,45,633/- as income from other sources and upholding of the same by the learned CIT(Appeals is contrary to facts, arbitrary, unjustified, erroneous, bad in law and legally untenable.”

assessee is a charitable trust which has duly been registered u/s.12A of the

Act by the competent authority. The assessee trust claimed to have

incurred expenditure of Rs.21,61,933/- for repairing of shelter homes and

3 ITA No. 186/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year :20 02- 03

claimed Rs.13,99,804/- was for the cattle feed subsidy. The Assessing

Officer observed that the assessee has made payment of Rs.21,66,933/-

to Cuttack Milk Union in respect of expenditure claimed under the head

“cyclone shelter homes repairs and maintenance” and made payment of

Rs.13,99,804/- to OMFED in respect of expenditure claimed under the head

“cattle feed subsidy”. The assessee produced copies of bills and vouchers

of Cuttack Milk Union and explained to the Assessing Officer that the

assessee availed repairing service of shelter homes from Cuttack Milk Union

and, therefore, made payment to that organization.

Officer and explained that in pursuance of the direction of the assessee,

the said OMFED supplied cattle feeds to the owners of cattle at subsidised

rate and, therefore, the subsidy amount was reimbursed to OMFED.

However, the Assessing Officer observed that the said two organisations

namely, Cuttack Milk Union and OMFED were commercial organisations and

the payment to them by the assessee cannot be treated as application for

charitable purposes. The Assessing Officer, therefore, disallowed the above

amount as not application for charitable purposes.

provides that on dissolution of the trust, the funds of the trust will revert

back to the settler and, therefore, the assessee is not eligible for exemption

u/s.11 of the Act. Finding that no funds were utilized for furtherance of the

4 ITA No. 186/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year :20 02- 03

objects of the trust, the Assessing Officer added the entire interest income

of Rs.41,45,630/- as the total income of the assessee trust and,

accordingly, levied tax thereon.

that the lower authorities have not been able to appreciate the nature and

purpose of the expenditure incurred by the assessee under the head

“cyclone shelter homes repairs and maintenance’ and “cattle feeds

subsidy” and consequently erred in holding that no fund was expended by

the assessee in furtherance of the charitable objects of the trust during the

year under consideration. He submitted that the matter may be restored

back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of the bills for the

same.

orders of lower authorities.

authorities and materials available on record. I find that the assessee trust

has not paid Rs.21,61,933/- to Cuttack Milk Union as donation. The

payment to Cuttack Milk Union was made as consideration for services

rendered by them at the direction of the assessee trust. It is not in dispute

that the bills raised by Cuttack Milk Union show that they have repaired the

5 ITA No. 186/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year :20 02- 03

cyclone shelter homes at the direction of the assessee and, therefore,

received consideration for services rendered by them or work done by

them. The assessee incurred expenditure in question not for the benefit of

Cuttack Milk Union but the expenditure was incurred for the benefit of the

inhabitant of the cyclone shelter homes. Therefore, in my considered

opinion, the lower authorities were not justified in treating the aforesaid

payment as not application for charitable purposes by the assessee.

Further, it is observed that the payments to OMFED was also not for the

purpose of benefit to OMFED. OMFED sold cattle feeds at a concessional

rate to the persons engaged in raring of cattle. The amount of concession

or subsidy which was actually provided to those persons by OMFED on

behalf of the assessee were spent by the assessee and the assessee paid

the said amount to OMFED. Thus, the payment made to OMFED was for

the benefit which was actually received by the persons who were engaged

in raring cattle and the same was for the charitable purposes. In view of

my above findings, I find that the lower authorities were not justified in

holding that no amount was spent by the assessee trust during the year

under consideration in furtherance of its charitable objects. As the ld A.R.

of the assessee has submitted before me that the issue should be restored

back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of bills and vouchers.

I, therefore, set aside the orders of lower authorities and remand the

matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for limited purposes of

verification of bills and vouchers to ascertain that amount of

Rs.21,66,933/- paid by the assessee to Cuttack Milk Union and

6 ITA No. 186/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year :20 02- 03

Rs.13,99,804/- paid to OMFED is not donation to them but for repairs and

maintenance of cyclone shelter home for inhabitants of cyclone shelter

homes and subsidy for cattle feed suppliers to persons raring cattle.

purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12/04/2017 in the presence of parties.

(N.S Saini) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 12/04/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : OMFED Trust, Plot No.D-2, Sahid Nagar, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent. ITO, Ward 2(2), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. CIT(Exemption), Hyderabad 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy//

SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack