Case Details: Madhur Sree Madanantheswara Vinayaka Temple vs. Income-tax Officer - [2025] 181 taxmann.com 506 (Kerala)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Ziyad Rahman A.A., J.
- Mahesh V Ramakrishnan, Adv. for the Petitioner.
- Christopher Abraham, P.R. Ajith Kumar, Advs., R.Lakshmi Narayan, Sr. Adv., Smt R.Ranjanie, Jose Joseph and P.G. Jayashankar, SCs for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee-petitioners were either administrative bodies of temples under the Malabar Devaswom Board or temples represented by their administrative bodies. They sought the benefit of section 10(23BBA) for exemption from income tax, for a refund of TDS deducted on deposits held in the names of the respective temples with financial institutions, and, in some cases, a declaration of exemption.
The administrative bodies were constituted under schemes framed pursuant to section 58 of the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951, and under the scheme, the properties and endowments from which income arose belonged to the deity/temple, with the administrative bodies managing such properties and income.
In some instances, assessment orders were passed against the temples, while in others, claims for refund of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on temple deposits were rejected or notices under section 148A were issued. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee preferred a writ petition to the Kerala High Court.
High Court Held
The Court held that the exemption contemplated under section 10(23BBA) is only for the body or authority created by the statute to govern public religious institutions, but the said provision is not intended to provide exemptions to public religious institutions governed by such body or authority. In other words, the exemption contemplated as per the said provision is for the income of bodies like the Devaswom Board, Waqf Board, etc., and not to the religious establishments governed by such institutions.
Further, there is a separate provision for exemption under sections 11, 12, and 12A for religious establishments. The religious institutions referred to in section 10(23BBA), including trusts, endowments, or societies, are eligible for exemption under sections 11 and 12 upon complying with the conditions stipulated in those provisions.
Further, the income of such body or authority alone is exempted, and the establishments/institutions which are under the administration of the said authority, as such, are not exempted from the liability to pay the income tax. A proviso to the said provision confirms the said aspect, by clearly specifying that the provisions under the said Act should not be construed to mean that the income of any proposed endowment or society which is subjected to the administration by the bodies referred to in the provision is exempted from tax.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Sri. Amrithakadeswaraswamy Devasthanam Dharumapuram Adheenam v. Asstt. CIT [CDJ 2021 MHC 1706] (para 18) followed
- Payyannur Sree Subrahmanya Swami Temple v. ITO [W.P.C. No. 8524 of 2019, dated 1-7-2019] (para 16)
- Jagannath Temple Managing Committee v. CIT [2008] 299 ITR 56 (Orissa) /AIR 2008 Ori.37 (para 18)
- State of Haryana v. Bharti Teletech Ltd. [2014] 45 taxmann.com 7/45 GST 283 (SC)/(2014) 3 SCC 556 (para 18)distinguished
List of Cases Referred to
- Payyannur Sree Subrahmanya Swami Temple v. ITO [W.P.C. No. 8524 of 2019, dated 1-7-2019] (para 16)
- Sri. Amrithakadeswaraswamy Devasthanam Dharumapuram Adheenam v. Asstt. CIT [CDJ 2021 MHC 1706] (para 17)
- Jagannath Temple Managing Committee v. CIT [2008] 299 ITR 56 (Orissa) (para 17)
- State of Haryana v. Bharti Teletech Ltd. [2014] 45 taxmann.com 7/45 GST 283 (SC) (para 17).
The post Section10(23BBA) Exemption Not Available to Temples | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
