Holding

Income derived from the cotton‑yarn business, being part of the Trust’s corpus and used for charitable purposes, is exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Income‑Tax Act.

Summary

The Thiagarajar Charities Trust, created in 1962, carried on a business of buying and selling cotton yarn under a board resolution. The Trust claimed exemption from income tax under Section 11 of the Income‑Tax Act, arguing that the business was merely a means to achieve its charitable objects and that any profit was spent on charitable activities. The Income‑Tax Officer rejected the claim, but the Appellate Assistant Commissioner granted exemption. The Income‑Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Madras High Court reversed that decision, holding that clause (g) of the Trust deed made the business an object for profit and thus non‑charitable. The Supreme Court held that clause (g) is a power, not an object, and that the business is part of the Trust’s corpus used to fund charitable purposes, so the income is exempt under Section 11. The Court set aside the High Court judgment and allowed the appeals.

Issues considered

Whether the objects of Thiagarajar Charities Trust fall within the definition of charitable purposes under Section 2(15) of the Income‑Tax Act, 1961.
Whether income from the business of purchasing and selling cotton yarn, carried out under the Trust, is exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Act.
How to interpret clause (g) of the Trust deed – as an object of the Trust or as a power to achieve the charitable objects.

Legislation cited

Income Tax Act, 1961s. 11, s. 2(15)

Subjects

charitable trustincome‑tax exemptionSection 11Section 2(15)trust deed interpretationcorpus vs objectprofit motiverural reconstructioncottage industry

Judgment

MIS. THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES, MADURAI A
v.
THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF
INCOME-TAX AND ANR.

APRIL 24, 1997
B
[K. S. PARIPOORNAN, K. VENKATASWAMI
AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.)

Income-Tax Act, 1961-Section ll-Exemption-CJ1aritable
Trust-Mode of determination-Main objects of Tmst were educational, medi- C
cal relief and relief to the poo~ther clauses of the Trust-Deed enumerates
as its objects: to assist and promote rural reconstruction work, cottage industry
and all other matters incidental thereto-Held, the power of the Trustees to
effectuate the aforesaid objects should not be mistaken for the objects of the
Trust-The business of purchasing and selling cotton, cotton yam, cloth and D
fibres etc., held, corpus of the Trust and the real object was to afford 'relief
to the poor'-So, profit making was not the real object of the Trust and the
assessee Trust was entitled to exemption.

-The appellant was a Trust and was assessed to income tax. Pursuant
to its resolution, the Board of Trustees commenced and carried on the E
business in the purchase and sale of cotton yarn.

The assessee filed its Income-tax returns disclosing "nil" income,
though, according to the profit and loss account, it had made a profit. The
assessee claimed that the business carried on by it was one held under
Trust and since the Trust was for charitable purposes, it income was F
exempt under section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The income-Tax-Of·
fleer rejected the claim. But in appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commis·
sioner upheld the plea of the assessee and directed the Income·Tax-Officer
to grant exemption.

In further appeal, the appellate Tribunal concluded that the object G
in the Trust-Deed involved carrying on of an activity of profit and held
that the income derived by the assessee from the business carried on by
it, though, held under the Trust, could not be said to be exempted from
tax under Section 11 of the Act. On a Reference, the High court agreed
with the view of the Tribunal and held the Trust to be a non-charitable· H
965
966 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 3 S.C.R.

A Trust. Hence this appeal.

Allowing the appeal, this Court

HELD : 1.1. The High Court had wrongly assumed that it is in
B pursuance of clause l(g) of the Trust Deed, the business of purchasing and
selling cotton, cotton yarn etc. was carried on by the Trust. It is patent
that there has been a mix-up of the clauses of the Trust Deed and clauses
of the Resolution of the Board. As per clause 3 of the Trust Deed the
business so started and carried on was corpus of the Trust. Clause l(g)
of the Deed had nothing to do with such business. A misreading and
C misunderstanding of the vital clauses of the Trust Deed and the Resolution
of the Trust Board have resulted in the wrong approach and conclusion
of the High Court. [978-B-D]

Dharamdeepti v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kera/a, 114 ITR 454
D and Commissioner of Income-Tax, Kera/a v. Slzri Shaila And Spiritual
Colony Chan.ties, 87 ITR 175, relied on.

1.2. In interpreting or understanding a Trust Deed one has to bear
in mind the basic difference between the corpus of the trust, the object of
the Trust and the power of the Trustees. The language employed in clause
E 1(g) itself suggests that it is a power vested in the Trust to engage and
promote rural reconstruction work, cottage industry and all matters in-
cidental thereto. In substance, the activities specified in clause 1(g) is to
afford "relief to the poor". Clause l(g) of the Trust-Deed only vests power
in the Trustees to do certain things to effectuate the main object of the
F Trust contained in clause 1(a) of the Deed • to start, run, develop educa·
tional, technical, vocational and other institutions and institutes for the
welfare and uplift of the general public. The power so vested in the trustees
under clause (g) cannot be called as "the object" of the Trust. So, the
Income·Tax Appellate Tribunal and also the High Court erred in constru-
ing clause (g) as "object" of the Trust enabling it to carry on a business
G with profit motive. It is clear that the business of purchasing and selling
cotton, cotton yarn, cloth and other fibres etc. was held under the Trust
and in view of clause 3 of the Deed it is the corpus of the Trust in reality.
It is not an object of the Trust. The business is only a "means" of achieving
the "object of the Trust; it is a medium through which the object is
H accomplished. [978-G; 980-G-H; 981-D-H]
THIAGARAIAR CHARITIESv. ADDL. err. [PARIPOORNAN,J.] 967

Aditanar Educational Institution v. Additional Commissioner of Ill- A
come Tax, (1980) 121 ITR 1, relied on.

2. The facts available on record show that the profits or amount
earned in the business had been essentially spent on charity. There can be
no doubt that the profit making was not the real object of the Trust. As
such, the income derived by the assessee from the business carried on hy B
it, held under the Trust, is exempt from income tax under section 11 of the
Income- Tax Act. [983-E]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 482- 484
of 1980.
c
From the Judgment and Order dated 23.12.78 of the Madras High
Court in Tax Nos. 182 and 252/74 and Reference Nos. 58 and 128 of 1974.

T.A. Ramachandran and Janki Ramachandran for the Appellant.

B.S. Ahuja, S.N. Terdol and B.K. Prasad for the Respondents. D

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

PARIPOORNAN, J. The appellant is a trust. The Trust was created
on 4.6.1962. The trust called "Thiagarajar Charities", is an assessee to
income tax. In this batch of appeals, we are concerned with the three E
assessment years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. A common question of law
arises for consideration herein. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal
referred two identical questions of law for the above three years, to the
High Court of Madras for its decision. The question of law referred for
the above three years are as follows :
F
"Whether on a proper construction of the trust deed dated 4.6.62, the
Tribunal was right in holding that the objects of the trust are not for
charitable purposes within the meaning of the said expression as defined
in Section 2(15) of the Income tax Act, 1961, and that consequently its
income for the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 is not exempt G
from tax under Section 11 of the Income tax Act, 1961?"

"Whether on a proper con~truction of the trust deed dated 4.6.1962 the
Tribunal was right in holding that the objects of the trust are not for
Charitable purposes within the meaning of the said expression as
defined in Section 2(15) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and that conse- H
968 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 3 S.C.R.

A quently its income for the assessmelll year 1966-67 is not exempt
from tax under Section 11 of the Income tax Act, 1961 ?"

(emphasis supplied}

2. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as also the High Court of
B Madras held that the income derived by the assessee from the business
carried on by it, though held under a trust could not be said to be exempt
from tax under Section 11 of the Income-tax Act. The High Court rendered
the decision by a common judgment dated 23.12.1977 in T.C. Nos. 182 and
252/74. This Court by order dated 3.3.1980 in S.L.P. © Nos. 2453-2455/79
granted special leave to appeal to the assessee-appellant to file the appeals
C from Lhc judgment of the Madras High Court aforesaid. That is how the
present appeals are before us.

3. The short question that arises for our consideration in this batch
of cases is, whether the appellant-assessee-trust is entitled to exemption
under Section 11 read with Section 2(15} of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as
D the relevant provisions stood then.

2(15). "charitable purpose" includes relief of the poor, education,
medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general
public utility - not involving the carrying on of any activity for
profit".
E
Section 11, as originally enacted, was couched in the following terms :

"(1} Subject to the provisions of sections 60 to 63, the following
income shall not be included in the total income of the
previous year of the person in receipt of the income -
F
(a) income derived from property held under trust wholly for
charitable or religious purposes, to the extent to which such
income is applied to such purposes in India; and, where a11y
such income is accumulated for application to such purposes
i11 india, to the extent to which the income so accumulated is
G
not in excess of twenty five per cent of the income from the
property or rupees ten thousand, whichever is higher,

(b) income derived from property held under trust in part only
for such purposes the trust having been created before the
H commencement of this Act, to the extent to which such
THIAGARAIAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.l.T. [PARIPOORNAN, J.] 969

income is applied to such purposes in India; and where any A
such income in finally set apart for application to such purposes
in India, to the extent to which the income so set apart 1:r not
in excess of twenty-five per cent of the income from the property
held under trust in part;

(c) income from property held under trust - B

(i) Created on or after the 1st day of April, 1952, for charitable
purposes which tends to promote international welfare in
which India is interested, to the extent to which such income
is applied to such purposes outside India, and C

(ii) for charitable or religious purposes, created before the lst
day of April, 1952, to the extent to which such income is
applied to such purposes outside India;

Provided that the Board, by general or special order, has D
directed in either case that it shall not be included in the total
income of the person in receipt of such income.

Explanation. - For the purposes of clauses (a) and (b), in
computing twenty-five per cent of the income-(rom any such
property as is referred to in the said clauses for any previous
E
year, the income from such property for the year immediately
preceding the previous year may be adopted, if that income
is higher than the income for the previous year.

(2) Where the persons in receipt of the income have complied F
with the following conditions, the restriction specified in
clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) as respects ac-
cumulation or setting apart shall not apply for the period
during which the said conditions remain complied with -

(a) such persons, have, by notice in writing given to the G
Income-tax Officer in the prescribed manner, specified
the purposes for which the income is being accumulated
or set apart and the period for which the income is to
be accumulated or set apart, which shall in no case
exceed ten years; H
970 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 3 S.C.R.

A (b) the money so accu111ulated or set apart is invested in
any government security as defined in clause (2) of
section (2) of the Public Debt. Act. 1944 (XVIII of
1944), or in any other security which may be approved
by the Central Government in thi; bi.:half.

B (3) Any income referred to in sub-section (1) or sub-section (2)
as is applied to purposes other than charitable or religious
purposes as aforesaid or ceases to be accumulated or set
apart for application thcn:to or is not utilised for the purpose
for which it is so accumulated in the year immediately follow-
c ing the expiry of the period allowed in this behalf shall be
deemed to be the income of such person of the previous year
in which it is so applied, or ceases to bi.: so accumulated or
set apart or; as the case may be, of the previous year imme-
diately following the expiry of the period aforesaid.

D (4) For the purposes of the sectinll 'property held under trnst'
includes a business unJertaking so held, and where a claim is
made that the income of any such undertaking shall not be
included in the total income of the persons in receipt thereof,
the Incorne-tdX Officer shall have power to determine the
E income of such undertaking in accordance with the provisions
of this Act relating to assessment, and where any income so
determined is in excess of the income as ;hown in the ac-
counts of the undertaking, such excess shall be 1.lcemcd to be
applied to purposes other than charit<tblc and religious pur-
poses and accordingly chargeable to t,1x within the meaning
F of sub-section (3).

(emphasis supplied)

4. The Trust Deed dated 4.6.1962 is to the following effect :
G This Indenture of Trust made this Fourth day of June, 1962 by (1)
Shri Karumuttu Thiagarajan Chettiar, son of M uthukaruppan
Chettiar, Hindu, Nattukottai Chettiar, (2) Sri T. Sundaram Chet-
tiar, son of Sri Karumuttu Thiagarajan Chettiar Hindu, Nattukottai
Chelliar and (3) Sri T. Manickavassagam Chettiar, son of Sri
H Karumutlu Thiaga1ajan Chettiar, Hindu, Nattukottai Chettiar, all
THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.I.T. [PARIPOORNAN, J.) 971

residing at "Meenakshi Nilayam". Tirupparankundram Road, A
Madurai, hereinafter referred to as "the Authors of the Trust".

Whereas the Authors of the Trust are desirous of founding a Public
Charitable Trust for the purposes, ends and objects hereinafter set forth.

AND whereas for such charitable purposes, the Authors have set B
apart a sum of Rs. 11,000 (Rupees Eleven Thousand only) and
declare hereby that the said sum shall f amt the nucleus of the Trnst.

NOW THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH AS FOLLOWS :

1. The Authors hereby create a Public Charitable Trust c
hereinafter referred to as THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES
(hereinafter referred to as the Trust) for the purposes, ends
and objects hereinafter following :

(a) To establish, maintain, run, develop, improve, extend,
grant donations for and to and assist in the estab- D
lishment, maintenance, running, development improve-
ment and extension of Elementary Schools, Secondary
Schools, High Schools, Colleges, Universities,
Workshops, Weaving, industrial, technological and other
Art, Craft and Science Institutes, Schools and Institutions E
of Tamil or Sanskrit Learning, Hostels for the benefit
of students and generally all kinds of educational institu-
tions, whether general, technical vocational professional
or of other description whatsoever for the welfare and
uplift of the general Indian Public and to institute and
award scholarships in India for study, research, appren- F
ticeship for all or any of the said purposes.

(b) To establish, maintain, run, develop, improve, extend,
grant donations for and to aid and assist in the estab-
lishment, maintenance, running, development, improve-
G
ment and extension of libraries, reading rooms, recreation
centres and all other facilities as are calculated to be of
use in imparting education to the Indian Public.

{c) To establish, maintain, run, develop, improve, extend,
grant donations for and to aid and assist in the estab- H
972 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 3 S.C.R.

A lishment, maintenance, running, development, improve-
ment and ·extension of hospitals, clinics, dispensaries,
sanateria, maternity homes and all similar institutious
as well afford treatment, cure, rest, recuperation and
other allied advantages in the way of alleviating the
sufferings of humanity.
B
(d) To build, erect and construct and to aid and ao;sist in the
building, erection and construction of houses, tenements
and places of residence for the poor, needy and defectives
and to afford them all comforts and conveniences.
c (e) To conduct poor feeding and generally to give food and
clothing to the poor, needy and defectives and to afford
relief to people in distress and affected by earthquake,
flood famin~, pestilence and other accidents and con-
duct or grant donations for the support of the inmates
D of orphanages.

(f) To help, assist and give aid to the fathers, or other
natural guardians, or near relatives of indigent and
unmarried girls for the marriages of such girls.
E (g) To engage in, carry on, help, aid and assist and promote,
rural reco11strnctio11 work, cottage industry and a.ll other
matters incidental thereto in India -

(h) The above objects shall be independent of each other
F and the Board of Trustees as hereinafter constituted
may, from time to time, apply the Trust properties in
carrying out all or any of the aforesaid objects of the
Trust as they may deem fit.

2. The Authors do hereby constitute themselves as the First
G Trustees of the Trust for their lives. On the death of any of
the Authors of the Trust, his senior-most male lineal descend-
ent shall succeed as Trustee in his place for his life. The said

H
Trustees shall have authority al any time and from time to
appoint or coopt other persons not exceeding four to be
Trustees to act along with themselves.
1
,.
'\
THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.l.T. (PARIPOORNAN, J.) 973

3. The Trust properties shall consist of the sum of Rs. 11,000 A
provided to the Trust by the Authors as hereinbefore men-

-- tioned and all and every other moneys and properties gifted,
conveyed and transferred to the Trust by any person what-
soever for the purpose of carrying out the objects of the Trust
hereby created and shall also include any income derived by
the investment of Trust Properties and all additions, accre-
B
tions, accumulation and augmentations thereto including any
profit on realisation of investments of Trust Properties and in
particular, the expression Trust properties shall include any
business undertaking held or carried on by the Tnts/.
c
- 4. Sri Karumuttu Thiagarajan Chettiar shall be the first Manag-
ing Trustee and he shall hold office for life, unless he volun-
tarily relinquishes the office and thereafter the senior-most
amongst the remaining Authors, failing which the senior-most
male lineal descendent of Shri Karumuttu Thiagarajan Chet-
liar shall become the Managing Trustee and such Managing D
Trustee shall hold office for his life.

5. The term of office of a Trustee save that of the Authors of
the Trust, their descendants as mentioned in clause 2 and the
Managing Trustee shall be three years from the date of his
E
appointment but he shall, in the discretion of the other
Trustees, be eligible for re-appointment.

6. Whenever any person appointed as Trustee disclaims or any
such Trustee either original or substituted dies or is for a
continuous period of six months absent from Indian Union F
or !caves Indian Union for the purpose of residing abroad or
desires to be discharged from the Trust or refuses or becomes
in the opinion of a principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction
unfit or personally incapable to act in the Trust accepts as
inconsistent trust or is otherwise disqualified, a new Trustee
may be appointed in his place by the Managing Trustee with
G
the approval of the majority of the remaining Trustees, if any.

7. All the Trustees including the Managing Trustee for the time
being of the Trust shall be referred to collectively as the
Board of Trustees and the Board of Trustees shall have the H
974 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 3 S.C.R.

A fallowing powers in regard to the investment of all or any part
of the Tmst properties.

(a) To invest in any securities of the Central or State
Government.

B (b) To invest in the purchase of any leasehold or freehold
lands or buildings and in the construction of any build-
ings on any land belonging to the Trust.

(c) To invest in Fixed Deposits, Current or other accounts
in any Scheduled Bank.
c
(d) To invest in shares, debentures or bonds of any Public
Company or corporation incorporated in India.

(e) To invest in any business undertaking of whatsoever
nature to be carried on by the Trust.
D
(I) To invest moneys in any business undertaking for the
purpose of acquiring and carrying on any business under-
taking, such as Managing Agency, Selling Agency or Pur-
chasing Agency of any Company, or Corporation in
E India.

Provided that nothing hereinbefore contained shall be deemed
to authorise any of the Trustees for the time being to advance any
of the Trust properties as loans to any of the Trustees. Such
business undertaking may be carried on individually by the Trust
F or in partnership or in combination with any other person or
persons .........."

(Clauses 8 to 31 have been omitted as they are not relevant.)

"32. T7ze business of the Board of Trustees shall be dealt with either
G
at. the meetings of the Board of Trustees or by resolution in
circulation ......... "

(emphasis supplied)

H (clauses 33 to 36 have been omitted as they are not rc.:levant.)
THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES V. ADDL. c.r:r. [PARIPOORNAN, J.] 975

5. A true copy of the Resolution of the Trust Board dated 6.6.1962 A
available at pages 30-31 of the Paperbook, is to the following effect :

"True copy of the resolution dated 6.6.1962

True copy of the resolution passed by the Board of Trustees at the
Meeting held on 6th June, 1962 "MEENAKSHI", B
Tiruparankundram Road, Madurai at 1 A.M .

. PRESENT:

1. Sree Karumuttu Thiagarajan Chettiar
c
2. Sri T. Sundaram Chettiar

3. Sree T. Maniekavasagam Chettiar.

Sree Karumuttu Thiagarajan Chettiar took the Chair.
D
The following resolution were unanimously passed :

1.

2. Resolved to undertake and carry on the business of purchase
and sale of cotton, cotton yam and cloth or other fibres both E
wholesale and retail and the Managing Trustee be and is
hereby authorised to take the necessary steps in this behalf.

3. Resolved to appoint Sree T.V. Krishnamoorthy as the
Manager of the Trust and to the business aforesaid and to
authorise him to enter into contracts for purchase and sale of F
cotton, cotton yarn and cloth or other fibres both for ready
and future delivery and to sign and execute all contracts on
that behalf from time to time."

(emphasis supplied) G
6. The Board of Trustees commenced and carried on business in the
purchase and sale of cotton yarn as per the resolution of the Board dated
6.6.1962, quoted hereinabove. For assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66
the relevant previous years being the periods from 4.6.1962 to 31.5.1963
and from 1.6.1963 to 31.5.1964 respectively, the assessee filed returns H
976 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] 3 S.C.R.

A disclosing "nil" in.come, though, according to the profit and loss account, it
had made a profit of Rs. 8,72,550 and Rs. 13,14,269 respectively. The
assessee claimed that the business carried on by it and from out of which
it had derived income was one held under Trust and since the Trust was
for charitable purposes, the income was exempt from tax under Section 11
of the Act. The claim was rejected by the Income-tax Officer. He deter-
-
B mined the total income as Rs. 8,72,550 for the assessment year 1964-65 and
Rs. 13, 14,269 for the assessment year 1965-66. In appeals, the Appellate
Assistant Commissioner by his orders dated 29.9.1969 and 22.4.1970 upheld
the plea of the assessee and directed the Income-tax Officer to grant
exemption. In further appeals filed by the Revenue, the Appellate Tribunal
C held that the objects covered by paragraph (1) clause (g) of the Trust Deed
did not fall under the head "relief of the poor" The Tribunal further held
that the objects covered by clause (g) would be covered by the fourth limb
of Section 2(15) of the Act, namely, "object of general public utility" and
held that the objects stated in paragraph (1) clause (g) of the Deed
involved carrying on of an activity for profit, and applying the test laid down
D
by a decision of the Kerala High Court in C.l. T. v. Indian Chamber of
Commerce, 80 ITR 645 concluded that the income derived by the assessee
from the business carried on by it, though held under Trust, could not be
said to be exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Act. All the statutory
authorities followed the decision rendered for the earlier assessment years
E 1964-65 and 1965-66 for the subsequent assessment year 1966-67 without
further discussion. The References made to the High Court of Madras for
all the three years were considered together and agreeing with the
Tribunal, the High Court held thus :

"...... But clause (g) provides for the Trust carrying on cottage in-
F dustries and there is nothing in the trust deed to show that there is
no profit motive. ........................... We are, there!ore, on the opinion
that the object of the Trust is also carrying on an activity for profit."

(emphasis supplied)
G The High Court proceeded further and held as follows :

"..... In the present case the object mentioned in clause (g) is one
of general public utility and it involves the carrying on of activity
for profit, namely the business of purchasing and selling cotton,
H couon yam and cloth and other fibres, wholesale or retail, which
\
THIAGARAJAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.l.T. (PARIPOORNAN, J.] 977

necessarily implies a motive for profit. It would not fall within the A
meaning of "Charitable purpose" mentioned in Section 2(15) of the
Income Tax Act, 1961. In the present case the Trustees have
absolute discretion to utilise the funds of the Trust to the one or
the other of the several objects of the Trust. ........................ "

(emphasis supplied) B
In coming to the above conclusion, the High Court of Madras followed a
Full Bench decision of the High Court of Kerala in Commissioner of
Income tax, Kera/a v. Dharamadeepti, 100 ITR 375. It was held that the
Trust is a non-charitable Trust and the income realised by the Trust from C
its business in cotton, cotton yam, cloth Etc. for the assessment years
1964-65 to 1966-67 is not exempt from tax under ~-:ction 11 of the Act.

7. We heard counsei. At the outset, we should highlight one aspect.
It appears that there is some patent mistake or confusion in the approach
made by the High Court. The Trust Deed dated 4.6.1962 clause l(g) is to D
the following effect :

"(g) To engage in, carry on, help, aid and assist and promote rural
reconstruction work, cottage industry and all other matters inciden-
tal thereto in India."
E
(emphasis supplied)

The trust carried on the business of purchasing and selling cotton, cotton
yarn, cloth and other fibres wholesale and retail, not in pursuance to clause
(g) aforesaid, but in pursuance to the power vested in it under clause 7(e)
read with clause 32 of the Trust Deed, which are to the following effect :
F

7. (e) "To invest in any business undertaking of whatever nature to
be carried on by the Trust."

32. "The business of the Board of Trustees shall be dealt with either G
at the meetings of the Board of Trustees or by resolution in
circulation."

(emphasis supplied)

Pursuant to the above power vested in the Trustees, a Resolution H
978 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 3 S.C.R.

A dated 6.6.1962, quoted in this judgment, was passed by the Board which
enabled the Trust to undertake and carry on the business of purchasing
and selling cotton, cotton yarn and other fibres both wholesale and retail
etc. It is patent that the High Court of Madras wrongly assumed, that it is
in pursuance of clause l(g) of the Trust Deed, the business of purchasing
B and selling cotton, cotton yarn etc. was carried on by the Trust. We are
afraid that there has been a mixer-up of clause 1(g) of the Trust Deed and
Clause 7(e) read with clause 32 of the Resolution of the Board dated
6.6.1962. The Appellate Tribunal denied exemption to the asscsscc-Trust
solely based on clause l(g) of the Deed. The Trust Deed vested powers on
the Trustees to carry on any business as per clause 7(e) of the Deed. The
C Board authorised the same by a separate Resolution dated 6.6.1962. The
business so started was held under Trust. In other words, a5 per clause 3
of the Trust Deed, the business (so started or carried on) was a corpus of
the Trust. clause l(g) of the Deed had nothing to do with such business.
We arc afraid that a misreading and misunderstanding of the vital clauses
D of-the Trust Deed and the Resolution of the Trust Board - have resulted
in the wrong approach and conclusion of the Madras High Court in holding
that the appellant-Trust in the present cast: is a non-charitable Trust, and
that the income realised by the Trust from its business of cotton, cotton
yarn etc. is not exempt from tax under Section 11 of the Act. The High
Court of Madras came lo the conclusion, as it did, based on a Full Bench
E decision of the High Court of Kerala in C.J.T. v. Dharamadeepti, 100 ITR
375. The said decision was revised by this Court in Dhannadeepti v.
Commissioner of Income-tax, Kera/a, 114 !TR 454. So, the very basis of the
decision of the High Court of Madras no longer exists.

8. Counsel on both sides addressed elaborate arguments based on
F
the Trust Deed dated 4.6.1962. The short question is, whether the objects
of the Trust will fall within the first three categories mentioned in Section
2(15) of the Act, namely, "relief of the poor, education, medical relier' or
will it fall under the fourth limb only and even so, its impact herein? In
interpreting or understanding the Trust Deed one has to bear in mind the
G basic difference between the corpus of the Trust, the objects of the Trust
and the powers of the Trustees. See : Aditanar Educational Institution v.
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, (1997) 1 SCALE 758 = JT (1997)
s.c. 284.
H It will be useful to remember the following passages in the judgment
THIAGARAIAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.l.T. [PARIPOORNAN, J.) 979

of the Kerala High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax, Kera/a A
v. Shri Shai/a Industrial and Spiritual Colony Charities, 87 ITR 175 (at
page 182) :

".............. It drew a distinction between the objects in a memoran-
dum of association and the powers taken in the memorandum of
association to carry out those objects. Reliance had been placed B
on a decision of the Court of Appeal in North of England Zoologi-
cal Society v. Chester Ruler District Council, (1959) 3 All ER 116.
C.A. which in turn referred to a decision of the House of Lords
in Cotman v. Brougham, (1918) A.C. 514 (H.L.) Lord Wrenbury
expressed the view in Cotman v. Brougham that there may be c
included in the objects what are not real objects of the
company but are enabling powers to achieve the objects of the
company. A passage from the judgment of Lord Wrenbury at page
522 may be extracted :

D
"The objects of the company and the powers of the company
to be exercised in effecting the objects are different things. Powers
are not required to be, and ought not to be, specified in the
memorandum. The Act intended that the company, if it be a
trading company, should by its memorandum define the trade, not
that it should specify the various acts which it should be within the E
power of the company to do in carrying on the trade. The Third
Schedule of the Act contains model forms, of memoranda of
association. These ought to be followed. Section 118, sub-section
(1), enacts that those forms 'or forms as near thereto as cir-
cumstances admit' shall be used in all matters to which those forms F
refer.

There has grown up a permc10us practice of registering
memoranda of association which , under the clause relating to
objects, contain paragraph after paragraph not specifying or
delimiting the proposed trade or purpose, but confusing power G
with purpose and indicating every class· of act which the corpora-
tion is to have power to do. The practice. is not one of· recent
growth. It was in active operation when I was a junior at the Bar.
After a vain struggle I had to yield to it, contrary to my own
· convictions. It has arrived now at a point at which the fact is that H
980 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997) 3 S.C.R.

A the function of the memorandum is taken to be, not to specify, not
to disclose, but to bury beneath a mass of words the real object or
objects of the company with the intent that every conceivable form
of activity shall be found included somewhere within its terms."

The paragraphs relied on hy counsel on behalf of the reve11ue
B can be treated as powers distinct from the primary objects of the
company and they are mea11t to enable the real purposes being
achieved. The memora11dum i11 question is one wherein there has
been a mingling of real objects with powers. The real objects disclose
charitable purposes and the powers taken are merely to carry out the
c objects."

(emphasis supplied)

[See also : Pennigton's Company Law (6th Edn.) page 13; Palmer's
Company Law (25th Edn.) Vol. 1 para 2.606, wherein the law has been
D discussed in detail.]

9. The objects of the Trust have been clearly stated in paragraph I
of the Trust Deed. The main purpose and objects of the Trust are educa-
tion, medical relief and poor relief. In that behalf, the Trust has been
authorised to e~tablish, maintain, run etc. educational institutions, tech-
E nological and other institutes for the welfare and uplift of the general Indian
Public; to assist in the establishment and running of hospitals, clinics and
dispensaries etc.; to assist in building and erection of houses and places of
residence for the poor; and to afford relief to the poor by giving food,
clothing and to help them in distress during earthquake, flood famine,
F pestilence etc. In this connection, we should notice clause l(g) which is to
the following effect :

(g) To engage in, carry on, help, aid and assist and promote rural
reconstruction work, cottage industry and all other matters inciden-
tal thereto in India-".
G
Though this sub-clause is included among the ''object clause", it is,
really only a power. The language employed in clause l(g) itself suggests
that it is a power vested in the Trust to engage and promote etc. rural
reconstruction work, cottage industry and all other matters incidental
H thereto. A three-member Bench of this Court in Dhannadeepti v. C.l. T.
THIAGARATAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.l.T. [PARIPOORNAN, J.] 981

Kera/a, 114 ITR 454 construed clause 3(b) of the Deed in the said decision, A
specified among the objects clause, as one really vesting powers, incidental
or ancillary to the attainment of the main objects in clause 3(a) therein, in
the appropriate or ancillary to the attainment of the main objects in clause
3(a) therein, in the appropriate authority. (See page 458). We should also
bear in mind that this power is so vested in this case, to effectuate the B
objects contained in clause 1(a) to establish, maintain schools, colleges,
workshops industrial technological and other institutes etc. "of whatever
description for the welfare and uplift of the general Indian public". "Rural
reconstruction", necessarily involves the uplift of the rural masses, and is
directed for the welfare of such people. Majority of such persons belong
to the "poor (or poorer) segments of the society". Similarly "cottage in-
c
dustry" is associated with the idea of a small, simple enterprise or industry
in which employees, work in their own houses or in a small place gathered
together for the purpose, using their own equipments and is usually found
in rural areas/places or so carried on, by the poor (or poorer) section of D
the society. In substance, the above activity, specified in clause (1) (g) is
to afford "relief to the poor". We understand clause l(g) of the Trust Deed
dated 4.6.1962 as only vesting a power in the Trustees to do certain things
to effectuate the main objects of the Trust contained in clause l(a) of the
Deed - to start, run, develop educational technical, vocational and other
institutions and institutes for the welfare and uplift of the general Indian E
public. The power so vested in the Trustees under clause (g) cannot be
called as ''the objects" of the Trust. So understood, we have no hesitation
to hold that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and also the High Court
erred in construing clause (g) aforesaid as "object" on the Trust enabling
it to carry on a business with a profit motive. Looked at from a different F
angle, and in the alternative, it is clear that the business of purchasing and
selling cotton, cotton yarn, cloth and other fibres etc., was held under
Trust; the said business was started in exercise of the powers vested in the
Trustees under clause 7(e) read with clause 32 of the Resolution dated
6.6.1962 and in view of clause 3 of the Deed it is the "corpus" of the Trust G
in reality. It is not an object of the Trust. So, it cannot be said that the trost
is canying on (business) - an activity for profit. The business - corpus -
property held under trust - produces or results in income, like any other
property. That is all. The business is only a "means" of achieving the "object"
of the trust; it is medium through which the "objects" are accomplished. In H
}
982 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] 3 S.C.R.

A this view, the entire approach made by the Appellate Tribunal as also by
the High Court fails to give due effect to the Trust Deed as a whole and
is palpably erroneous and the resultant conclusion is vitiated, in denying
the exemption to the appellant Trust. We hold accordingly.

10. Counsel for the appellant-assessee drew our attention to a
B decision rendered by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Additional
Commissioner of Income-tax, Gujarat v. Surat Art Silk Cloth Manufacturers
Association, (1980) 121 ITR 1, and contended that the dominant purpose
as could be gleaned from the various clauses of the Trust Deed is only to
sub-serve the charitable purpose and not to earn profit and so, the appel-
C lant-assessee is entitled, in any view of the matter, [even if this case falls
under the fourth limb of Section 2(15)] to the exemption under Section 11
of the Act. Our attention was invited to the following observations of
Bhagwati, J. (who delivered the judgment of the majority) at pages 25-26
of the report which is to the following effect :
D
".............. The test which has, therefore, now to be applied is
whether the predominant object of the activity involved in carrying
out the object of general public utility is to subserve the charitable
purpose or lo earn profit. Where profit-making is the predominant
object of the activity, the purpose, though an object of general
E public utility, would cease lo be a charitable purpose. But where
the predominant object of the activity is to carry out the charitable
purpose and not to eam profit, it would not lose its character of a
charitable purpose merely because some profit arises from the ac-
tivity. The exclusionary clause does not require that the activity
F must be carried on in such a manner that it do.;s not result in any
profit. It would indeed be difficult for persons in charge of a trust
or institution to so carry on the activity that the expenditure
balances the income and there is no resulting profit. That would
not only be difficult of practical realisation but would also reflect
unsound principle of management. We, the~efore, agree with Beg
G J. when he said in Sole Tmstee, Loka Sikhshana Tmst's case (1975)
101 ITR 234, 256 SC that :

"If the profits must necessarily feed a charitable purpose under
the terms of the trust , the mere fact that the activities of the
H tmst yield profit will not alter the charitable character of the
THIAGARAIAR CHARITIES v. ADDL. C.l.T. [PARIPOORNAN,J.) 983

llust. The test now is, more clearly than in the past, the A
genuineness of the purpose tested by the obligatio11 created to
spend the money exclusively or essentially 011 charity."

The learned judge also added that the restrictive condition "that
the purpose should not involve the carrying on of any activity for
profit would be satisfied if profit-making in not the real object." B
(emphasis supplied). We wholly endorse these observations."

(emphasis supplied)

We an: of the view that the above test is also satisfied on the facts
of this case.
c
11. It appears from the affidavit filed by the appellant-trust, which is
available at page 142 of the paperbook, that an aggregate sum of Rs.
16,48,030 was spent for charitable purposes during the period from 4th
June, 1962 to 31st May, 1967. The purposes are aid to the various colleges, D
orphanages, relief to the poor and different categories or types of educa-
tion. lt also appears that in one of the assessment years, the amount so
applied is much more than the total income. The facts available in the
records go to show that the profits or amounts earned in the business fed
the charitable purposes specified in the Trust Deed. In other words, the
E
amounts earned had been essentially spent on charity. There can be no
doubt that profit making was not the real object of the trust.

12. In the light of the above, we answer the question referred to the
High Court in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We hold
that the income derived by the assessee from the business carried on by it F
held under trust, is exempt from income tax under Section 11 of the Act.
The common judgment of the Madras High Court dated 23.12.1977
rendered in T.C. Nos. 182 and 252 of 1974, is set aside and this batch of
appeals allowed with costs including advocates' fees which is estimated at
Rs. 10,000 in each appeal.
G
B.K. Appeals allowed.