MAHANT SRI SRINIVAS RAMNUJ DAS, MAHANT OF EMAR MATH, PURI versus THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER, PURI & ANR.

Citation: [1979] 1 S.C.R. 656 · Decided: 12-09-1978 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.N. BHAGWATI · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
656 
MAHANT SRI SRINIV AS RAMNUJ DAS, 
MAHANT OF EMAR MATH, PURI 
v. 
THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX 
OFFICER, PURI & ANR. 
September 12, 1978 
[P. N. BHAGWATI, V. D. TULZAPURKAR AND R. S. PATHAK, JJ.J 
Orissa Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1947, S. 8(1), whether .'>uflers fro1n 
the vice of discrimination and as such hit by Art. 14 of the Constitution-
Scope of 8(1), 9 and 16 of the Act. 
The appellant is the Mahant of Ernar Math of Puri which is an ancient I 
C 
Public Hindu Religious Trust. 
Being a trustee, the appellant has been assessed 
in the status of an "individual" under the Orissa Agricultural Income Tax 
.i-\ct. 1947 for the assessment years 
1948-49 to 
1967-68 in respe;;t of the 
income derived fron1 agricultural lands owned by the trust. 
These 
assess~ 
ments were made after granting the exemption undet s. 8 ( 1) of the Act \vhich 
provides that "any sum derived from land held under such trust and actually 
spent for the said purpose (charitable· or religious:purposes) shall not be includ-
D 
ed in the total agricultural income of such assessee." 
E 
F 
G 
II 
The aippellant challenged the constitutional validity of s. S ( 1) of the r\ct 
under which the assessments were made principally on the ground that s. 8(1) 
was discriminatory and hit by Art. 14 of the Constitution, in a; much as 
under the said provision, in respect of non-public muslim trusts created for 
religious or charitable purposes the exemption contemplated therein was con-
fined to such agricultural income -or was actually spent for the publiC purposes 
of charitable or religious nature, while in the case of muslim trusts (Waqfs) 
the entire agricultural income whether spent for charitable or religious pur-
pose or not, was exempt from the operation of the Act under s. 9 of the 
Act. The Orissa High Court, negatived the said contention on an examination 
cf the provisions of Sections 8 and 
~1 in 
the context o~ the sche1ne of the 
Act and dismissed the Writ Petition. 
Dismissing the appea.l by special leave the Court. 
HELD: (I) S. 8(1) of the Orissa Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1947 is ·-<:" 
free from the vice of discrimination under Art. 14 of the Constitution. and 
l 
the said provision is perfectly valid and constitutional. [663 G-HJ 
(2) The scheme of the Act is that under the charging provision agricultural 
income-tax is levied on the total agricu1tural income of the previous year of 
every assessee subject to the exemption which have been provided for under 
Sections 8, 9 and 16. [661 C-DJ 
The legislative intent of granting of limited exemption is brought out by 
Sections 8(1) and 16 of the Act. Whereas exemption in regard to the amount 
actually spent for charitable purposes under S. 8(1) is in relation to the agri-
cultural income of a public charitable trust, the exemption of similar nature 
and extent contemplated by s. 16 is in regard to the agricultural income of 
any assessee who may not be a tn1stce owning lands under a public charitable 
trust, in other words, in either case, the exemption is confined to such part 
of the agricultural income which is achlally spent by the assessee fcir charit<tble 
purposes. [661 D-EJ 
(_ . 
\ .. • 
MAHANT SRINIVAS v. I.T .. 0. (Tulzapurkar, J.) 
657 
• 
(3) Section 9 of the Act, in terms, says that the exemption !hereunder is 
conJined to Muslim Trusts "referred to in s. 3 of the Musalman Waqf Validating 
Act, 1913''. 
S. 3 of the Validating Act refers only to muslim trusts which 
are in 1he nature of Waqf-alal-aulad. 
The exemption in s. 9 of the Act, 
therefore clearly applies only to Muslim trusts which arc in the nature of 
Waqf-alal-aulad. 
The marginal note to s. 9 as well as the proviso to the 
section make this clear [662 B, 663 B· Cj 
If that be so, then all muslim trusts other than Waqf-alal-aulad squarely 
fall under s. 8(1) and to all such waqfs the limited exemption contemplated 
therein would apply. 
If that be so, the gravamen of complaint that all waqfs 
(Muslim Trusts) other than waqf-alal-aulad are receiving favourable treatment 
as against non-Muslim public charitable trusts must fall to the ground. [663 C, 
El 
A 
B 
As regards h-fuslim trusts which are in the nature of waqf-alal-aulad 
C 
which alone are covered 'by s. 9· the proviso clearly shows that the share of 
the beneficiary under such a trust far from being exempted is brought to tax 
and the tax is made realisable from !tie mutawali and read with the proviso 
the main provision really confines the b

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.