THE GURU ESTATE THROUGH DWARKADAS GURU AND OTHERS versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX BIHAR AND ORISSA

Citation: [1963] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 667 · Decided: 19-10-1962 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.L. KAPUR · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

1 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 667 
THE GURU ESTATE THROUGH 
DWARKADAS GURU AND OTHERS 
v. 
THE CO.MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 
BIHAR AND ORISSA 
(J. L. KAPUR, M. HrnAYATULLAH and 
J.C. SHAH, JJ.) 
Income Tax-Income from trust-Exemptiou from taxa-
tion-Applicability of the rule-'' Exclusively to purposes religioU8 
or charitable"-High Court's jurisdiction in references-Binding 
on Tribunal's findings on facts-Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 
(11of1922), ss. 4 (3) (i) and (ii), 66 (2). 
The assessees were members of a joint Hindu family who 
carried on the vocation of Pandas or priests who assisted devotees 
in performing· worship and ceremonies connected with the 
pilgrimage to the temple of Jagannath at Puri. They collected 
from the pilgrims amounts of money known as Annadan under 
writings called A nnadan Patras signed by the pilgrims. The 
assessees claimed that the offerings of Annadan were exempt 
from Income-tax under ss. 4 (3) (i) and (ii) of the Indian 
Income-tax Act, 1922. because they were received by them on 
condition of utilising the same for the Bhog (food offering) in 
the temple of Jagannath and were, therefore, income derived 
from property held under a trust and, in any event, income of 
a religious institution derived from voluntary contributions 
applicable solely to religious 
purposes. The income-tax 
authorities rejected the claim and held that the amount was 
liable to tax. The Appellate Tribunal found that the money 
paid by the pilgrims as A nnadan was not used for the exclusive 
purpose of offering Bhog, that the said amounts were earned by 
the assessees in the conduct of their business as Pandas that 
the facts did not indicate that any trust was intended or c;eated 
by the pilgrims. and that the assessees were not an institution. 
The Tribunal accordingly held that the· assessees were not 
exempt under s. 4 (3) (ii) of the Act from liability to pay 
income-tax. On a reference under s. 66 (2) of the Act, the 
High Court took the view that it was not necessary to decide 
the question whether the contributions made through Annadan 
Patras by the donor would amount to a trust, that even if it be 
assumed that a religious trust was created it was only a privat~ 
)§62 
Octob1r1 19. 
1962 
Guru Est•lf tlo.u1h 
Dwark•il.s Guru 
v. 
Commissi.ner •/ 
lncoTlll•Tax Bili•r 
an4 Oriss• 
Silail,J. 
' 
608 SUPREME COURT REPGRTS [1963] SUPP. 
religious trust and that, therefore, the income of the assessaes 
derived from the source-wa; not exempt from liability to tax 
u11der ss. 4 (3) (i) and (ii) of the Act. 
Held, tha.t the amounts received by the assessees under tke 
Annadan PatrM were not exempt from tax under ss, 4 (3) (i) 
and (ii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, since, on the find-
ings of the Tribunal, they were not applicable exclusively to 
purposes religious or charitable. 
H•ld, further, that the High Court erred in ignoring the 
finding ;or the Appellate Tribunal that there was no trust and in 
coming to a conclusion, on the assumption that a trust was 
intended to be created by the pilgrims, that the trust was a 
private tru•t. 
Under the scheme of the Indian Income-tax Act the 
function of determining facts rests with the Tribunal and on 
the facts found the High uourt has to advise the Tribunal as to 
the Ja.w applicable. In the present case, 
the High Court 
attempted to exercise not the advisory jurisdiction in respect of 
the decision of the Tribunal which alone is conferred by s. 66 
(2) of the Act, but jurisdiction which in substance was appellate. 
CIVIL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION : 
Civil 
Appeals Nos. 248 to 253 of 1962. 
Appeals from the judgments dated April 1, 1958, 
of the Orissa High Court in Special Jurisdiction 
Cases Nos. 6 of 1953 and 42 to 45 of 1954 and 7 of 
1956. 
A. V. Viswanatha Sastri, R. S. Mahanty and 
B. P .. Makeshwari, for the appeilants in all the 
appeals. 
N. D. Karkhanies and R. N. Saohthey, for the 
respondent in all the appeals. 
1962. October 19. 
The Judgment of the 
Court was delivered by 
Sl'IAH, ].-These six appeals raise a common 
question as to the liability of the assessees to pay 
income-tax in respect of certain receipts known as 
1 S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
669 
'Annadan' during the assessment years 1946-47 to 
1951-52. The assessees are a Hindu Undivided 
family, and engage themselves as Pandas or priests 
who assist devotees in performing worship and cere-
monies connected with pilgrimage to the temple of 
Jagannath at Puri, and for servi

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