LexTHE TRUSTEES OF THE CHARLTY FUND, ESPLANADE ROAD, FORT, BOMBAY versus THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BOMBAY
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2) S.C.R. SUPHEME COURT RE.POH,TS 923 with proper questions, and it seems th<tt similar ques- tions on these aud other points were not put to the witness out of deference (as it is now suggested) to the ruling of the Court. The accused c<rn only blame themselves, if they did not. The learned Judges of the High Court r1 !led out from their consideration that these two cirnumstances made it possible for the witnesses to recognise the accused, but held that there was ample opportunity even other- wise for the witnesses to do so. The High Court was justified in so doing, and there being ample evidence on which they could come to the conclusion that the witnesses had, in fact, recognised the accused, it must inevitably be regarded as one of fact in regard to which this Court does not interfere. Since 110 other point was argued, the appeal must fail, and we agree that it be dismissed. Appeal dismis8ed. THE TH,U~TEES OJ!' THE CIIARlTY HUND, ESPLANADE l~OAD, .FORT, BOMBAY v. THE COMMU3SIONEL~ OF INCO:'vlE-TAX, BOMBAY (S. g, DAS, C. J., N. H. BHAGWA'l'l aml M. HrnAYA'I'ULLAH, JJ.) Incumc-tax--Public charitable trust--Exemption- -Test-Indian Income-tax Act, r922 (XI of r922), s. 4(3)(i). The appellants were the trnstees of a charity fund known as "The Charity Fund founded by Sir Sassoon David, Baronet of Bombay". Clause 13 of the deed of trust, after declaring that the trnstees should apply the net income for all or any of the following purposes, namely, (a) the relief antl benefit of the poor ;111d indigent members of Jewish or any other community of Bombay or other parts of lndia or of the world either by making payments to them in cash or providing them with food and 1959 Tahsild'" Singh 0 .d not her v. He Stal~ of Utt:lr J>1 adesh Hid ,y,tullah ] . I959 May 5. I95Y 924 SUPREME COURT REJ'ORTS [1959] Supp. clothes and/or lodging or residential quarters or in giving educa- tion including scholarships to or setting them up in life or in such The J'rustecs of the other manner as to the said Trustees may ·seem proper or ........ . Chudty Fund, (b) the institution maintenance and support of hospitals Esplanade lload, and schools1 colleges or other educational institutions or ........... . Forl Bombay · · f ' (c) the relief of any distress caused by the elements o C v. . . nature such as famine, pestilence, fire, tempest, flood, earthquake The ommissioner . or any other such calamity or .............. . of Income-tux, Bombay (d) the care and protection of animals useful to mankind or ................. . (e) the advancement of religion or .............. . (f) other purposes beneficial to the community not falling under any of the foregoing purposes .............. ., added by way of provisos (1) that in applying the net income for the purposes mentioned in sub-cl. (a) the trustees must give preference to the poor and indigent relations or members of the family of Sir Sassoon David, including distant and collateral relatives, (2) that for the said purpose the trustees must apply not less than half of the income for the benefit of the members of the Jewish com- munity of Bombay only, including the said relatives of Sir Sassoon David and Jewish objects. The question for determination was whether the income from the trust fund was exempt from taxa- tion under s. 4(3)(i) of the Indian Income-tax Act. The High Court came to the conclusion that the trust fund could not be said to be held, wholly or partly, for religious or charitable pur- poses involving an element of public utility and answered the question in the negative. Held, that there could be no doubt that each one of the pri- mary purposes mentioned in the deed of trust, including the one mentioned in sub-cl. (a), properly construed, involved an element of public utility and thus they constituted a valid charitable trust. Although it was open to the trustees to spend the entire income for the purpose mentioned in sub-cl. (a), that could not detract from the validity of the trust since the relations or family members of the founder did not come in directly under any of the other purposes and could do so only under sub-cl. (a) as preferential beneficiaries to be selected from out of the class of primiary beneficiaries prescribed by it, in terms of the pro- visos. · The test of the validity of such a public charitable deed of trust should be whether or not at the primary stage of eligib
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.