Beneficiaries Diverted Income to Trust, Not Taxable. Court Rules in Favor of Charitable Trust

The court held that the income assigned by beneficiaries to a charitable trust was divested at the source and could not be taxed in the beneficiaries' hands. By relinquishing their right to receive a portion of the income, the beneficiaries diverted the income to the charitable trust. Drawing on legal precedents, the court distinguished between the application of income and diversion of income, ultimately dismissing the petition and ruling in favor of the charitable trust.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in allocating income between beneficiaries and a charitable trustRs.
2. Whether the case involves diversion of income at source or application of incomeRs.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1:
The case involved a trust created for the benefit of three granddaughters, with income and corpus to be equally shared among them until a specified age. The beneficiaries later assigned their rights in the income to a charitable trust. The court examined the deed of trust, where beneficiaries were competent to transfer their interest in the trust properties or income. By assigning a portion of the income to the charitable trust, the beneficiaries divested themselves of that part of the income at the source. Citing the Indian Trusts Act, the court held that the income assigned to the charitable trust cannot be taxed in the hands of the beneficiaries as it did not accrue to them.

Issue 2:
The court referred to the case of CIT v. Smt. Kasturbai Walchand Trust, where a beneficiary surrendered her right under the trust for charitable purposes, extinguishing her entitlement to the income. Drawing a parallel, the court found that the beneficiaries in the present case, by assigning their income to the charitable trust, relinquished their right to receive that portion of the income. The court distinguished between the application of income after accrual and diversion of income by overriding title, following the principle laid down in Moti Lal Chhadami Lal Jain v. CIT. Ultimately, the court concluded that no referable question of law arose, leading to the dismissal of the petition and discharge of the rule with costs.

---