SRI PEDDA JEEYANGAR MUTT Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
LAWS(IT)-1989-7-6
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on July 24,1989

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

K.S. Viswanathan, Accountant Member - (1.)WE find it convenient to dispose of these four appeals by the assessees by a common order. The assessees before us are represented by the same counsel and the issues arising in all these appeals are identical. By the consent of the parties, we have consolidated these appeals for the sake of convenience.
(2.)The issue to be decided in all these appeals is whether the activity undertaken by the assessees would constitute business for the purpose of Section 11(4A). The two assessees are two religious Mutts who are closely connected with the day-today performance of the religious duties and worship in the Venkateswara Swamy Temple at Tirumala. The Mutts have been in existence for several centuries from the time of Saint Ramanuja Charya who founded these Mutts. The Heads of the Mutts are Sanyasies. The Officer of the head of Pedda Jeeyangar is decided by nomination. The ruling Pedda Jeeyangar nominates as Chinna Jeeyangar who acts as the 'alter ego' of the Pedda Jeeyangar during the latter's lifetime and succeeds him at his death. The vacancy of Chinna Jeeyangar is filled in by another Sanyasi by selection as found suitable by the Pedda Jeeyangar. The successive Pedda and Chinna Jeeyangar have come to occupy the positions in this manner over the centuries.
Up to 1873 Mahant of Sri Hathiramjee Mutt on the one hand and the Jeeyangars on the other acted as the trustees of the Temple at Tirumala, the former discharging administrative functions and the latter religious functions. The temple revenues consisted of mainly the surplus from the offerings of devotees and pilgrims. This surplus after meeting the cost of administration and maintenance of the temple was being appropriated by the Government but that has now been stopped and it is divided among various parties and both the Mutts are entitled to a share therefrom. In fact, in 1904 a declaratory suit was filed before the High Court of Madras in which Jeeyangar Mutts were the appellants and the Mahant of Hathiramjee Mutt was the respondent. The High Court delivered their judgment on 27-4-1911. They had held that the two Mutts are the Dharmakartas or the trustees of Tirumala Temple and certain other temples. At page 5 of their order, the High Court observed "We therefore consider that the plantiff is entitled to be styled Dharmakarta of the temples shown as Nos. 1 to 4 and 18 in plaint schedule A and of no others: the term Dharamkarta being understood in a limited and special sense as indicated in Sri Sadagopa Ramanuja Jiyangarlu v. Sri Mahant Rama Kesore Dossjee I.L.R. 22 Mad. 189 and not as entailing the full rights and duties of a trustee.

(3.)THE High Court had also set out what were the duties of the Dharmakarta. THEse have been codified later in the T.T.D. Manual. Shortly, the duties included the keeping in safe custody of the keys of the temple doors, opening the temple for puja etc., supervising the pujas, supervising Hundi collections every night, checking and sealing the Hundies, keeping accounts etc. ,


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.