Thursday, November 29, 2012

IT HAPPENS ONLY IN INDIA~ Honored to be Indian




Mr.Kalayanasundaram worked as a Librarian for 30 years. Every month in his 30 year experience(service), he donated his entire salary to help the needy. He worked as a server in a hotel to meet his needs. He donated even his pension amount of about TEN(10) Lakh rupees to the needy.
He is the first person in the world to spend the entire earnings for a social cause. In recognition to his service, (
UNO)United Nations Organisation adjudged him as one of the Outstanding People of the 20th Century.. An American organisation honored him with the ‘Man of the Millennium’ award. He received a sum of Rs 30 cores as part of this award which he distributed entirely for the needy as usual.

Moved by his passion to help others, Super Star Rajinikanth adopted him as his father. He still stays as a bachelor and dedicated his entire life for serving the society.

We all Indians should be PROUD. UNO has honored him but we Indians don't even know that such a personality exist amongst us.

At least have the courtesy to pass this on and on till the whole world comes to know about this Great Good Samaritan.
Man of the Millennium.....
Hat's off Kalayanasundaram.. We Indians are extremely proud of you and proudly say "EVEN THIS , HAPPENS ONLY IN INDIA"

Moved by his passion to help others, Super Star Rajinikanth adopted him as his father. He still stays as a bachelor and dedicated his entire life for serving the society.
We all Indians should be PROUD. UNO has honored him but we Indians don't even know that such a personality exist amongst us.
At least have the courtesy to pass this on and on till the whole world comes to know about this Great Good Samaritan.
Man of the Millennium.....
Hat's off Kalayanasundaram.. We Indians are extremely proud of you and proudly say "EVEN THIS , HAPPENS ONLY IN INDIA"

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

More than mapping of Ancient India


More than mapping

BY KESAVAN VELUTHAT
A significant intervention in the historiography of ancient India for which students of history will be grateful to the authors.

IT may not be quite a coincidence that the senior author of this Atlas of Ancient Indian History is a student of Professor C.C. Davies, author of An Historical Atlas of the Indian Peninsula (1949) which most of us used for our “map study” in colleges. The distance that the student has covered from his teacher is an index not only of the growth of the student but also of the territory that Indian historiography has conquered between the two publications.
This Atlas embodies by far the most exhaustive and comprehensive mapping of Indian history in what is described as its “ancient” period, from the earliest times to c. A.D. 800. It has two major parts: a) 12 detailed maps and b) texts explaining these in 110 closely printed double-column pages of double demy size. The bibliography, printed in a font smaller than that of the texts, runs into seven double-column pages. There are three indices: Places with their coordinates and references to the maps in the Atlas; Tribes, Territories and Kingdoms with their coordinates and references to the maps; and Ancient Rivers, again with coordinates and references to the maps.
This brief description of the Atlas should be sufficient to show its sweep and scope, which go far beyond just plotting places, territories and rivers mentioned in historical sources. It presents visually the pattern of development in the subcontinent in matters of culture, language, economy, society and polity, with all its complexity and unevenness. Data presented in it start speaking meaningfully as, for example, when we see the extent of the Harappan civilisation against isohyets (Map 3). (Isohyets are lines drawn on a map connecting places receiving equal rainfall.) The Harappans did not cross the 30 inch/75 cm isohyets. Considering the technology of the age with some bronze tools, with a heavy sprinkling of stone tools, this makes sense as the somewhat dense forests of the regions with heavier rainfall could not have been cleared by the Harappans. Incidentally, D.D. Kosambi had suggested this more than half a century ago.
Similar patterns emerge in the map on Neolithic India (Map 2). The distribution of the Mesolithic cultures shows a south-north spread. The earliest dates for microliths are from Sri Lanka, with a gradual progression northward through the Indian peninsula. The obvious conclusion is that the technology originated in the south in the South Asian context and diffused northward. Given that microliths are absent in the Indus basin and the Afghanistan region, the conclusion is also that the Mesolithic cultures of India are practically of subcontinental origin, the first transformation having taken place in Sri Lanka. The pattern presented by the Neolithic is interestingly in the reverse, the earliest Neolithic sites of South Asia being in Afghanistan and Pakistan and the diffusion being in a south-easterly direction. Mehrgarh on the Bolan Pass is a remarkable site where the whole process of “Neolithic Revolution” is archaeologically illustrated with an extraordinary degree of clarity. At the same time, the Habibs have shown that there was another direction in which Neolithic influence could have been received, namely the east, from China via South-East Asia, Myanmar and Assam. This pattern, or the lack of it, of directions in the diffusion of the Mesolithic and the Neolithic also underlines the fact that one did not succeed the other as a matter of course. The Habibs point out some contradiction in the dates obtained by stratigraphy and carbon dates as, for example, in the case of the Neolithic in Kashmir: the carbon dates for pre-ceramic Neolithic at Burzahom is later than the ceramic Neolithic. Here they evoke that supremely uncommon sense called common sense. This, as well as other discussions of the Neolithic in south India are all done with the caveat that “the reader must appreciate that fresh carbon dates could alter the picture”.
The map and the discussion of the Indus civilisation and the antecedent and contemporary cultures are important in ways more than one. First, the selection of sites is very judicious. As all sites, not even all the excavated ones, cannot be represented on a map like the present one, the authors have used clear criteria for their selection. Settlements covering an area of more than 15 hectares or more are invariably presented. Besides, they have shown all type-sites of particular cultures such as Sothi, or sites defining cultural boundaries; or those of strategic importance such as Suktagen-dor; sites of commercial importance such as Lothal or Shortughai; or sites that provide evidence of economic importance. However, one may not be able to go all the way with them when they choose a site “out of many, for the simple reason that there appeared to be a number of settlements in the area and to leave it bare in our map will give a wrong impression about the pattern of distribution”. This not only is arbitrary but also violates the principle adopted. “Numerous sites” is a legend that an atlas should avoid as it does not help the reader in any way.
That is only a minor point. The information that the chapter provides is rich and up to date. The economic information, including details of production and exchange, is meaningfully plotted. Similarly, details of population and levels of urbanism are shown with significant insight. When sites are categorised according to cultures, the pattern of the distribution of not only the cultures that were antecedent to the civilisation but also those that went into the making of it is articulated in a clearer manner than could be presented verbally. The internal chronology within the civilisation emerges with great clarity and in a meaningful manner. The criterion adopted for the plotting of river courses and the discussion of it are both refreshing. This will also set at rest all the claims to rename the civilisation whose basis is less than academic.


Map 4 is on the archaeological cultures during the period c. 1800-600 BCE. It is the array of Neolithic and Copper-Bronze cultures that is mapped here and taken up for discussion in the text. Although it was during this period that the hymns of the Rgveda and even the later Vedic texts were composed, the map goes far beyond the limited geographical extent in which those activities were happening. The concern is with India as a whole, and not the limited geographical area covered by the Vedic literature. This can lead to questioning the notion of a “Vedic Age” in Indian history in a big way. It should be noted that it is not because the authors consider literature less important: a whole map, Map 5, covering the same period as this one does, is devoted to the information on historical geography derived from the Vedic texts. This one on archaeological cultures, therefore, is able to present the material culture while details of other information derived from literary texts are reserved for the next map. It is true that the Aryan problem, which has tormented much of historiography in relation to this period, cannot be discussed any more without reference to archaeology, and in that respect, the exclusion of the important copper hoard sites is not exactly a wise thing—whatever the plea on which they have been excluded. This is particularly felt when one sees the discussion of evidence relating to the evidence of horse.
[Sic: That is to say, there is a hidden agenda-- to keep the Harappans non-Vedic. This is introducing the AIT through the back door. NSR]
That apart, the information contained here is rich. Despite the inadequate indications of locations available in archaeological reports and the insufficient details of dates, the authors have done a commendable job. The discussion of environmental changes and operations in areas with rainfall above 40 inches/100 cm is a case in point. The technology of pottery, of metal work, glass, and so on provides important information. The size and pattern of settlements raise an important question regarding urbanism, and seen with the absence of the art of writing, this tells us how the Harappan tradition had really vanished[Sic: Because of the Aryan invasion. NSR] That is achieved even without accusing Indra, as Mortimer Wheeler had done long ago.
The evidence presented in this map and its annotation in Chapter 4 have to be read with what is contained in Map 5 and Chapter 5. The authors explain why there are two maps dealing with the same period and the same geographical spread. They tell us that “down to the present day, the archaeological and ‘historical’ evidence have not been successfully synthesised”. This is extremely significant because it helps us steer clear of much of the emotional debates concerning this period. Moreover, this second map also helps us to have a clearer understanding of the languages of India in the millennia BCE. The discussion of the different linguistic families in India draws on the most modern scholarship in the discipline of linguistics. This is truly interdisciplinary, where answers to questions in one discipline, when they are not available within its frontiers, are sought beyond its frontiers and where the boundaries themselves start wearing thin. Accordingly, no linguistic family is given a “foundational” status, and the first treatment of the Dravidian, therefore, should not be read as anything more. The discussion of the Indo-European languages and their distribution, in a similar fashion, is refreshing. Geography as could be gathered from the Rgveda and the later Vedic texts is treated separately. In fact, this is a brilliant exercise in historical geography as it can be reconstructed from literary texts.
The period between the sixth and third centuries BCE is the subject of the next map. It draws information from largely Buddhist literature, Persian and Greek accounts, Achaemenid inscriptions and the like. Archaeology now becomes an important source with more definite information and clearer correspondence with data from literature. Coins appear for the first time and they too help in identifying places, territories and peoples. The questionability of the claim that Tamil Brahmi predates Asokan Brahmi is exposed. [Sic: This upsets the 'secularist' chronology. The authors Habib and Habib are neither linguists nor paleogrphers, but have reputation as professionals and scholars. NSR]
The next map of Mauryan India (Map 7) and the related discussion are perhaps among the boldest. In discussing the age of the Mauryas, it is a convention to doubt the acceptability of the Arthasastra as a Mauryan document; but when it comes to the details, information from that text is used liberally. The authors of this Atlas have shown the courage to “regretfully” put it aside. This is honesty. [Sic: Political agenda again! Discrediting Kautilya! NSR]
The list of inscriptions and information from them is up to date. The proceedings of a Delhi seminar held in August 2009, Reimagining Asoka: Memory and History edited by Patrick Olivelle, Janice Leoshko and Himanshu Prabha Ray, came perhaps too late for the discussion on the inscriptions to be incorporated. In the discussion of Tamil Brahmi inscriptions, it would appear that the authors take up the cave, leave labels alone, leaving out the significant corpus of pottery inscriptions, copious information regarding which is already available in the article of Subbarayalu cited by the authors (page 37) and elsewhere. However, for the exhaustive information on towns, regions, physical features and linguistic divisions, the map is extremely rich. It is at its best in dealing with economic information. Political details such as administrative divisions and imperial boundaries are also traced.
Political geography
Political geography and economic geography form the subject matter of the next two maps (8 and 9). A question may be asked why the period from 200 BCE to A.D. 300 is taken up for political geography while that from A.D. 1 to 300 is taken up for economic geography, but there is no doubting the magnitude of the effort. As it is related to periods which lack as much clarity as the earlier and later periods, this is among the best parts of the Atlas. The authors are modest in their claims: “What results is essentially a depiction of the historical evidence of the inscriptions and not a map based on a properly cohesive interpretation of this evidence.” But the result is immoderately more than what this may suggest.


There may be a few drawbacks or inaccuracies in certain statements. A case in point is the one that the Tamil Brahmi “inscriptions do not give the name of any ruler, except for the Jambai inc”, while in reality at least a couple of them from Pugalur speak about Atan Cel Irumporai (Nos. 61 and 62 in I. Mahadevan’s corpus), a Chera ruler who is celebrated in early Tamil literature. So also, the authors’ failure to consult the important Historical Atlas of South India, which has been in the public domain for more than seven years now (www.ifpindia.org/histatlas) and to which K.M. Shrimali had, in his review of the maps presented by these authors to the Indian History Congress, drawn their attention, is a major drawback. These problems do not detract from the immense value of the Atlas in any case.
Maps 10 and 11 as well as the relevant chapters deal with the political geography of India in the period from A.D. 300 to A.D. 750, and Map 12 plots the economic map of India from A.D. 500 to A.D. 800. Impeccable as the material presented here and the critical understanding the authors have brought to bear on it, there are again a few inadequacies. For, it is questionable if Kerala listed on page 89 is a name of a region or a lineage of rulers—the weight of evidence is still in favour of the latter (See Irfan Habib, ed., India: Studies in the History of an Idea, Delhi, 2005, pages 117-125). These, however, do not minimise the stupendous nature of the work.
What we have here is more than a mapping of the details available in relation to the history of India up to A.D. 800. It is a significant intervention in the historiography of the period. Although the authors used to describe themselves somewhat self-effacingly as “two laymen” when they were presenting these maps to the sessions of the Indian History Congress, they have put specialists to shame. This is a contribution for which students of history for several generations will be grateful.


-- 
S. Kalyanaraman

Friday, November 16, 2012

Hinduism not a Religion; Don't ask for benefits accorded to Christianity or Islam - Income Tax Dept


Explanation 3 to section 80G(v) states that “in this section, “charitable purpose” does not include any purpose the whole or substantially the whole of which is of a religious nature.” This explanation takes note of the fact that an institution or fund shall be for a charitable purpose and may have a number of objects. If any one of these objects is wholly or substantially wholly of a religious nature, the Institution or Funds falls outside the scope of section 80G and the donation to it will not make the donor entitled for the deduction u/s. 80G. The objects as per Explanation 3 must be wholly or substantially whole of which must be of religious nature. The assessee has submitted all the evidence including the objects and how the expenditure has been incurred by it. The onus, in ouropinion, gets shifted on the Revenue to prove that the assessee-trust is wholly or substantially for the religious purpose. There is no allegation on the part of the revenue that the whole or substantially whole of the object of the trust is to propagate or advance support to a particular sect. We may observe that Hinduism is a way of life of a civilized society. It as such is not a religion. In this regard we rely on the case of T T Kuppuswamy Chettiar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1987) 100 LW 1031 in which it was held ” The word “Hindu” has not been defined in any of the texts nor in judgment made law. The word was given by British administrators to inhabitants of India, who were not Christians, Muslims, Parsis or Jews. The alleged Hindu religion consists of four castes Brahmins, kshatriyas, vaishyas and sudras belonging ultimately to two schools of law, mitaksharas and dayabhaga. There is, however, no religion by the name ~Hindu’. It only shows that so called Hindu religion has been called for convenience.” CIT must be aware of that the Hindu consists of a number of communities having the different gods who are being worshipped in a different manner, different rituals, different ethical codes. Even the worship of god is not essential for a person who has adopted Hinduism way of life. Thus, Hinduism holds within its fold men of divergent views and traditions who have very little in common except a vague faith in what may be called the fundamentals of the Hinduism. The word ‘community’ means a society of people living in the same place, under the same laws and regulations and who have common rights and privileges. This may apply to Christianity or moslem but not to Hinduism. Therefore, it cannot be said that Hindu is a separate community or a separate religion. Technically Hindu is neither a religion nor a community. Therefore, expenses incurred for worshipping of Lord Shiva, , Hanuman, Goddess Durga and for maintenance of temple cannot be regarded to be for religious purpose. Under these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the CIT is not correct in law in not allowing the approval to the assessee trust u/s. 80G of the Act. We accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT and direct the CIT to grant approval to the assessee-trust u/s. 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NAGPUR
ITA No.223/Nagpur/2009 – Assessment Year : NA
Shiv Mandir Devsttan Panch Committee Sanstan Nagpur
Vs.
CIT-1 Nagpur
 Date of pronouncement: 11.10.2012
ORDER
Per P.K. Bansal, Accountant Member:-
The only issue involved in this appeal filed by the assessee relates to the grant of approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The brief facts of the case are that Shiv Mandir Devsttan Panch Committee Sanstan, Nagpur filed an application in form no.10G on 9.7.2008 seeking approval u/s 80G(5)(vi) of the Income-tax Act. The copy of the accounts for the year 31.3.2008 was also filed. As per this, the assessee has incurred total expenditure amounting to Rs.82,977/-, which consist of building maintenance expenses – Rs.23,530/-; Free food expenses – Rs.34,399/-; Festival prayer & daily expenses – Rs.18,328/-; Tailoring training expenses – 1,225/-; Yoga training expenses – Rs.2,475/- and Free distribution of opticals – Rs.3,020/-.
2. The CIT took the view that the expenses for building maintenance, free food expenses and festivalprayer & daily expenses related to the religious object. Only balance sum of Rs.6,700/- were incurred for non-religious objects. In view of explanation 3 to section 80G read with sub-section 5B, he took the view that since the expenditure on religious object exceeds 5% of the total income of the assessee trust, therefore, he did not approve the assessee u/s 80G(5)(vi).
3. The Ld. A.R. before us contended that the assessee is carrying on yoga training, tailoring training and free distribution of opticals to the poor and needy people. The building is required for the training, yoga etc. The maintenance expenses incurred over the building relate to the charitable activities and not the religious activities. Food distributed to the needy may be called as maha prasad and distribution of the food to the poor people is not a religious expenditure. Similarly, the expenses incurred on festival prayer & daily expenses represent Rs.3,600/- paid to safai worker, Rs.1,080/- for news papers, Rs.1,136/- for cleaning the cloths and Rs.5,373/- for miscellaneous purchases for day to day consumption. It is only a sum of Rs.7,139/- which is less than 5% can be regarded to have been spent for the religious purpose even if it is treated that maintenance of the temple is a religious purpose. He contended that the temple is open to everybody without caste and creed. Anybody who have faith or not in Shiva, Hanuman, Durga may come or even the person who does not have faith in these deities, can also come. The temple does not belong to a particular religion. The expenditure so incurred are not of religious nature. Even the objects of the assessee are not the religious nature. Putting the idols is not a religious activity. The CIT has not stated how the activity so carried are religious. The assessee has duly been registered u/s 12A of the Income-tax Act.
4. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand contended that the CIT(A) has rightly denied the approval u/s 80G. The assessee was carrying on religious activities and has spent money for the maintenance of the temples.
5. We have heard both the parties and have carefully perused the entire material available on record along with the order of CIT. The provisions of section 80G sub-section (5) of the Income-tax Act lays down as under :
“(5). This section applies to donations to any institution or fund referred to in sub-clause (iv) of clause (a) of sub-section (2), on if it is established in India for a charitable purpose and if it fulfils the following conditions, namely -
(i). where the institution or fund derives any income, such income would not be liable to inclusion in its total income under the provisions of section 11 and 12 or clause (23AA) or clause (23C) of section 10 :
Provided that where an institution or fund derives any income, being profits and gains of business, the condition that such income would not be liable to inclusion in its total income under the provisions of section 11 shall not apply in relation to such income, if -
(a) the institution or fund maintains separate books of account in respect of such business;
(b) the donations made to the institution or fund are not used by it directly or indirectly, for the purposes of such business; and
(c) the institution or fund issues to a person making the donation a certificate to the effect that it maintains separate books or account in respect of such business and that the donations received by it will not be used, directly or indirectly, for the purposes of such business;
(ii) the instrument under which the institution or fund is constituted does not, or the rules governing the institution or fund do not, contain any provision for the transfer or application at any time of the whole or any part of the income or assets of the institution or fund for any purpose other than a charitable purpose;
(iii) the institution or fund is not expressed to be for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste;
(iv) the institution or fund maintains regular accounts of its receipts and expenditure;
(v) the institution or fund is either constituted as a public charitable trust or is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or under any law corresponding to that Act in force in any part of India or under section 253 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), or is a University established by law, or is any other educational institution recognised by the Government or by a University established by law, or affiliated to any University established by law, or is an institution financed wholly or in part by the Government or a local authority; and
( vi) in relation to donations made after the 31st day of March, 1992, the institution or fund is for the time being approved by the Commissioner in accordance with the rules made in this behalf:
Provided that any approval shall have effect for such assessment year or years, not exceeding five assessment years, as may be specified in the approval.”
6. From the perusal of the aforesaid section, it is apparent that section 80G of the Act provides for deduction in respect of the donations made by the tax payers to certain trust or institution. These trusts or institutions have to comply with the condition as laid down u/s. 80G(5)(i) to (v) of the Income-tax Act. By Finance Act, 1991, the deduction under the provisions of section 80G for any fund or Institution not specifically mentioned is allowed if it is approved by the Commissioner of Income-tax in accordance with section 80G(5)(vi). The approval has to be made in accordance with the Rules made in this behalf. Rule 1 1A under the Income-tax Rules has been inserted w.e.f. 21.09.1992. This rule requires an institution or fund to make an application for approval under section 80G(5)(vi) in form No. 10G. The application was to be submitted in triplicate. This Rule further requires that the application shall be accompanied with the following documents namely :
(i). Copy of registration granted u/s. 12A or copy of the notification issued u/s. 10(23) or 10(23C);
(ii). Notes on activities of the institution or fund since its inception or during the last three years, whichever is less;
(iii). Copies of account of the Institution or fund since its inception or during the last three years, whichever is less.
7. Sub-rule (3) empowers the Commissioner to call for such documents or information from the institution or fund or cause such enquiries to be made as he may deem necessary in order to satisfy himself about the genuineness of the activities of such Institution. Sub-rule (4) lays down that if all the conditions as enumerated in clause (1) to (v) of sub-section (5) of section 80G are fulfilled by the institution or fund, CIT shall record such satisfaction in writing and grant approval to the institution or fund specifying the assessment year or years for which the approval is valid. Sub-rule (5) empowers the CIT to reject the application for approval after recording the reasons for such rejection in writing where the CIT is satisfied that one or more conditions laid down in clause (i) to (v) of section 80G(5) are not fulfilled. This rule also states that no order rejecting the application shall be passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the institution or trust. Sub¬rule(6) requires the CIT to pass an order granting or rejecting the application within 6 months from the date on which the application is made. We noted that in the case of the assessee-trust, the CIT was of the opinion that the assessee-trust has not complied with the conditions No. (ii) and (iii) of section 80G(5). He is of the opinion that the trust is expressed for the religious object and has applied the fund for the purpose other than charitable as contemplated in Explanation 3 to section 80G(5) in contravention of section 80G(5)(ii) of the Income-tax Act. The Explanation 3 to this section lays down that charitable purpose does not include any purpose the whole or substantially whole of which is of a religious nature. The main objection of the CIT is that the objects as enumerated in the trust deed are religious and the expenditure has been incurred for religious purposes. He has also noted that a trust or institution is permitted to incur an expenditure not exceeding to 5% of his total income in the previous year for religious purpose so that it may not contravene the condition No. (ii), as stipulated u/s. 80G(5) of the Act.
8. We have gone through the relevant clauses which have been regarded to be religious in nature by the CIT(A). The object clause of the trust reads as under:
“Worship of Lord Shiva , Hanumanji, Goddess Durga and maintaining of temple. To celebrate festivals like Shivratri, Hanuman Jayanti, Ganesh Uttasav, Makar Sankranti, renovation and maintenance of temple. To make available temple for general public and to provide facilities for the public visiting temple. Balance fund, if any after utilizing for the above mentioned objects, may be utilized for education, social and the cultural activities. To conduct nursery school, library, sports club, hostels and other activities. To help poor children for education. To provide medical aid for poor. To help the peoples affected by natural calamity.”
Now the question arise whether these objects can be regarded to be of religious nature and the expenditure incurred for the fulfillment of these objects can be said to have been incurred for the benefit of particular religion.
9. The charitable purpose has been defined u/s. 2(15) of the Act. The definition of charitable purpose is inclusive one. It includes relief of the poor, education, medical relief, and the advancement of any other object of general public utility. The objects as enumerated above held on by the assessee trust are charitable within the meaning of section 2 of sub section 15. Some of the objects fall within the “advancement of any other object of general public utility”. Proviso to section 2 sub section 15 restricts the meaning “advancement of any other objects of general public utility”. But CIT(A) has not stated that proviso to section 2 sub section 15 is applicable in the case of the assessee.
10. Now coming to the question whether the assessee trust has violated the conditions as laid down in clause (iii) of section 80G(5), we reproduce this clause which reads as under :
“(iii). the institution or fund is not expressed to be for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste.”
This clause stipulates that the Institution or the Trust must not be for the benefit of any particular religious community or caste. The words “religious community” means the group of people having a common religion or faith. The word “religion” means the belief in and worship to a superhuman controlling power, specially the personal god or gods, a particular system of faith and worship. It means the trust should not be for the benefit of any particular group of persons having the common belief in worshiping of superhuman controlling power or having common system & faith and worship. If the trust is for the benefit of any particular religious community, it would include the advancement, support or propagation of a religion and its tenants, it could be said that a trust has violated the condition No. (iii) of section 80G(5). The objects as has been pointed out by CIT, nowhere talks of advancement, support or propagation of a particular religion, worshipping of Lord shiva, hanumanji , goddess  Durga and maintaining of temple, in our opinion, cannot be regarded for the advancement support or propagation of a particular religion. No evidence or material was placed on record or brought before us by the learned DR which may prove that these object relate to a particular religion. No doubt the DR argued that it relate to Hindu Religion but in our opinion it is not so. Lord shiva, Hanumanji, goddess Durga does not represent any particular religion, they are merely regarded to be the super power of the universe.
11. In the case of Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Madras vs. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar 1954 SCJ335, Religion has been expressed to mean a matter of faith with individuals or communities and it is not necessarily theristic. There are well known religions in India, like Buddhism and Jainism, which do not believe in God or in any intelligent first cause. A religion undoubtedly has its basis in a system of beliefs or doctrines which are regarded by those who profess that religion as conducive to their spiritual well being, but it will not be correct to say that religions is nothing else but a doctrine or belief. A religion may not only lay down a code of ethical rules for its followers to accept, but it might prescribed rituals and observances, ceremonies and modes of worship which are regarded as integral parts of a religion, and these forms and observances might extend even to matters of food and dress. No material or evidence has been brought on record by the department which may prove that any person coming, worshipping and maintaining the temple has to follow a particular code of ethical rules and has to carry out the prescribed rituals and observances, ceremonies and modes of worship. The entry is not restricted to a particular group of persons. Any body whether want to worship or not and want to maintain or not can come to the temple and avail of all the facilities available to the public at large. Therefore, these objects cannot be regarded to be the religious objects. In our opinion, until and unless the activities for which the trust is established, involve the activity religious purpose, it cannot be said that the assessee has not complied with the condition No. (iii) enumerated u/s. 80G(5) of the Act.
12. Even we noted that all the building maintenance expenses, free food expenses and festival , prayer and daily expenses cannot be regarded to be the one incurred for religious object ,even if the object is regarded to be religious one. It is not denied that in the building the assesse was carrying yoga centre , tailoring training centre as well as food for the needy and optical centre for the poor.
13. Explanation 3 to section 80G(v) states that “in this section, “charitable purpose” does not include any purpose the whole or substantially the whole of which is of a religious nature.” This explanation takes note of the fact that an institution or fund shall be for a charitable purpose and may have a number of objects. If any one of these objects is wholly or substantially wholly of a religious nature, the Institution or Funds falls outside the scope of section 80G and the donation to it will not make the donor entitled for the deduction u/s. 80G. The objects as per Explanation 3 must be wholly or substantially whole of which must be of religious nature. The assessee has submitted all the evidence including the objects and how the expenditure has been incurred by it. The onus, in our opinion, gets shifted on the Revenue to prove that the assessee-trust is wholly or substantially for the religious purpose. There is no allegation on the part of the revenue that the whole or substantially whole of the object of the trust is to propagate or advance support to a particular sect. We may observe that Hinduism is a way of life of a civilized society. It as such is not a religion. In this regard we rely on the case of T T Kuppuswamy Chettiar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu (1987) 100 LW 1031 in which it was held ” The word “Hindu” has not been defined in any of the texts nor in judgment made law. The word was given by British administrators to inhabitants of India, who were not Christians, Muslims, Parsis or Jews. The alleged Hindu religion consists of four castes Brahmins, kshatriyas, vaishyas and sudras belonging ultimately to two schools of law, mitaksharas and dayabhaga. There is, however, no religion by the name ~Hindu’. It only shows that so called Hindu religion has been called for convenience.” CIT must be aware of that the Hindu consists of a number of communities having the different gods who are being worshipped in a different manner, different rituals, different ethical codes. Even the worship of god is not essential for a person who has adopted Hinduism way of life. Thus, Hinduism holds within its fold men of divergent views and traditions who have very little in common except a vague faith in what may be called the fundamentals of the Hinduism. The word ‘community’ means a society of people living in the same place, under the same laws and regulations and who have common rights and privileges. This may apply to Christianity or moslem but not to Hinduism. Therefore, it cannot be said that Hindu is a separate community or a separate religion. Technically Hindu is neither a religion nor a community. Therefore, expenses incurred for worshipping of Lord Shiva, , Hanuman, Goddess Durga and for maintenance of temple cannot be regarded to be for religious purpose. Under these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the CIT is not correct in law in not allowing the approval to the assessee trust u/s. 80G of the Act. We accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT and direct the CIT to grant approval to the assessee-trust u/s. 80G(5)(vi) of the Act.
14. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Pronounced in the open Court on 11.10.2012
http://taxguru.in/income-tax-case-laws/expense-worship-hindu-gods-temple-maintenance-regarded-religious-purpose.html