Institute of the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary v. UOI (2024)469 ITR 312 / 302 Taxman 4 (SC) Editorial : UOI v. Society of Mary Immaculate (Tamil Nadu), Madras (2019) 262 Taxman 496/ 412 ITR 545 (Mad)(HC)

S. 192 : Deduction at source-Salary-Diversion of income by overriding title – Salary of teachers of Christian Institutions paid by State Government – Teachers paying their entire salaries to Church – Salaries not diverted at source by overriding title – State Government is bound to deduct tax at source on salaries-Central Board of Direct Taxes – Circulars -Circulars issued before independence of India – Subsequent circulars overriding earlier circular – Exemption granted under old circular is not binding on Revenue-SLP of assessee is dismissed.[S. 4, 5, 15, 192A up to 194LBB, Art. 136]

On appeals by the Department against the decision of the single judge allowing writ petitions filed by nuns, sisters, priests and fathers, who rendered service as teachers in schools which received grants-in-aid from the State to the extent of their full salary, against instructions of the Income-tax Department to the concerned authorities of the State Government to deduct Income-tax at source on the payment of salaries made to these teachers, nuns, etc., along with other teachers employed in such schools, the Department appealed to a Division Bench. The Division Bench (UOI  v. The Society of Mary Immaculate (Tamil Nadu) (2019) 412 ITR 545 (Mad)(HC),  2019 SCC OnLine Mad 39034) held that the salary in question was not directly received by the congregation or religion by overriding diversion of title, but was paid by the State to the teachers who were nuns or missionaries, that the circulars issued on January 24, 1944 and in 1977 had been overridden and clarified by the subsequent circulars of February 26, 2016 and April 7, 2016, in which the Board had clearly stated that these old circulars would not cover the case of salary and pension payable to such nuns or missionaries working as teachers, and that therefore tax had to be deducted at source on the salaries. The court held that neither the Income-tax Department nor the State Government had anything to do with the religious character of the institution, and therefore, could not take a stand for not making the tax deduction at source in view of the canon law. On petitions for special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, of the assessee is dismissed.