No income tax for those in “civil death.” High Court disagrees, arguing they can’t engage in regular activities or enjoy fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court of India is looking into whether nuns who earn salaries should pay income tax. Christian missionary groups like the Franciscans and the Carmelites started this legal fight. They argue that when nuns and priests promise to live in poverty, they are considered “civil death” meaning they shouldn’t have to pay taxes.
This legal issue centers around the special promise nuns make called the vow of poverty. Nuns dedicate their lives to serving their faith and commit to three important vows: obedience, chastity, and poverty. They take part in rigorous training before making these promises, which symbolize their strong dedication to God and the church. It’s crucial to understand that, after taking these vows, nuns give up any personal property claims and say no to getting married. Their lives are simple, focused on spiritual discipline, and any money they earn goes towards improving their religious communities instead of benefiting themselves.
Sister Superior Romy Chacko of the Franciscan Missionary of St. Clare emphasizes this point, stating,
“Once a person takes the vow of poverty, she denounces all her earthly relationships with the natural family. She undergoes civil death. Even if the natural parents of a nun die intestate, the assets of the deceased parents do not devolve upon the nun.”
The core of the matter emanates from a directive issued by the Income Tax Department on December 1, 2014, which mandated the imposition of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on members of religious congregations receiving salaries from the government. Christian missionary orders contested this directive, leading to an ongoing legal dispute now brought before the Supreme Court.
ALSO READ: Haryana’s Job Reservation Law Faces Supreme Court Scrutiny
In a prior judgment, the Kerala High Court upheld the validity of the Income Tax Department’s directive. The court asserted that while canon law recognizes the superior authority of religious congregations over their members, it cannot override or supersede civil law. This ruling established a clear distinction between religious principles and civic obligations.
In their appeal to the Supreme Court, the missionary orders contend that individuals undergoing a state of “civil death” should be exempt from income tax obligations, as they are not accruing personal income. However, the High Court, in its previous stance, argued that individuals in a state of “civil death” cannot reasonably be expected to participate in “ordinary activities” or enjoy fundamental rights.
The petition presented to the Supreme Court challenges this interpretation, asserting,
“‘Civil death’ simply implies that the taxpayer cannot generate any income and forfeits proprietary rights. Civil death does not imply a suspension of fundamental rights or necessitate leading a secluded existence. The crux lies not in whether the individual can pursue a profession but in whether such pursuit is undertaken altruistically, devoid of personal income.”
This argument seeks to draw a distinction between earning income for personal benefit and engaging in such activities for charitable and religious purposes.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
