Section 445 — Benefits to related persons. Successor to s.271AAE of the 1961 Act.
Section 445 is in Chapter XXI — Penalties, which runs from section 439 to section 472.
Where it is found during any proceeding under the Act that a registered non-profit organisation has specified income chargeable to tax under section 337 (Table: Sl. No. 2), the Assessing Officer may impose a penalty. Clause (a) sets the penalty at a sum equal to the aggregate amount of income applied, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of any related person referred to in section 355(h) where the violation is noticed for the first time during any tax year. Clause (b) raises it to 200% of that aggregate amount where the violation is noticed again in any subsequent tax year.
Income applied for the benefit of a related person defeats the basis on which a non-profit organisation is registered; the penalty strips the benefit entirely on the first occasion and doubles it on repetition, so a second breach costs more than the amount diverted.
| What | Figure | The condition on it | Where |
|---|---|---|---|
| Penalty on a first violation | 100% of the aggregate income so applied | A sum equal to the aggregate amount of income applied, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of a related person referred to in section 355(h), where the violation is noticed for the first time during any tax year | Clause (a) |
| Penalty on a repeat violation | 200% of the aggregate income so applied | Where the violation is noticed again in any subsequent tax year | Clause (b) |
The penalty base is the amount applied for the related person's benefit, not the tax on it, so on a first occasion the organisation loses the whole of the diverted sum in penalty and 200% of it on any later occasion — over and above the charge to tax under section 337. Indirect application counts: both clauses cover income applied "directly or indirectly". The trigger is a finding in any proceeding under the Act, not a separate penalty inquiry, and the escalation turns on when the violation is noticed rather than when the income was applied.
During an assessment it is found that a registered non-profit organisation routed Rs. 40 lakh through an intermediary so that the money reached a person related to it under section 355(h), and that this is specified income chargeable under section 337 (Table: Sl. No. 2). Because the violation is noticed for the first time, clause (a) allows a penalty of a sum equal to that aggregate — Rs. 40 lakh, measured on the income applied and not on the tax on it — and the indirect route makes no difference, the text covering application 'directly or indirectly'. If the organisation is found doing the same again in a later tax year with Rs. 10 lakh, clause (b) raises the penalty to 200% of that amount, Rs. 20 lakh, so the repeat costs twice what was diverted.
In a penalty order of the Assessing Officer against a registered non-profit organisation, made off the back of a proceeding — usually the organisation's own assessment — in which specified income chargeable under section 337 (Table: Sl. No. 2) has been found.
a sum equal to 200% of the aggregate amount of income of such person applied, directly or indirectly, by that person for the benefit of any person referred to in section 355(h), if the violation is noticed again in any subsequent tax year
See the full 1961 to 2025 concordance.