TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon ble Supreme Court that in the case of charitable institution registered under section 12A, even though expenditure incurred for acquisition of capital assets was treated as application of income for charitable purposes under section 11(1)(a), yet depreciation would be allowed on assets so purchased. Both sides have agreed that the issues in dispute are covered in favour of the assessee. - ITA No:- 2761/Del/2017 - - - Dated:- 8-8-2019 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, JJ. Appellant By : Shri S.S. Rana, CIT(DR) Respondent By : Shri Nirbhay Mehta, CA ORDER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, J. (A) This appeal by Revenue is filed against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-40, Delhi, [ Ld. CIT(A) , for short], dated 27.02.2017 for Assessment Year 2013-14. The grounds of appeal are as under: i. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law fact by ignoring the fact that the receipt are on account of franchisee fees and same are in the nature of business income within the meaning of provisions of sub-section 4A of the Section 11 of the I.T. Act. The assessee failed to maintain s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Delhi in ITA No. 4571/Del/2004 in assessee s own case i.e. The Delhi Public School Society vs. DCIT(E) is reproduced as under: (B.1.2) The relevant portion of the aforesaid order dated 23.05.2019 of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi in assessee s own case in DCIT(E) vs. The Delhi Public School Society in ITA No. 4887/Del/2016 is reproduced as under: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 01.06.2016, passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XL, New Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) for the Assessment Year 2012-13 on the following grounds of appeal. 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Ictw, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law fact by ignoring the fact that the receipts are on account of franchisee fees and same are in the nature of business income within the meaning of provisions of sub-section 4A of the Section 11 of the IT Act. The assessee failed to maintain separate books of accounts as per Sub-Section 12A of the section 2 of the I.T. Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) has erred in allowing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6. In ground no. 2 in ITA No. 6627/Del/2015 (supra), the relevant findings given qua ground no. 2 3 of appeal have been given in paragraph 5 which reads as under: 5. This ground has been raised by revenue, as Ld. CIT (A) allowed deduction on account of depreciation. The Ld. AO was of the opinion that assessee was a trust and it was deriving income from depreciable assets. As assessee took into account depreciation on those assets while computing income of trust, Ld.AO held that depreciation could not be taken into account because full capital expenditure has been allowed in the year of acquisition of the assets. The Ld. DR placed reliance upon the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT vs. Chiranjiv Charitable Trust reported in 223 Taxmann.com 71. 5.1. On the contrary assessee placed reliance upon a subsequent decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Indraprastha Cancer Society reported in 53 Taxmann.com 463. 5.2. We have perused the submissions advanced by both the sides in the light of the decisions relied upon by them. 5.3. It is observed that order passed by this Tribunal in assessee s own case for assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld as under (Heads notes only):- Section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Charitable or religious trust - Exemption of income from property held under - Whether a trust can be allowed to carry forward deficit of current year and to set off same against income of subsequent years - Held, yes - Whether adjustment of deficit of current year against income of subsequent year would amount to application of income of trust for charitable purposes in subsequent year within meaning of section 11(1 )(a) - Held, yes. 18. In view of the aforesaid exposition by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court, we find that there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), accordingly, we uphold the same. In the result, the issue raised by the Revenue stands dismissed. 6.3 Respectfully following the same we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). 9. In view of the above and respectfully following the same, grounds no. 3 4 are dismissed. (B.2) In the case of aforesaid precedent of DIT(E) vs. Delhi Public School Society [2018] 92 taxmann.com 132 (Delhi), it was held by Hon ble High Court of Delhi in assessee s own case tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
