Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 361 - AT - Income TaxEntitlement for exemption u/s 11 of the Act – No approval u/s 10(23C)(vi) of the Act – Requirement for registration u/s 12A of the Act – Held that:- To avail exemption u/s 11 of the Act, the only requirement is that the assessee should have obtained registration u/s 12A of the Act and there is no necessity to obtain approval u/s 10(23C) of the Act - the assessee duly granted registration u/s 12A of the IT Act and claimed exemption u/s 11 of the Act - AO cannot deny exemption on the reason that the assessee's case is not covered u/s 10(23C) of the IT Act and cannot thrust upon the assessee for particular deduction - assessee is having registration u/s 12A of the Act, it is entitled for exemption u/s 11, if the conditions required under this section is complied with – Relying upon CIT Vs. Bar Council of Maharastra, [1981 (4) TMI 8 - SUPREME Court] – thus, the order of the CIT(A) is upheld – Decided against Revenue. Denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act - Benefit extended to specified persons as defined u/s 13(3) of the Act – Held that:- When the income of the assessee is applied for charitable purposes or religious purposes, the same is entitled for exemption u/s 11 of the Act provided that the money accumulated or set apart is invested or deposited in the forms or modes specified u/s 11(5) of the Act - Concession given the above persons falls foul of section 13(1)(c) of the Act - When the assessee has violated the provisions of section 11 and 13 of the Act by giving concession to the above persons, who are specified persons u/s 13(3) of the Act, being so, the assessee cannot be granted exemption u/s 11 of the Act - CIT(A) was not justified in bringing only the benefit given to the specified persons as income liable to tax - Relying upon T. Bapanaiah Vidyadharma Trust Vs. CIT, [1987 (1) TMI 52 - ANDHRA PRADESH High Court] - the only remedy is to disentitle the assessee in getting exemption u/s 11 of the Act – thus, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the AO is directed not to grant exemption u/s 11 of the Act to the assessee – Decided in favour of Revenue. Disallowance of depreciation – Held that:- Following Income-tax (Exemption) Versus M/s. Exhibition Society, Hyderabad [2014 (6) TMI 357 - ITAT HYDERABAD] – its claim under S.32(1) is eligible only in respect of business assets and where entire cost of the asset stands allowed by way of application of income under S.11(1), the depreciation claimed by the assessee under S.32(1) is not allowable as the trust is not undertaking any business activity. – thus, the AO is directed to verify in respect of each asset on which depreciation claimed, whether the value of such asset was in fact allowed u/s 11, and if it was so allowed, the depreciation would not be allowed in respect of such asset – thus, the matter is remitted back to the AO for adjudication – Decided in favour of Revenue.
|