TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri G.C.Gupta, and Shri T.R. Meena, JJ. Appellant: Shri N.B. Shah, A.R. Respondent Shri B.K.S. Pandya, Sr. D.R O R D E R PER : T.R.Meena, Accountant Member This is assessee s appeal arises out of order of CIT(A)-XXI, Ahmedabad, order dated 16.02.2010 for assessment year 2007-08. The assessee raised following effective grounds of appeal:- 1. The Order passed by CIT (Appeals) is bad in law and on facts and hence, it is submitted that the same be cancelled and be suitably modified. The appellate order passed by the learned CIT (Appeals) in defiance of the ratio of the judgments of the hon ble High Court of Gujarat and the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench which are binding on all the Income Tax authorities is perverse. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assets had already been allowed as expenditure/application of fund. The assessee was given reasonable opportunity of being heard during the course of assessment proceeding but assessee s reply was not found convincing to the A.O. After considering the various decisions, the A.O. disallowed the depreciation as double deduction. The assessee relied upon before the A.O. and CIT (A) in case of CIT v/s. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust 198 ITR 598 (Guj). The CIT (A) considered this case law and also followed the decision of ITAT A Bench in case of Ahmedabad South Indian Association in ITA Nos. 2331/Ahd/2004, 84/Ahd/2006, 2782/Ahd/2007 and 3208/Ahd/2007, dated 24.07.2009 where Hon ble A Bench had observed as under: In our ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el Selection 264 ITR 110 (Bom) He also filed a copy of ITAT C Bench, Ahmedabad decisiojn in case of Adharshila Education Charitable Trust in ITA No. 1443/Ahd/2008, A.Y. 2005-06 810/Ahd/2009, A.Y. 2006-07, order dated 06.05.2011 in which similar issue has been allowed by following decision in ITA No. 2221/Ahd/2008, A.Y. 2005-06, order dated 30.11.2010 observing as under: 9. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. In our considered view there is no case for interference in the order of ld. CIT (A). 10. The issue of depreciation on the assets owned by the assessee trust and used in their activities is allowable in view of the two judgments referred to by the assessee in the written submissions. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in the subsequent year in which adjustment has been made having regard to the benevolent provisions contained in s.11 and that such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the trust under s.11(1)(a) vs. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1994) 119 CTR (Guj.) 144 (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Guj) concurred with: Accordingly, ground Nos. 1 2 of Revenue are rejected. Respectfully following above decision, we reject the ground raised by the Revenue, As a result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 5. Ld. D.R. vehemently argued to confirm the order of ld. CIT(A). 6. We have perused the orders of authorities below and gone through the case law cited by both the side. The assessee had already been allowed asset ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
