TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 676X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unting to ₹ 13,74,010/- being the depreciation claimed on the assets purchased the value of which was claimed as application of funds u/s 11(1) (a) of the Act. 3. At the outset, the learned AR pointed out that the issue is covered against the revenue by the decision of the ITAT Ahmedabad Bench in the following cases: (i) 1322/Ahd/2011 (AY: 2008-09) order dated 07-03-2012 DIT (Exemption) Vs Sardar Patel Institute of Public Administration (paper book pages 42 to 45) (ii) ITA No. 2657/Ahd/2012(AY 2009-10) order dated 24-01 2013 ADIT (Exemption) Vs Blind People Association. (iii) ITA No. 2658/Ahd/2012(AY: 2009-12) order dated 31-01- 2013 ADIT (Exemption) Vs Friends WWB, India. 4. The learned DR could not controvert to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e commercial manner and not under the various heads set out in section 14. In our considered opinion, this judgement of Hon ble Gujarat High Court along with this judgment of Hon ble Madras High Court agreed to by Hon ble Gujarat High Court covers this aspect also against the revenue and hence, this ground of the revenue is also liable to be rejected. We order accordingly. 7. Before parting, we would like to observe that the written submissions filed by the learned DR as reproduced above does not render any help to the revenue because sitting in Gujarat, we are duty bound to follow the judgment of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in preference to the Judgment of Hon ble Kerala High Court cited by learned DR. Moreover, we also find that in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... South Indian Association Charitable Trust in ITA No.2331/Ahd/2004, for the assessment year 2001-02 along with other appeals had decided this issue in favour of the assessee and against the revenue, wherein AT Para 11 to 14, it was held as under: 11. We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. In the case of CIT v. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust (198 ITR 598) (Guj), the facts are that the assessee was a trust registered under the Public Trusts Act. The income of the assessee is mainly from immovable property. In the returns of income filed for the assessment years 1971-72 and 1972-73, the assessee claimed depreciation and calculates its income accordingly. The In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome is arrived at for the purpose of assessment to tax by application of some artificial provisions either giving or denying deduction. The provisions of Income-tax Act are to compute income under different heads cannot be introduced to find out the income derived from the property held under the Trust. Similar view was taken by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection. 12. However, it is not very clearly laid down in these decisions referred to in the foregoing paragraph as to whether depreciation, in respect of assts in which investment was allowed as application earlier, would be further considered as application in subsequent year for the purpose of treating 85% of receipts as appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust (198 ITR 598), and hold that depreciation would be further allowed to the trust in a subsequent year in respect of the property when we calculate its income in a commercial sense. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) and dismiss the ground raised by the Revenue in this regard. 13. Grounds No.3 and 4 in each of the appeals filed by the Revenue are general in nature and need no specific adjudication. 14. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. 5.2 Respectfully following the decisions of our higher judiciary authorities and predecessors, we hold the issue in favour of the assessee. Further, it is explicitly clear that Section 11 (1) (a) of the Act provides ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
