9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Services reported in 264 ITR 110 (Bom) ignoring the ratio of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. Vs. Union of India (1991TR 43)wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that double deduction cannot be presumed if the same is not specifically provided by law, in addition to normal deduction". 2. That without prejudice to ground No. 1 above, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that deduction of depreciation u/s 32 which falls under the head 'profit and gains from business and profession' of the Income tax Act, 1961 would not be available to the assessee trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 11(1) of the Act on the ground that capital expenditure on these assets had been claimed as application of income, therefore, allowing depreciation would amount to claim of double deduction. Before Ld. CIT(A) it was pleaded that such disallowance by the AO is contrary to the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel, 264 ITR 110 (Bom). Finding force in such claim of the assessee Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs. 3,75,52,814/- on account of depreciation. The department is aggrieved, hence, has filed Ground No.1 to 3 to agitate such decision of Ld. CIT(A). 3. As it can be seen from the grounds raised by the Revenue, the deletion is mainly agitated on the basis of decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntioned observations of Jurisdictional High Court, we decline to interfere in the relief granted by Ld. CIT(A) and Ground No.1 to 3 raised by the revenue are dismissed. 5. Apropos Ground No. 4 & 5, the grievance of the revenue is regarding the direction of Ld. CIT(A) vide which it has been held that allowance of carry forward deficit of Rs. 3,92,18,813/- should be considered in the light of decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel (supra) and allowed the capital expenditure to the extent of surplus and balance be allowed to carry forward. However, Ld. CIT(A) has also held that the deficit in each year should be worked out without considering the accumulation of 25%/15%. Against such direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
