TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1422X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been preferred by the revenue against the order dated 15/09/2015 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai, for the assessment year 2010-11, whereby the Ld. CIT (A) has partly allowed the appeal filed against assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered with Director of Income Tax Exemptions [DIT (E)] Mumbai under section 12A of the Act and Charity Commissioner, Mumbai, filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year as nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under section 143 (2) and 142(1) along with questionnaire. In response thereof the autho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order of Ld. CIT (Appeals), the revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal on the following effective grounds:- 1. Whether on the facts of the case and in law the ld. CIT (A) erred in allowing the carry forward of deficit of ₹ 1,87,32,411/- and allowing set off against the income of the subsequent years, allowing the deficit will tantamount to double deduction on account of expenditure out of exempt income. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in allowing to carry forward of deficit on account of excess expenditure and directing the Assessing Officer to allow carry forward of deficit on account of excess expenditure without appreciating the fact this would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act permitting allowance of such claim. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel for the assessee relying on the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that since the findings are based on the law laid down by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court Bombay in CIT vs. Institute of banking 264 ITR 110, there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to interfere with. Therefore, there is no merit in the appeal of the revenue and the same is liable to be dismissed. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record and also gone through the cases relied upon by the authorities below. The only issue involved in this case is whether the Ld CIT(A) has erred in allowing carry forward of deficit in question and allowin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the identical issue holding as under: Now coming to question No. 3, the point which arises for consideration is: whether excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against the income of the subsequent year and whether such adjustment should be treated as application of income in the subsequent year for charitable purposes? It was argued on behalf of the Department that expenditure incurred in the earlier years cannot be met out of the income of the subsequent year and that utilisation of such income for meeting the expenditure of earlier years would not amount to application of income for charitable or religious purposes. In the present case, the Assessing Officer did not allow carry forward of the excess of expenditur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
