TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 38 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. No substantial question of law. Claim of the assessee for carry forward of the said deficit - Held that:- The question no.(ii) as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law as it stands concluded by the decision of this Court in M/s. Gem & Jewellery Exports Promotion Council [2011 (2) TMI 1511 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] as well as CIT v/s. Institute of Ban ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) that depreciation is allowable on the assets of the trust inspite of cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income in current or past years by relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of CIT v/s. Institute of Banking (264 ITR 110) and ignoring the ratio of the Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. v/s. Union of India (199 ITR 43) wherein Sup ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on 15th February, 2011 as well as the decision of its Coordinate Bench in Dy. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) v/s. Aditya Birla Foundation (Income Tax Appeal No.5922/Mum/2012) decided on 27th February, 2014. (b) Mr. Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue very fairly states that so far question no.(i) is concerned, it has been concluded against the Revenue by the decis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing by this Court in Gem Jewellery Exports Promotion Council (supra). (b) In the above view, the question no.(ii) as proposed does not give rise to any substantial question of law as it stands concluded by the decision of this Court in M/s. Gem Jewellery Exports Promotion Council (supra) as well as CIT v/s. Institute of Banking Personnel Services reported at 264 ITR 110 (Bom) and the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
