9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 1142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Services reported in 264 ITR 110 (Born) ignoring the ratio of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. vs. Union of India (199 ITR 43) wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that double deduct/on cannot be presumed if the same is not specifically provided by law, in addition to normal deduction. 2. That without prejudice to ground No. I 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 a Charitable Trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. 3. That ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground that the learned CIT(A) has wrongly followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Services (supra) by ignoring the ratio of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. (supra). According to the revenue if the impugned benefit is granted to the assessee it will tantamount to double deduction. 3. We have heard both the parties on this issue and we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the subsequent decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Gem & Jewellery Exports Promotion Council order dated 15.02.2011 in ITA No. (LOD) No. 113 of 2010. This decision was followed by ITAT, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Director of income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai vs. GICR Charities, (2013) 32 taxmann.com 208 (Bombay). Copy of this decision is placed at pages 4 to 5 of the paper book. Our attention was drawn to the following question addressed by the Revenue to be adjudicated by the Hon'ble High Court: (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in law in ignoring the stand of the revenue that allowance of depreciation on the assets, the cost of which has already been allowed as a deduction on account of application of income, would amount to double deduction which is legally not permissible in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India 199 ITR 443? ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel (supra) but also by the later decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Gem & Jewellery Exports Promotion Council order dated 13/2/2011 in Income Tax Appeal No.(LOD) No.113 of 2010. Copy of this order is filed at pages 14 to 16 of the paper book. Following question was raised by the Revenue before Hon'ble Bombay High Court for adjudication: "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was tight in directing the AO to set off the deficit of earlier years to the surplus of this year and consider such adjustment as application of income for charitable purpose? Hon'ble Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
