TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - - Dated:- 17-10-2019 - Dr. Vineet Kothari, Acting Chief Justice And Mr. Justice C. Saravanan For the Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanasamy Sr. Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Mr.Sriram for M/s.S.Sridhar JUDGMENT THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) The learned counsel at bar on both sides submit that the controversy in question is covered by a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona, reported in [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC) , in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the assessee Trust is entitled to depreciation on the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision of the ITAT thereby dismissing the appeals of the Income Tax Department. From the judgments of the High Courts, it can be discerned that the High Courts have primarily followed the judgment of the Bombay High Court in 'Commissioner of Income Tax v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS)' [(2003) 131 Taxman 386 (Bombay)]. In the said judgment, the contention of the Department predicated on double benefit was turned down in the following manner: '3. As stated above, the first question which requires consideration by this Court is: whether depreciation was allowable on the assets, the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under section 11 in the past years? In the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ject to section 34. In that matter also, a similar argument, as in the present case, was advanced on behalf of the revenue, namely, that depreciation can be allowed as deduction only under section 32 of the Income Tax Act and not under general principles. The Court rejected this argument. It was held that normal depreciation can be considered as a legitimate deduction in computing the real income of the assessee on general principles or under section 11(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act The Court rejected the argument on behalf of the revenue that section 32 of the Income Tax Act was the only section granting benefit of deduction on account of depreciation. It was held that income of a Charitable Trust derived form building, pl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jected. The Tribunal, however, took the view that when the ITO stated that full expenditure had been allowed in the year of acquisition of the assets, what he really meant was that the amount spent on acquiring those assets had been treated as 'application of income' of the Trust in the year in which the income was spent in acquiring those assets. This did not mean that in computing income from those assets in subsequent years, depreciation in respect of those assets cannot be taken into account. This view of the Tribunal has been confirmed by the Bombay High Court in the above judgment. Hence, Question No. 2 is covered by the decision of the Bombay High Court in the above Judgment. Consequently, Question No. 2 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... These appeals filed by the appellant/Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are directed against the common order dated 06.07.2012, passed by the Income T ax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.927, 929 928/Mds/2012 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The above appeals were admitted, on 25.11.2013, on the following substantial question of law: 'Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation on the assets, in the form of, application of income, even though the cost of purchase of asset was treated as application of income under Section 11 of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
