TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d/2017 - - - Dated:- 15-11-2019 - Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri G.C. Pipara, A.R. For the Revenue : Shri Kishan Vyas, CIT-D.R. ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This revenue s appeal for A.Y. 2014-15, arises from order of the CIT(A)-9, Ahmedabad dated 29-08-2017, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short the Act . 2. The revenue has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in neglecting the findings of A.O. regarding applicability of section 13(1)(c)(ii). 2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in deleting the amount of depreciation of ₹ 2,99,77,044/- which amount to double deduction as 100% of deduction was allowed to the assessee as application of income. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of development fund of ₹ 33,46, 000/- 4) Whether on the facts and circumst ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entitled for deduction by cost of investments in fixed assets and also entitled to deprecation on such assets. However, the assessing officer was not agreed with the submission of the assessee and disallowed the claim of deprecation of ₹ 2,99,77,044/- and added to the total income of the assessee. During the course of assessment, the assessing officer has also noticed that assessee has received development fund and same was claimed as exempt u/s. 11(1)(d) of the act. The assessing officer show caused the assessee to explain why not the said development fund should be treated as revenue receipt. The assessee explained that said development fund was required to be spent as and when required for the development purpose of the children s education in the school and the said fund is collected and utilized for the purpose of development of activities in the school for the children such as swimming pool, cricket ground and other related educational activities. It is further submitted that the said fund was shown as liability in balance sheet since the said fund was separate fund collected from the students for which the school was liable to spend the same at any mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imed by the assessee u/s. 11 and 12 of the income tax act is not available to the assessee. 6. Aggrieved assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee. 7. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the ld. counsel has brought to our notice that the identical issue on similar facts has been adjudicated by the ITAT vide ITA No. 92/Ahd/2014 in the case of Dy. CIT vs. Bholaram Education Society dated 14-09-2017 and ACIT vs. Bholaram Education Society dated 29.03.2019 in ITA No. 3041/Ahd/2016. With the assistance of Ld. representatives, we have gone through the above referred order of the ITAT and noticed that the identical issue on similar facts has been adjudicated in favour of the assessee. The ld. departmental representative was fair enough not to contradict the aforesaid undisputed fact that issue has been decided in favour of the assessee. Relevant part of the decision of ITAT is reproduced as under:- 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that the tribunal in the own case of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... luntary contribution and accordingly treated the income of the assessee. 11. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to learned CIT (A) who has deleted the addition made by the AO. 12. Being aggrieved by the order of learned CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 13. The learned DR and the learned AR before us relied on the order of authorities below as favorable to them. 14. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that the tribunal in the own case of the assessee bearing ITA No. 92/AHD/2014 pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11 decided the issue against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee vide order dated 14-9-2017. The relevant extract of the order is extracted below. 8. The Revenue s fifth substantive ground seeks to revive Assessing Officer s action treating development fund amount of ₹ 32,69,000/- as assessee s taxable income. We notice herein as well that the Assessing Officer made the impugned addition in page 8 without dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o interfere in the finding of the learned CIT-A. Hence the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 15. The third issue raised by the Revenue is that learned CIT (A) erred in allowing the benefit of section 11 12 of the Act for the rent paid to the trustees. 15.1. The AO during the assessment proceedings found that the assessee has paid rent to the trustees in contravention to the provisions of section 13(1)(c)(ii) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO held that the assessee is not eligible for exemptions under section 11 and 12 of the Act. 16. The aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to learned CIT (A) who has deleted the addition made by the AO. 17. Being aggrieved by the order of learned CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 18. The learned DR and the learned AR before us relied on the order of authorities below as favorable to them. 19. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that the tribunal in the own case of the assessee bearing ITA No. 92/AHD/2014 pertaining to the assessment year 2010- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23. Being aggrieved by the order of learned CIT (A), the Revenue is in appeal before us. 24. The learned DR and the learned AR before us relied on the order of authorities below as favorable to them. 25. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that the tribunal in the own case of the assessee bearing ITA No. 92/AHD/2014 pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11 decided the issue against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee vide order dated 14-9-2017. The relevant extract of the order is extracted below. 12. The Revenue s seventh substantive ground pleads that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in considering assessee s investment in fixed assets amounting to ₹ 13,51,02,167/- as application of income as well as its deduction. There is no dispute about the assessee have incurred the impugned expenditure. The Assessing Officer was of the view that assessee s instant action amounted to claiming the very relief in both application as well as computation of income. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
