9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1019X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Tribunal remanding the matter for a fresh consideration by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is questioned by the assessee in this appeal. 3. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as under: Assessee is a Trust registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, carrying on with charitable activity of imparting education in Tattihalli, Mundgod, Uttara Kannada and also imparting education of tailoring to the needy poor people on charitable lines. The appellant assessee filed its returns of income for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13 on 29.6.2011 and 29.9.2012 declaring nil income. The returns were selected for scrutiny and assessments were completed by the Assessing Officer under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing used by assessee in relevant years for regular business activity of the assessee is not coming out from the orders of the authorities below. Therefore I set aside the order of CIT(A) for both years and restore the matter back to his file for fresh decision after examination and decision on this factual aspect and he should pass speaking and reasoned order as to whether assets in question were used by the assessee in relevant years for regular business activity of the assessee and thereafter decide this issue as per law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to both sides. 4. In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above." 6. As could be seen from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appeal grounds, the following substantial question of law are raised: "1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the use of asset is essential for claiming depreciation under section 32 read with section 13(6)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the facts and circumstance of the case. 2. Whether the Tribunal was erred in law in not holding that the use of asset is not a necessary ingredient for allowing depreciation after the introduction of concept of block of assets in the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the facts and circumstance of the case. 3. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in setting aside the Appellate order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), and reversed the proper finding of the commissioner of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otwithstanding non-usage of the asset itself by the assessee. In the present case before us, the assessee is a leasing company which leases out trucks that it purchases. Therefore, on a combined reading of Section 2(13) and Section 2(24) of the Act, the income derived from leasing of the trucks would be business income, or income derived in the course of business, and has been so assessed. Hence, it fulfills the aforesaid second requirement of Section 32 of the Act viz. that the asset must be used in the course of business." 10. We have given our anxious consideration to the rival contentions of the parties. 11. The Tribunal agreed with the contentions urged on behalf of the assessee that if no income is earned from the use of assets duri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
