2018 (2) TMI 2062

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act'). 2. The only issue in this appeal of Revenue is against the order of CIT(A) allowing carry forward of deficit and allowing set off against the income of subsequent years. For this Revenue has raised following three ground: -  "1. Whether on the facts of the case and in law the Ld. CITA) erred in allowing the carry forward of deficit of Rs. 40,50, 625/-.and allowing setoff against the income of the subsequent years. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of the assessee for carry forward of the said deficit, ignoring the fact that there was no express provision in the Act, 1961 permitting allow .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aised by the assessing officer have been dealt with Relying upon several case laws the appellant stated that deficit of the current year is required to be carried forward to the subsequent years. On perusal of the facts I find that the case of appellant is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon. Jurisdictional High Court has observed as under - ........"5. Now coming to question No. 3, the point which arises for consideration is: whether excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against the income of the subsequent year and whether such adjustment should be treated as application of income in subsequent year for charitabl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ar in which adjustment has been made having regard to the benevolent provisions contained in section 11 of the Act and that such adjustment will have to excluded from the income of the Trust under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. Our view is also supported by the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak fain Marda! (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Gui). Accordingly, we answer question No. 3 in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the department. ii. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon. High Court as above, the AO is directed to allow the carry forward of deficit in the succeeding years after due verification of facts." Aggrieved, now Revenue is in appeal before Tribunal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X