TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 1321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT v. Rajasthan Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona [ 2017 (12) TMI 1067 - SUPREME COURT] as decided that the amendment made as prospective in nature. Respectfully following the above judgment, accordingly we allow ground No. 1 of the assessee. Corpus fund - as per the assessee, it is towards building corpus fund and not part of the total income, whereas the authorities below considered it as a general receipt of the assessee trust. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) and substantiate its case, therefore we remit this issue to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision as per law. Loss on sale of asset - Lower authorities have held that the assessee has not incurred any actual expenditure, therefore, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n : The Respondent has erred in disallowing the claim of Depreciation at Rs. 31,97,283/- 2. Building of Corpus Fund : The Respondent has erred in treating Rs. 1,05,92,266/- as general receipt and not as building corpus fund. 3. Loss on Sale of Assets : The Respondent has erred in disallowing claim of loss of sale of assets to the tune of Rs. 52,413/- as no actual expenditure incurred. 4. Refund of Caution Fees : The Respondent has erred in treating a sum of Rs. 58,000/- refund of caution deposit to the students, rejecting the claim of application of funds in the absence of proper proof of expenditure. 2. During the course of hearing none was present on behalf of the assessee, therefore, the case was heard qua the assessee. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Rs. 1,05,92,266 was treated as general receipts. 5. He further observed that the assessee has claimed loss on sale of assets of Rs. 52,413/- which was not allowed by the AO. He further noticed that the assessee has refunded as caution money to students of Rs. 58,000/-, In this regard the AR submitted that the this amount was collected from the students at the time of admission and refunded when they leave the institution. The details were called for but in absence of proof of payments/expenditure the same was not allowed as application of fund of the trust. Accordingly, the AO completed the assessment and computed the income as under:- 6. Aggrieved from the above order, assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on, Poona, [2018] 89 taxmann.com 127 (SC). The Hon ble Apex Court has decided that the amendment made as prospective in nature. Respectfully following the above judgment, accordingly we allow ground No. 1 of the assessee. 10. In respect of ground No. 2 relating to Corpus fund of Rs. 1,05,92,266/-, as per the assessee, it is towards building corpus fund and not part of the total income, whereas the authorities below considered it as a general receipt of the assessee trust. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) and substantiate its case, therefore we remit this issue to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision as per law. 11. Ground No. 3 is regarding loss on sale of asset at Rs. 52,413/-. The lower authorities have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
