2017 (2) TMI 1245 - AT - Income Tax

Exemption u/s 11 - hostel surplus fee receipts treating it as business income in the hands of appellant u/s 11(4)/11(4A) - disallowance of depreciation - Held that - As perused the records especially the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and the order of the Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Indraprastha Cancer Society 2014 (11) TMI 733 - DELHI HIGH COURT wherein held that where a charitable institution, which has purchased capital assets and treated amount spent on purchase of capital asset as application of income, is entitled to claim depreciation on same capital asset utilized for business.- Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Addition of hostel surplus fee receipts as business income
2. Disallowance of depreciation claimed by the assessee

Analysis:

Issue 1: Addition of Hostel Surplus Fee Receipts as Business Income
The appellant contested the addition of ?26,50,796 on account of hostel surplus fee receipts, arguing that it was incorrectly treated as business income under sections 11(4)/11(4A) by the lower authorities. The appellant claimed that the authorities failed to observe the principles of natural justice and recorded incorrect facts and findings. The appellant also sought to modify, amend, or delete the grounds of appeal. The Tribunal noted that the appellant is a charitable society/trust registered under the Society Registration Act, 1860, and had been granted approval under sections 12AA and 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer (AO) had made various disallowances, additions, and completed the assessment at a taxable income of ?26,50,796. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

Issue 2: Disallowance of Depreciation
The appellant challenged the disallowance of ?4,34,99,716 on account of depreciation claimed, contending that the lower authorities did not properly appreciate the law on the issue and the arguments presented by the appellant. The appellant argued that the view favoring the assessee should prevail in case of differing opinions. The appellant cited a decision of the Hon'ble High Court related to the application of income for purchase of capital assets and the entitlement to claim depreciation on the same assets used for business purposes. The Tribunal, after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, concluded that the issue in dispute was similar and covered by the precedent. Consequently, the additions in dispute were deleted, and the issues were allowed in favor of the assessee.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, deleting the additions in dispute based on the precedents and arguments presented during the proceedings.