2020 (5) TMI 404 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 11 12 - Councel submitted since the assessment for the year under consideration was pending before the Assessing Officer, hence, the assessee is entitled to deduction as per provisions of sections 11 12 - HELD THAT - Considering the submissions of the Ld. AR of the assessee, that where the registration has been granted to a Trust or Institution u/s 12AA of the Act, then the provisions of section 11 12 shall apply to the income of such an assessee from the property held under the trust of any preceding assessment year also subject to the condition of the assessment of such preceding year is pending before the AO on the date of such registration, the matter is restored to the file of the AO for verification of the facts and if the contention of the assessee is found true, the AO will allow the benefit of the relevant provisions to the assessee in accordance with law. - Appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Issues involved:
- Appeal against order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)
- Disallowance of depreciation
- Benefit of provisions of Section 11 and 12 after registration under Section 12AA
- Treatment of assessee as an 'AOP'
- Interpretation of proviso to section 12A(2) of the Income Tax Act

Analysis:
1. Appeal against CIT(A) order:
The appellant appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), challenging the disallowance of depreciation and the denial of benefits under Sections 11 and 12 after registration under Section 12AA. The appellant contended that the CIT(A) erred in not allowing the depreciation, which is mandatory under the Income Tax Act and as interpreted by the courts. Additionally, the appellant argued that the CIT(A) failed to grant the benefits of Sections 11 and 12 after registration under Section 12AA, which the appellant believed should be applicable retrospectively.

2. Disallowance of depreciation:
The appellant raised concerns about the disallowance of depreciation by both the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer. The appellant argued that depreciation is a mandatory allowance under the Income Tax Act and should have been permitted. The appellant emphasized that the courts have interpreted the provisions in favor of allowing depreciation, and thus, the disallowance was against the law and facts of the case.

3. Benefit of Sections 11 and 12 after registration under Section 12AA:
The appellant contended that the CIT(A) grossly erred in not granting the benefits of Sections 11 and 12 after the appellant's registration under Section 12AA. The appellant highlighted that the first proviso to section 12A(2) of the Income Tax Act allows for the application of Sections 11 and 12 to income from property held under trust of any preceding assessment year if the assessment proceedings are pending before the Assessing Officer at the time of registration. The appellant argued that since the assessment for the year under consideration was pending, the appellant should be entitled to deductions under Sections 11 and 12.

4. Treatment of assessee as an 'AOP':
The appellant contested the Assessing Officer's treatment of the assessee as an 'AOP' (Association of Persons). The appellant clarified that they had been granted registration under Section 12A for a subsequent assessment year, not the one under consideration. The appellant relied on the proviso to section 12A(2) to support their argument that the benefits of Sections 11 and 12 should apply to the income from the property held under trust for the preceding assessment year if the assessment proceedings were pending at the time of registration.

5. Interpretation of proviso to section 12A(2) of the Income Tax Act:
The Tribunal considered the submissions of the appellant and directed the matter to be sent back to the Assessing Officer for verification of facts. If the contentions of the appellant were found to be true, the Assessing Officer was instructed to allow the benefits of the relevant provisions to the appellant in accordance with the law. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, indicating a favorable outcome for the appellant based on the interpretation of the proviso to section 12A(2) of the Income Tax Act.

← Previous Next →