2010 (9) TMI 205 - HC - Income Tax

Depreciation on fixed asset - registered as a Trust under the Act. While assessing the application of its income under Section 11, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of depreciation and contribution made to the Marketing Board - Held that - question covered against the revenue by the judgment of this Court dated 5.7.2010 in ITA No. 535 of 2009 (The Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal v. Market Committee, Pipli) - Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Allowability of depreciation on fixed assets for a charitable trust/institution under Sections 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Allowability of expenditure contributed under statutory obligation by a statutory body registered as a Trust under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Allowability of depreciation on fixed assets for a charitable trust/institution under Sections 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The appeal was filed by the revenue under Section 206A of the Income Tax Act against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal had allowed the claim of depreciation made by the assessee, a statutory body under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961, registered as a Trust. The Assessing Officer had disallowed the claim of depreciation, but the CIT (A) upheld the plea of the assessee for deduction of depreciation, a view affirmed by the Tribunal. The High Court noted that the issue of allowing depreciation on fixed assets for charitable trusts/institutions was previously addressed in judgments dated 5.7.2010 in other cases. The Court found that the questions raised in this appeal were already decided against the revenue in those previous judgments. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal on this issue.

Issue 2: Allowability of expenditure contributed under statutory obligation by a statutory body under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961:
The second issue pertained to the allowability of expenditure amounting to Rs. 19,49,182 claimed to have been contributed to the HSAM Board under statutory obligation by virtue of section 27 of the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer had disallowed this expenditure, but the Tribunal allowed it. The High Court pointed out that this issue was also previously addressed in a judgment dated 5.7.2010 in another case. The Court noted that the question raised in this appeal was already decided against the revenue in that previous judgment. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal on this issue as well.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the revenue's appeal on both issues, as the questions raised had already been decided against the revenue in previous judgments. The Court upheld the decisions of the Tribunal in allowing the depreciation claim on fixed assets and the expenditure contributed under statutory obligation by the statutory body registered as a Trust under the Punjab Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1961.