9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 955 - AT - Income TaxClaim of depreciation denied to assessee trust - Held that - We find that Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Institute of Banking Personal (2003 (7) TMI 52 - BOMBAY High Court) and CIT vs Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Mandal (1993 (11) TMI 17 - GUJARAT High Court ) decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Income of a charitable trust derived from building plant and machinery and furniture was liable to be computed in a normal commercial manner although the trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets In all such cases section 32 of the Income-tax Act providing for depreciation for computation of income derived from business or profession is not applicable However the income of the trust is required to be computed under section 11 on commercial principles after providing for allowance for normal depreciation and deduction thereof from gross income of the trust - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Allowance of depreciation on assets whose cost has been fully allowed as application of income under section 11 in past years. 2. Allowance of depreciation on assets received on transfer without incurring the cost of acquiring the assets. 3. Carry forward and set off of deficit from earlier years against the surplus of subsequent years for a charitable trust. Detailed Analysis: 1. Allowance of Depreciation on Fully Allowed Assets: The primary issue revolves around whether depreciation can be allowed on assets whose cost has already been fully allowed as an application of income under section 11 in previous years. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Institute of Banking Personal (264 ITR 110) (Bom.), which held that depreciation is allowable even if the cost of the assets has been fully allowed as application of income. The High Court noted that section 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provides for the computation of income of the trust from property held for charitable or religious purposes, and it allows for normal depreciation as a legitimate deduction in computing the real income of the assessee. This principle was upheld despite the Revenue's argument that such depreciation would result in double deduction. 2. Depreciation on Transferred Assets: The second issue pertains to whether depreciation can be allowed on assets received on transfer when the assessee has not incurred the cost of acquiring the assets. The Tribunal again referred to the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income-tax (Exemption) vs Framjee Cawasjee Institute (109 CTR 463), which clarified that depreciation is allowable on such assets. The Court held that the amount spent on acquiring the assets, treated as "application of income" in the year of acquisition, does not preclude the allowance of depreciation in subsequent years. This decision was affirmed by the Tribunal, indicating that depreciation on transferred assets is permissible. 3. Carry Forward and Set Off of Deficit: The third issue involves whether the excess expenditure of earlier years can be adjusted against the income of subsequent years and if such adjustment should be treated as an application of income for charitable purposes. The Tribunal referred to the Bombay High Court's decision which allowed the carry forward and set off of the deficit, stating that income derived from trust property must be computed on commercial principles. The Court held that if commercial principles are applied, then the adjustment of expenses incurred for charitable purposes in earlier years against the income of subsequent years should be regarded as application of income for charitable purposes in the subsequent year. This view was also supported by the Gujarat High Court in CIT vs Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (211 ITR 293). Conclusion: The Tribunal, respecting the judicial discipline, followed the decisions of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court and found no infirmity in the conclusion drawn by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, thereby allowing the claims of the assessee on all three issues. This order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of the ld. DR at the conclusion of the hearing on 13/06/2016.
|
