Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (12) TMI 529

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of convenience. 2. Effective grounds of the Revenue, which are common in these appeals, as taken from ITA No.464/Hyd/2012 for assessment year 2005- 06, read as follows- "1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in appreciating the fact that obtaining approval of the prescribed authority is not mandatory as per the plain meaning of the provisions of 10(23C)(vi) of the I.T. Act and it does not call for any interpretation. 2. Whether the CIT(A) erred in appreciating the fact that when gross receipts exceed Rs.1 crore, approval u/s. 10(23C)(vi) is mandatory and assessee is not entitled for exemption u/s. 11 of the I.T. Act.   3. Whether the CIT(A) erred in appreciating the fact that section 10(23C) as such is not a replacement of Sec.10(22) and (2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l for the assessee, at the outset, mentioned that this issue is covered by series of decisions of this Tribunal, wherein similar grounds of the Revenue were considered and the matter was adjudicated, as in the case of Dy. Director of Incometax( Exemption) Hyderabad, V/s. Exhibition Society, Hyderabad for the assessment year 2006-07 vide order dated 22th March, 2012 in ITA No.1195/Hyd/2009, wherein the Tribunal has set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the file of the assessing officer, for verification, with the following observations- "5. We however, find that the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in Director of Income-tax(Exemption) V/s. Vasavi Academy of Education in ITA No.1449/Hyd/2008, vide order dated 4.2.2010, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ile of the assessing officer, with a direction to verify the aspect of donation, capitation fee etc., if any collected by the assessee, and further direct that if it is found that besides fulfilling other prerequisites for exemption under S.11, the assessee has not charged any money by whatever name it is called, i.e. donation, building fund, auditorium fee etc, over and above the prescribed fee for the admission of students, the assessee would be entitled for exemption under S.11, even though the notification under S.10(23C)(vi) of the Act have not been received by it. We direct accordingly. 7. The next issue involved in these appeals relates to the addition made on account of depreciation claimed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the case of Dy. CIT V/s. Adi Sankara Trust (46 SOT 230) that where an assessee trust is claiming depreciation on assets where cost of the relevant assets stood claimed as an application of income for a preceding and/or the current year under S.11(1), its claim under S.32(1)is eligible only in respect of business assets and where entire cost of the asset stands allowed by way of application of income under S.11(1), the depreciation claimed by the assessee under S.32(1) is not allowable as the trust is not undertaking any business activity. In view of the above, the Assessing Officer is directed to verify in respect of each asset on which depreciation claimed, whether the value of such asset was in fact allowed under S.11, and if it was so .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... basis deserve to be deleted.   11, Learned Departmental Representative, per contra, supported the order of the assessing officer. 12. We heard the parties and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that impugned additions on account of unrecorded capitation fees collected from the students admitted under the management quota, are made in the case of the assessee-society for these years only on protective basis, substantive additions having been made in the hands of the trustees. In view of the submission of the learned counsel of the assessee, that those substantive additions have reached finality, which has not been controverted by the Learned Departmental Representative, the impugned protective additions .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates