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

2014 (12) TMI 639

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the name of the assessee under the Indian Registration Act, depreciation cannot be disallowed - possession and user is of the assessee – in assessee’s own case as decided in Commissioner of Income Tax Jaipur-II Vs. M/s. Jawahar Kala Kendra [2014 (6) TMI 292 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] the finding of the Tribunal for allowing depreciation to the assessee is upheld - the claim of depreciation was allowable and as such it cannot be said that the claim made by the assessee was wrong or inadmissible since beginning - merely because the assessee did not challenge further, is no reason to come to the conclusion that assessee is to be visited with penalty – thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld and the assessee neither concealed income nor furnish .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... so been granted registration u/S 12A. Prior to the constitution of the assessee-society, Jawahar Kala Kendra was managed by the Government of Rajasthan. On its constitution as a society, all the assets and liabilities were transferred and incorporated in the books of the assessee-society. The Chairperson of the assessee-society is the Chief Minister of the State of Rajasthan and all other members of the governing body are persons of eminence. On the transfer of assets in its books of accounts, the assessee-society recorded the value of the land of Jawahar Kala Kendra at ₹ 42.62 crores and building at ₹ 9.05 crores in its books of accounts as on 01/08/2004. 3. The short controversy involved in the instant appeal is that the as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 271(1) (c) stands imposed on account of the depreciation which was disallowed by the ld. AO and upheld in further appeal before the appellate authority on ₹ 1,62,00,951/-. According to the AO the assessee concealed the particulars of income. The CIT(A) in appeal sustained the penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Act by observing that wrong/excessive and prima facie inadmissible claim of depreciation was made and since there was no ownership with the assessee, therefore, depreciation could not have been claimed by the assessee and thus he sustained penalty u/s 271(1)(c). 5. The assessee carried the matter in further appeal before the Tribunal who by the impugned order has deleted the penalty and allowed the relief as aforesaid by observi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... disallowed by the AO, thereafter, partly allowed by the CIT(A) and further not pressed by the assessee, but the fact remains that the assessee-society was constituted as an autonomous body by an order dt.11/08/2003 issued by the Governor of Rajasthan to preserve and promote art and culture of Rajasthan and to contribute to the social and cultural development of the people of the State. It is also an admitted fact that subsequent to the said order of the Governor of Rajasthan, the assessee-society came to be formed and was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1958 andthe Commissioner of Income Tax has also granted registration u/s 12A to the assessee-society. 9. It is also an admitted fact and which has not disputed by the Rev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nd from the date of order of the Governor and formation of society. 10. In view of what we have held in the assessee's own case for the assessment year 2007- 08, the claim of depreciation was allowable and as such it cannot be said that the claim made by the assessee was wrong or inadmissible since beginning. 11. Merely because the assessee did not challenge further, is no reason to come to the conclusion that assessee is to be visited with penalty. In so far as the assessee is concerned when all facts and details of assets were before AO than it cannot be said that assessee concealed particulars of income. 12. In our view, the Tribunal has decided the issue after appreciation of evidence on record and facts found on record th .....

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