9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri. Suresh Muthukrishnan, CA For The Revenue : Shri. Sunil Kumar Agarwala, JCIT ORDER PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : In this appeal filed by assessee it is aggrieved that claim for carry forward of deficit of ₹ 2,15,68,002/- resulting out of excess application over income was not allowed. 02. Facts apropos are that assessee, a trust registered u/s.12A of the Income tax Act, 1961 ( the Act in short), had filed its return for the impugned assessment year claiming exemption u/s.11 12 of the Act. In the computation of income filed, assessee claimed carry forward of a deficit of ₹ 2,15,68,002/-. AO denied the claim for a reason that computation of loss under vario ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in the case of Indian National Theatre Trust (supra), relied on by the CIT (A) for confirming the view taken by the AO was considered by this Tribunal in the case of M/s. St. Francis Sales Educational Charitable Trust (supra). Same view has been taken by us in the case of DCIT v. M/s. Rashtrothana Parishat [ITA Nos.896 897/Bang/2014, dt.14.08.2015]. In para 9 of the latter order it was held as under : 09.Coming to the aspect of eligibility for carry forward of such deficit, coordinate bench of this Tribunal in the case of Rajarajeshwari Devasthana Trust v. ITO (Ex), in ITA No.116/Bang/2015, dt.11.06.2015, had considered this issue. It was held at para 7 of the order as under: 07. In so far as the issue relating to carry ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n fact to enable the officer to ascertain the actual surplus of the application which was required to be set off against the surplus against the Assessment Year 2006-07. For Assessment Years 2004-05 and 2005-06 in the returns itself the claim was made and the excess surplus was shown. For this assessment year the assessment has been completed accordingly accepting the return though in the intimation, the assessed income has shown as nil. The assessee's counsel without prejudice to the claim of the assessee, submitted that the excess application as claimed for the earlier years up to 2004-05 cumulatively was to be considered for set off against the surplus for the Assessment Year 2006-07. The counsel for the assessee submitted surplus fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see's favour following the above decision of the Bombay High Court. The Hon'ble Madras High Court decision reported in Govindu Naicker Estate (supra) also supports the case of the assessee he submitted. The assessee is enjoying exemption u/s.10(23C)(vi). Thus no income for the relevant assessment year is liable to be taxed as exemption continues to be in operation for the relevant assessment years. Hence the learned counsel for the assessee submitted the appeal by the revenue is to be dismissed. 13. Considering the rival submissions we are of the view that all the appeals preferred by the revenue is to be allowed. The assessee is relying on the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking (supra) where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
