9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (10) TMI 916X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rough the impugned orders of the Tribunal and that of the lower authorities. 3. The respondent is a Trust formed by the Government of Kerala in coordination with the KSRTC, a Government of Kerala undertaking (functioning under Government control). Since the respondent Trust is engaged in conducting Engineering college which claimed exemption under section 11 of the Act and the Trust was granted the benefit by issuing registration in it's favour under section 12 of the I.T.Act, in the returns filed for the assessment years 2001-2002 and 2003-2004, respondent-assessee claimed depreciation on buildings, furniture etc. However, the assessing officer rejected the claim holding that since the income received by the assessee is exempt unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the above provisions stated above. But neither the assessing authority nor the Department has considered the assessee's entitlement for exemption under the above provisions and so much so, we have to consider the case only with respect to the assessee's institution as a Charitable Trust enjoying exemption under section 11 of the I.T.Act. 5. There is nothing to indicate that charitable institutions enjoying income tax exemption should not carry on business or their activities should not lead to any surplus to qualify it for exemption. Any institution with Education, medical relief, relief of the poor or the advancement of any other object of general public utility as it's objects qualify it as a charitable institution for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led to depreciation for fixed assets used in the business, no matter, the activity was carried on with profit motive or not. In this view of the matter, we uphold the order of the Tribunal declaring eligibility of the respondent for depreciation benefits available under section 32 of the IT Act. 6. On the question raised pertaining to addition made in the assessment deleted by the first appellate authority and confirmed by the Tribunal, we find from the Tribunal's order that the amount representing fees receivable by the respondent from KSRTC was written off by the respondent. It is not known whether the fees shown as payable to the respondent by the KSRTC for earlier years is towards the fee for training the employees of the Corpor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
