9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Rao, JM And Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM Assessee by : Md. Iqbal (Adv.) Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT) ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. These are three miscellaneous applications by the Revenue seeking recalling of order dated 30.10.2015 of this Tribunal. The Revenue has stated in these miscellaneous applications that while deciding the issue of allowable of claim of depreciation the Tribunal has not considered the amendment in Section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Ld. DR has supported the miscellaneous application and contended that the amendment in section 11 (6) is clarificatory in nature and applicable respectively and therefore, the claim of depreciation is not allowable. 3. On the other hand, ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used for business purposes. Income of a charitable trust like the present assessee derived from the depreciable heads is also liable to be computed on commercial basis, however, while doing so it is to be kept in mind that ultimately assessee is a charitable institution and its income for tax purposes is required to be determined by taking into consideration provisions of Section 11 of the Act of 1961 after extending normal depreciation and deductions for its gross income. In computing the income of a charitable instutition/trust depreciation of assets owned by such institution is a necessary deduction on commercial principles, hence, the amount of depreciation has to be deducted to arrive at the income available. 6. In view of the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the ITAT so as to call for any interference of this Court. In our view, no substantial question of law arises out of the order passed by the ITAT. Consequently, the appeal, being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed in limine. No order as to costs. 18. He contended that the view taken by the Tribunal is on consideration of facts and it is not a question of law. 19. he has relied upon the judgment of this court in Murari Lal Khandelwal vs. CIT (2003) 263 ITR 642 wherein it has been held as under:- 4. Learned counsel for the assessee Mr. Jhanwar submits that the amount of salary claimed on account of payment to the sons i.e. Anoop and Alok was reasonable, as both are looking after the business and assessee has got paraly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing Sec. 13 definition and explanation and substantial controlled or substantial transferred are not in their name. It may be private institution which is a creation of statue having controlled by the same trustee and will not indirectly covered u/s 13 merely because the trustees of the beneficiaries of the trust or any persons controlling the trust which is part of another institution. The object is to see where even transfer for educational purpose or not that has been done. In that view of the matter, the contention that the university will be covered u/s 13, in our considered opinion merely because same trustees or the directors or the persons are there, Sec. 13 except with the explanation is required to be considered and the Tribunal h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
