9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 1142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri D Karunkara Rao, AM Appellant by : Shri A C Tejpal Respondent by : Shri Dilip J Thakkar ORDER Per I P Bansal, Judicial Member : This appeal has been filed by the revenue. It is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) dated 23.10.2012 for A.Y. 2008-09. The grounds of appeal raised read as under:- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the claim of depreciation amounting to ₹ 16,15,0021- relying on the decision of the Hon 'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Services reported in 264 ITR 110 (Born) ignoring the ratio of judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the claim of the assessee for carry forward of the said deficit, ignoring the fact that there was no express provision in the I T Act, 1961 permitting allowance of such claim. 2. The assessee is a charitable trust, whose income is exempt u/s. 11 of the Act. The AO did not grant the benefit of depreciation to the assessee on the ground that the same will tantamount to double deduction. The order of the AO has been reversed by the learned CIT(A). The department is agitating the decision of the CIT(A) on the ground that the learned CIT(A) has wrongly followed the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Services (supra) b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 110 (Born). Finding force in such claim of the assessee Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of ₹ 3,75,52,814/- on account of depreciation. The department is aggrieved, hence, has filed Ground No.1 to 3 to agitate such decision of Ld. CIT(A). 3. As it can be seen from the grounds raised by the Revenue, the deletion is mainly agitated on the basis of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. Vs. Union of India, 199 ITR 43(SC). During the course of hearing Ld. AR drew our attention towards latest decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Director of income Tax (Exemption), Mumbai vs. GICR Charities, (2013) 32 taxmann.com 208 (Bombay). Copy of this decision is placed at pages 4 to 5 of the pape ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 3,92,18,813/- should be considered in the light of decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel (supra) and allowed the capital expenditure to the extent of surplus and balance be allowed to carry forward. However, Ld. CIT(A) has also held that the deficit in each year should be worked out without considering the accumulation of 25%/15%. Against such direction of Ld. CIT(A) the Revenue is aggrieved and, hence, has filed aforementioned grounds. 6. This issue was stated to be covered not only by the aforementioned decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel (supra) but also by the later decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
