9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Revenue against order dated 28.09.2016 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-36, New Delhi {CIT(A)} for Assessment Year 2011-12. The grounds of appeal are as under: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law fact by ignoring that the receipts are on account of franchisee fee and the same are in the nature of business income within the meaning of provisions of sub-section 4A of section 11 of the Act. The assessee failed to maintain separate books of accounts as per sub section 12A of section 2 of the I.T. Act. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in allowing the claim of carry forward of losses disregarding the fact that set-off and carry forward of losses are dealt with by the provisions of section 70 to 74 of the Income Tax Act. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law fact that allowing depreciation of fixed assets is tantamount double deduction as the expenditure on fixed assets is already allowed. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing. (B) A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort), copies of the following orders were filed from assessee s side: I. ITAT order dated 20/04/2005 for AY 2001-02 in the case of The Delhi Public School Society v. DCIT(E) ITA No. 4571/D/2004. II. ITAT order dated 23/05/2019 for AY 2012-13 in the case of DCIT(E) v. The Delhi Public School Society ITA No. 4887/D/2016. III. Director of Income tax (E) v. Delhi Public School Society High Court of Delhi 92 taxmann.com 132 IV. Director of Income tax (E) v. Delhi Public School Society Supreme Court of India 100 taxmann.com 80. V. Commissioner of Income tax III v. Rajasthan Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona Supreme Court of India 89 taxmann.com 127 VI. Director of Income tax v. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust High Court of Delhi 197 taxman 170 (B.1) At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative ( AR , for short) of the assessee submitted that all the disputed issues are covered in favour of the assessee by the aforesaid judicial precedents. The Ld. AR of the assessee further submitted that, in identical facts, in assessee s own case, the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi has already taken a view, on the disputed issues, in favou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he impugned issues raised in this appeal are squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the Co-ordinate bench in assessee's own case in 6627/Del/2015 for A.Y. 2010-11 vide order dated 29th November, 2017. 3. The ld. DR, other than supporting the findings of the Assessing Officer, could not bring any distinguishing decision in favour of the Revenue 4. After considering the impugned orders and the issues raised in the present appeal, we find that similar issues were involved in the earlier years and were considered by the co-ordinate bench. The relevant observation reads as under: Ground No. 1 4. This ground has been raised by revenue against the addition that has been deleted in respect of franchisee fees received by assessee from different satellite schools which are running under the name and logo of assessee, having different management than assessee society. 4.1 It is seen from various orders placed in the paper book for the various assessment years in assessee s own case passed by this Tribunal that this issue now stands settled in favour of assessee and against revenue. It is also observed that Ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come of the assessee should be computed on commercial principles and in doing so whether depreciation on fixed assets utilized for the charitable purposes should be allowed. On this issue, there seems to be a consensus of judicial thinking. Having regard, to the consensus of judicial opinion, we are not inclined to admit the appeal and frame any substantial question of law. There does not appear to be any contrary view plausible on the question raised before us and at any rate no judgement taking a contrary view has been brought to our notice. 7. Thus, respectfully, following the same, ground no.2 is dismissed. 8. In grounds no.3 4 in ITA No.6627/Del/2015 (supra), the relevant findings given qua grounds no.4 5 of that appeal at paragraph 6.2 read as under: 6.2.1 Ld. AR a the outset submitted that the issue stands covered by this Tribunal in ITA No. 4081/Del/2012 for assessment year 2009-10. This Tribunal dealt with this issue as under: 16. We have heard the rival contentions in light of the material 'produced and precedent relied upon. Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ciation would be allowed on assets so purchased. (B.2.2) In the case of DIT vs. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust [2011] 197 Taxman 170 (Delhi), it was held by Hon ble Delhi High Court that a trust can be allowed to carry forward deficit of current year and to set off same against income of subsequent years. It was further held by Hon ble Delhi High court in this case that adjustment of deficit of current year against income of subsequent year would amount to application of income of trust for charitable purposes in subsequent year within meaning of section 11(1)(a). (C) We have heard both sides. We have perused the materials available on record. We have also considered the judicial precedents brought to our notice. At the time of hearing before us, both sides have agreed that the issues in dispute are covered in favour of the assessee by the aforesaid judicial precedents mentioned in foregoing paragraphs (B) and sub paragraphs (B.1), (B.1.1), (B.1.2), (B.2), (B.2.1) and (B.2.2). The first ground of appeal is dismissed accordingly and the issue is decided in favour of the assessee, respectfully following the precedents referred to in the foregoing paragraphs (B.1.1), (B.1.2), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
