9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 passed by DCIT (Exemptions), Circle-2(1), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer or 'AO'). 2. The facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return on 23.09.2014. The assessee is an association of persons being a society registered under society registration act and is approved under section 12AA and 80G of the act. The assessee is engaged in running an educational institute under name of Samalkha group of Institution, Samalkha, Haryana. During under consideration the assessee has invested Rs.92,05,962 in acquisition of fixed assets and claimed the same application of funds while calculating the income. Further to arrive at the income on commercial basis has charged and cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... forward deficit from preceding years. 3. Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition by following relevant findings under in para 4.1.5; 4.2.2; 4.3.2. and which are reproduced as under :- "4.1.5 A bare reading of the provisions relating to income from property held for charitable purposes shows that depreciation per se was not allowed as a deduction in the case of charitable or religious institutions. This issue has been laid to rest by amendment to section 11 by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2014 which is effective from the assessment year 2015-16 and subsequent years. However, relying on the latest decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of DIT (Exemption) vs. Indraprastha Cancer Society (supra), the claim of depreciation of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it of carry forward of deficit has been allowed to the appellant and also relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the matter of DIT vs. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust (supra), Assessing Officer is directed to allow carry forward of the net deficit of the current year. This ground of appeal is allowed." 4. The revenue is in appeal raising following grounds :- 1. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing depreciation as already claimed by assessee as capital expenditure in earlier years. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee by ignoring the fact in the case of charitable or religious institutions, the assessee is not eligible for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing the claim of carry forward of losses disregarding the fact that set-off and earn forward of losses are dealt with by the provisions of Section 70 to 74 of the Income Tax Act. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in allowing the claim of carry forward of application beyond 85% by relying on the judgements of Hon‟ble Supreme Court. While the facts of these two cases viz. S.R.M.M. CT.M. TIRUPPANI TRUST V. The Commissioner of Income Tax (1998) 230 ITR 636 and Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax V. A.L.N. Rao Charitable Trust (1995) 2016 ITR 69 are different from the present case and cannot be applied in this case. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend any ground of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
