9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 1434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd also the certificate issued by Charity Commissioner. From the record of the assessee, it was found by the AO that the assessee has claimed depreciation through application within the meaning of section 11(1)(a) of the Act for availing exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The stand of the ld. DR as well as the conclusion drawn by the AO is that the assessee has claimed double deduction as the capital expenditure incurred on the assets has already been allowed as application of income. On appeal, before the CIT (Appeals), reliance was placed upon the decision from Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs Institute of Banking Personnel [ 2003 (7) TMI 52 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] - AO was directed to allow claim of depreciation to the assessee. The R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r by advancing his arguments which are identical to the ground raised. On the other hand, Shri Rahul R. Sarda, ld. counsel for the assessee, defended the conclusion arrived at in the impugned order by claiming that the issue is covered by the decision of the Tribunal dated 16th June, 2015 (ITA No.5842/Mum/2011) in the case of ITO vs Kabibai Hansraj Morarji Charity Trust. This factual matrix was not controverted by the ld. DR. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above submissions, we are reproducing hereunder the relevant portion from the order of the Tribunal for ready reference:- Challenging the order dt.8.5.2011 of CIT(A)-I, Mumbai, the Assessing Officer(AO), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... necessary. 2. During the course of hearing before us, Representatives of both the sides agreed that in the earlier years identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal. We find that the Hon ble Bombay High Court had also decided the issue in favour of the assessee for the assessment year 2007-08. We will like to reproduce the order of the Tribunal for the AY 2009- 10( ITA No.5312/Mum/2012 dt.12.3.15) 2. At the outset it may be noticed that learned CIT(A) followed the decision , of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2003-04 in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation and does not amount to double deduction. Para 3.3 in this regard reads as under :- 3.3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leading to addition made to the total income, conclusion drawn in the impugned order, material available on record, the conclusion drawn in the order of the Tribunal and the assertions made by the ld. respective counsel, if kept in juxtaposition and analyzed, we note that the assessee is engaged in carrying out charitable activities by making donation to the different organizations, which are carrying out charitable activities as defined in section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act). Before finalization of assessment, the assessee filed the necessary details, as called for by the Assessing Officer which were examined by him. The assessee filed copy of 12A certificate along with the certificate u/s 80G of the Act and als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
