THE DCIT,(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1,, AHMEDABAD vs. INSTITUTE FOR PLASMA RESEARCH SPCOETY,, GANDHINAGAR

PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY – JUDICIAL MEMBER:

The instant appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 01.11.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 9, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 10.10.2016 ITA No.113/Ahd/2018 and CO No.25/Ahd/2019 Asst.Year – 2014-15 passed by the ITO (Exemption), Ward-2, Ahmedabad under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15. Since both the appeals relate to the same assessee these appeals are taken together and are being disposed of by a common order.

ITA No.113/Ahd/2018 for A.Y. 2014-15 :

appearing for the assessee has been taken care of and ultimately while allowing the claim of the assessee the Ld. CIT(A) observed as follows:-

“4.3 Further, the A.O has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. vs. Union of India (1993) 199 ITR 43 (SC) while disallowing the depreciation of capital assets held by charitable trust. The aspect was also elaborated by Hon’ble ITAT “C” Bench, Ahmedabad in appeal No. 1322/Ahd/2011 in the case of Sardar Patel Institute of Public Administration for Asst. Year: 2008-09. The Hon’ble ITAT vide para-4 has observed as under:- “Before us Ld. CIT-DR has supported the assessment order and made submission that the view of the Assessing Officer was correct. On the contrary, that the view of the assessee argued that the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. (supra) is not applicable in the present case. The AR further argued that in the identical facts and circumstances of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has distinguished the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in favour of the assessee.

We have considered facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by the respective Representatives of the parties. The Assessing Officer has disallowed the claim following the judgment passed by the Hon’ble High Court Punjab and Haryana has distinguished the judgment of the Hon’ble 21(P&H) in view of the fact that the issue has already been settled by the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana respectfully following the ratio laid therein we had o infirmity into the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the present appeal stands dismissed. We find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). In view of the above, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.”

Since the issue has already been decided up to the highest level being the Apex Court in favour of the assessee as discussed above, we do not find any ambiguity in the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) so as to warrant interference and hence the order passed in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

CO No.25/Ahd/2019 (in ITA No.113/Ahd/2018) for A.Y. 2014-15 :

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"या"पत ""त //// उप सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.