CIT, HISAR vs. MAHARAJA AGGARSAIN MEDICAL EDUCATION

ITA/750/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093718201006 January 2011Author: MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), New Delhi. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2005-06 and challenges the ITAT's decision regarding the allowability of depreciation on fixed assets for a charitable trust. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated. The procedural history involves the Revenue filing this appeal after the ITAT passed an order in favor of the assessee, Maharaja Aggarsain Medical Education & Scientific Research Society.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Court noted that the learned counsel for the appellant (Revenue) fairly stated that the matter was covered against the Revenue by an earlier order of the same Court dated 5.7.2010 in I.T.A. No.535 of 2009, Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal v. Market Committee, Pipli. Therefore, without delving into the merits of the substantial question of law raised, the appeal was disposed of based on the precedent. The specific finding of the ITAT on the allowability of depreciation for charitable trusts, which was the subject of the appeal, was not re-examined by the High Court due to the concession made by the Revenue's counsel. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT was justified in holding that depreciation on fixed assets is allowable in the case of a charitable trust/institution, particularly when income is computed as per Sections 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and capital expenditure is considered as application of income, leaving no assets/WDV for depreciation claim? Assessee's arguments: Not recorded. Revenue's arguments: The Revenue contended that depreciation on fixed assets is not allowable for a charitable trust when capital expenditure is treated as an application of income under Sections 11 to 13 of the Act, as this would lead to a double deduction. The Revenue relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Escorts Ltd. & another Vs. Union of India and others (199 ITR 43 (108) CTR 275) which held that no depreciation is allowed under Section 32 when deduction under Section 35(2)(iv) is allowed for capital expenditure on scientific research, emphasizing the principle against double deduction unless statutorily indicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 11,Section 12,Section 13,Section 32,Section 35(2)(iv)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 6.1.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax. -----Appellant. Vs. Maharaja Aggarsain Medical Education & Scientific Research Society. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in I.T.A. No.609/Del/09 for the assessment year 2005-06 proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned ITAT was justified in holding that the depreciation on fixed asset is allowable in the case of charitable trust/institution particularly when the income is computed as per provisions of sections 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as question of depreciation does not arise when capital expenditure is also considered as application of income of the assessee and there remains to a

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,347 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →