COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S P.PERICHI GOUNDER MEMORI

PDF · subscribers
TCA/419/2015HC Madras27 August 2019Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice T. S. SIVAGNANAM4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial question of law framed in the appeal has been answered against the Revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation reported in [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC). Following this precedent, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The substantial question of law was answered against the Revenue. No costs were awarded. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai, filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against an order dated 12.12.2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Bench 'A', Chennai. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2010-11 and challenges the ITAT's decision regarding the assessee, M/s. P. Perichi Gounder Memorial Charitable Trust. The substantial question of law admitted for consideration by the High Court concerns the assessee's entitlement to claim depreciation on assets whose cost was previously treated as an application of income under Section 11 of the Act. The respondent assessee did not appear before the High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation of assets even though the cost of purchase of asset was already treated as application of income under Section 11? (Question of law) Assessee's Contention: Not recorded as the assessee did not appear. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that depreciation cannot be claimed on assets where the cost has already been treated as an application of income under Section 11. The Revenue relied on the substantial question of law framed by the High Court. The Revenue's counsel fairly submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation reported in [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC) has answered this question against the Revenue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 11

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.No.419 of 2015 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal No.419 of 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai.

.. Appellant -vs- M/s.P.Perichi Gounder Memorial, Charitable Trust, No.545, BKR Nagar, Coimbatore - 641 018. .. Respondent Appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 12.12.2014, on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'A', Chennai in I.T.A.No.2220/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. For Appellant : Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, Senior Standing Counsel For Respondent : No appearance ****** JUDGMENT (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) The appeal filed by the appellant/Revenue under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is directed against the order dated 12.12.2014, on the 1/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.419 of 2015 file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'A', Chennai in I.T.A.No.2220/Mds/2014 for the assessment year 2010-11. 2.The appeal was admitted, on 30.06.2015, on the following substantial question of law:- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to claim depreciation of assets even though the cost of purchase of asset was already treated as application of income under Section 11?" 3.Heard Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant/Revenue. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue fairly submits that the substantial question of law, which has been framed in this appeal, hasbeen answered against the Revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation reported in [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC). 2/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.419 of 2015 5.Following the same, the appeal stands dismissed and the substantial question of law is answered against the Revenue. No costs. (T.S.S., J.) (V.B.S., J.) 27.08.2019 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order cse To 1.M/s.P.Perichi Gounder Memorial, Charitable Trust, No.545, BKR Nagar, Coimbatore - 641 018. 2.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'A', Chennai. 3/4 http://www.judis.nic.in T.C.A.No.419 of 2015 T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J. and V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J. cse T.C.A.No.419 of 2015 27.08.2019 4/4 http://www.judis.nic.in

More judgments on Section 11

All 7,190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →