DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, GHAZIABAD vs. FATEH CHAND CHARITABLE TRUST, MUZAFFARNAGAR
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the excess application of income in earlier years, representing excess expenditure over income, should be allowed to be adjusted against income in subsequent years. This was based on previous ITAT decisions in the assessee's own case and a Supreme Court ruling.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a charitable trust running an educational institute, filed its return declaring 'NIL' income. The trust had carried forward losses from earlier years, which the Assessing Officer did not allow to be set off against current year's income.
What were the issues?
Whether excess application of income (expenditure over income) in earlier years can be carried forward and set off against income in subsequent years for a charitable trust.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT(Exemption) v. Subros Education Society40 citing303 CTR 1 · 2018 · SC
- CIT v. Subros Educational Society36 citing96 Taxmann.com 652 · 2018 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI ]
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.
This appeal is filed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Ghaziabad, against the order passed by the office of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), MuzaffarNagar, dated 10.04.2018 for assessment year 2015-16.
The only ground of appeal
raised is that the ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in allowing claim of carry forward of losses to the appellant.
3. The brief facts of the case shows that assessee is a charitable trust running educational institute, filed its return of income on 29.09.2015 declaring ‘NIL’ income. The assessee is registered under Section 12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). Assessee is running Medical college, Nursing college and also running a hospital.
4. Assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act was passed on 18.12.2017 computing the income of the assessee at Rs. ‘NIL’. Page | 1
During the year the assessee has carried forward sum of Rs.117.53 crores from earlier years. The same was not allowed as a set off against the current year’s income of the assessee. Thus, assessee is aggrieved amongst others with this issue also.
Assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT (Appeals) stating that assessee has claimed brought forward losses of Rs.117.53 crores along with current loss of Rs.11.17 crores. This is excess of expenditure over income of the assessee for the previous year as well as the current year respectively. This detail was submitted by the assessee vide letter dated 30th September, 2015 and requested the Assessing Officer that same shall be allowed for carry forward to assessment year 2016-17. The ld. Assessing Officer did not allow such carry forward of losses. It was stated that the identical issue in the case of the assessee has been decided by the co-ordinate bench for assessment years 2006-07 and 2008-09 in and ITA. No. 290/Del/2012, which was allowed by the ITAT vide order dated 17.01.2014. The ld. CIT (Appeals), therefore, following the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of the appellant itself allowed carry forward and set off of the losses. Thus, the Revenue is aggrieved by the above order in this appeal. 7. The ld. CIT–DR vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer whereas the ld. AR relied upon the order of the CIT (Appeals) as well as the order of the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case for assessment years 2006-07 and 2008-09. 8. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. It is apparent that assessee has excess application of income in earlier years and has claimed that such excess application of earlier years should be allowed to be adjusted as application of income in subsequent years. This issue has been decided by the co-ordinate bench in assessee’s own case for assessment years 2006-07 and 2008-09 as stated above. This issue is also squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court Court in the case of DCIT (Exemption) New Delhi Vs. Subros Educational Society [2018] 96 taxmann.com 652 (SC)/[2018] 303 CTR 1 (SC) . In view of this, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals). Thus, we hold that the ld. CIT (Appeals)
has correctly directed the ld. Assessing Officer to allow the excess application of income being excess of expenditure over income of the previous year to be set off against the income of the current year. Thus, we dismiss the solitary ground of appeal. Accordingly, appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on : 29/09/2021.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Dy CIT (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs Saifee Burhani Upliftment Trust, MumbaiMumbai8 Nov 2021Dismissed
Also relies on CIT v. Subros Educational Society and 1 other authority
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, agreeing that the issue of carrying forward deficits for trusts is settled in favor of the assessee by Supreme Court and jurisdictional High Court decisions. The Tribunal dismissed...
- M/S.Madrasa-E-Quwathul Islam, Bengaluru vs Income-Tax Officer, Exemptions, Ward-2…Bangalore27 Jul 2023Remanded
Also relies on CIT v. Subros Educational Society and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the provisions of Section 80 do not apply to the carry forward and set-off of excess expenditure for a trust registered under Section 12A, as per the decision in Smt. Angoori Devi. However, the qua...
- Dy CIT, CC-7(1), Mumbai vs Dr. D.Y. Patil Sports Academy, MumbaiMumbai25 Nov 2021Dismissed
Also relies on CIT v. Subros Educational Society
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, agreeing that completed assessments do not abate and that proceedings under section 153A/153C cannot re-adjudicate issues unless fresh incriminating material is found. Therefore...
- DCIT (Exemption), Circle-1(1), Delhi vs Ishan Educational Research Society, DelhiDelhi9 Jan 2026Dismissed
Also relies on CIT v. Subros Educational Society
The CIT(A) was justified in holding that the assessee would be entitled to set off the earlier years' excess expenditure over income with the unutilized accumulated fund. The Tribunal agreed that due to the injunction or...
- ACIT(E), Lucknow vs M/S. Gangotri Human Resources & Development…Lucknow26 Jun 2024Dismissed
Also relies on CIT v. Subros Educational Society
The Tribunal held that the adjustment of expenses incurred in earlier years against income earned in subsequent years is permissible and should be regarded as application of income for charitable purposes. This view is s...
More judgments on Section 12AA
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2448/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Yashaswi Academy for Skills, Pune vs PCIT (Central), PuneITA 2447/PUN/2026[NA]Status: Disposed13 Oct 2026
- Sri Jawahar Education Trust, Chamarajanagar vs The Income Tax Officer Ward 1…ITA 1735/BANG/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed5 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(1), MohaliITA 636/CHANDI/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Punjab Urban Planning and Development… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 635/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed1 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026