THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE- 1, BANGALORE vs. M/S. CHILDRENS EDUCATIONS SOCIETY, BANGALORE

All the three appeals filed by the revenue are directed against the orders passed by Ld CIT(A)-14, Bangalore and they relate to the assessment years 2014-15, 2016-17 and 2017-18. In all the three years, the revenue is assailing the decision of Ld CIT(A) in holding that the brought forward deficit is allowable as application of income u/s 11(1)(a) of the Act.

The assessee is a charitable trust registered u/s 12A of the Act. In the earlier years, the assessee had spent towards objects of the TO 699/Bang/2020 M/s. Childrens Education Society, Bangalore Page 2 of 6 trust, which were in excess of the income of that year. The assessing officer restricted the application of income to the extent of income available. The assessee sought carry forward of excess application and claimed that the same should be treated as application of income of the succeeding year. This claim did not find favour with the AO. Hence the assessee filed appeals before Ld CIT(A) in all the three years. The Ld CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee following the decision rendered by jurisdictional Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT (Exemptions) vs. Manipal Academy of higher Education (2019)(111 taxmann.com 243)(Kar). The revenue is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in all the three years.

We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has followed the decision rendered by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Manipal Academy of higher Education (supra). The relevant observations made by the jurisdictional High Court are extracted below:- “4. With regard to carrying forward of the losses for being set off against the income of the charitable trust for the present Assessment Year, the controversy is covered by the judgment in CIT (Exemptions) v. Ohio University Christ College [2018] 99 taxmann.com 377/408 ITR 352 (Kar.) in which this Court held as under: "16. In so far as the second question proposed by the Revenue, quoted above is concerned also, we find that the Tribunal's findings in this regard do not give rise to any substantial question of law. The said findings are quoted below for ready reference: "5.1 In the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had claimed application of income on account of expenditure of earlier years, which has been brought forward and set off in the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer disallowed the same on the ground that there is no express provision in the Act permitting the adjustment of earlier years brought forward expenses as application of income in the current year. According to the Assessing Officer, the application of income for charitable purposes must be during the relevant previous year. Since the income of the trust is exempt from tax, the TO 699/Bang/2020 M/s. Childrens Education Society, Bangalore

In our opinion, the matter is squarely covered by a decision of the cognate Bench of this Court in the case of CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne (1984) 16 Taxman 400 (Kar.) and (1984) 146 ITR 28, wherein the congnate Bench of this Court held that even the depreciation not involving any cash outflow is also in the character of expenditure and therefore such depreciation is nothing but decrease in the value of property through wear and tear, deterioration or obsolescence and the allowance made for that purpose in the books of accounts were deemed to be the application of funds for the purpose of Sec. 11 of the Act. The relevant portion of the said judgment is also quoted below for ready reference: "11. Mr. Srinivasan, however, urged that there are enough indications in Section 11 to exclude the mercantile system of accounting. The learned counsel relied upon sections 11(1)(a) and 11(4) in support of his contention. We do not think that there is anything in these sub-sections to support the contention of Mr. Srinivasan. Explanation to section 11(1)(a) on the contrary takes note of the income not received in a particular year. It lends support to the contention of the assessee that accounting need not only be on cash basis. Section 11(4) is not intended to explain how the accounts of the business undertaking should be maintained. It is intended only to bring to tax the excess income computed under the provisions of the Act in respect of business undertaking.

The depreciation if it is not allowed as necessary deduction for computing the income from the charitable institutions, then there is no way to preserve the corpus of the trust for deriving the income. The Board also appears to have understood the 'income' under section 11(1) in its commercial sense. The relevant portion of the Circular No.5XX-6 of 1968, dated 19-6-1968 (See Taxmann's Direct Taxes Circulars, Vol. 1, 1980 edn. P.85) reads: "Where the trust derives income from house property, interest on securities, capital gains, or other sources, the word 'income' should be understood in its commercial sense, i.e., book income, after adding back any appropriations or applications thereof towards the purposes of the trust or otherwise, and also after adding back any debits made for capital expenditure incurred for the purposes of the trust or otherwise. It should be noted, in this connection, that the amounts so added back will become chargeable to tax under section 11(3) to the extent that they represent outgoings for purposes other than those of the trust. The amounts spent or applied for the purposes of the trust from out of the income, TO 699/Bang/2020 M/s. Childrens Education Society, Bangalore Page 5 of 6 computed in the aforesaid manner, should not be less than 75 per cent of the latter, if the trust is to get the full benefit of the exemption under section 11(1)."

In CIT v. Trustee of H.E.H. The Nizam's Supplemental Religious Endowment Trust (1981) 127 ITR 378, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has accepted the accounts maintained in respect of the trust in conformity with the principles of accountancy for the purposes of determining the income derived from the property held in trust."

In view of the aforesaid findings of the learned Tribunal, allowing any expenditure of the earlier year which has been brought forward and set off in the year under consideration, is a justified finding of fact based on the correct interpretation of law and the judgment relied upon by it rendered by the cognate Bench. Therefore, the same does not call for interference. A similar view was also taken by the Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income- tax v. Institute of Banking (2003) 264 ITR 110, wherein the Division Bench of Bombay High Court held that the income derived from the trust property has also got to be computed on commercial principles and if commercial principles are applied, then adjustment of expenses incurred by the trust for charitable and religious purposes in the earlier years against the income earned by the trust in the subsequent year will have to be regarded as application of income of the trust for charitable and religious purposes in the subsequent year. The relevant portion of the said judgment of Bombay High Court is also quoted below for ready reference : "Normal depreciation can be considered as a legitimate deduction in computing the real income of the assessee on general principles or under section 11(1)(a) of the Inome-tax Act, 1961. Income of a charitable trust derived from building, plant and machinery and furniture is liable to be computed in a normal commercial manner although the trust may not be carrying on any business and the assets in respect whereof depreciation is claimed may not be business assets. In all such cases, section 32 of the Act providing for depreciation, for computation of income derived from business or profession is not applicable. However, the income of the trust is required to be computed under section 11 on commercial principles after providing for allowance for normal depreciation and deduction thereof from the gross income of the trust. Income derived from the trust property has also got to be computed on commercial principles and if commercial principles are applied, then adjustment of expenses incurred by the trust for charitable and religious purposes in the earlier years against the income earned by the trust in the subsequent year will have to be regarded as application of income of the trust for charitable and religious TO 699/Bang/2020 M/s. Childrens Education Society, Bangalore Page 6 of 6 purposes in the subsequent year in which adjustment had been made having regard to the benevolent provisions contained in section 11 of the Act and such adjustment will have to be excluded from the income of the trust under section 11(1)(a)." In view of the controversy covered by the above decisions of this Court, we are of the opinion that the substantial questions of law as suggested by the appellant do not now arise for our further consideration in the present appeals.

We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has followed binding decision rendered by jurisdictional Hon’ble Karnataka High Court and hence we do not find any reason to interfere with his order passed in all the three years under consideration.

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue are dismissed.