Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “F”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI O.P. KANT
ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed these Appeals against the respective impugned Orders both dated 11.03.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-40, New Delhi relevant to assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, except the difference in figure, hence, the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience, by dealing with (AY 2010-11).
The following are the common grounds raised in both the appeals, except the difference in figure.
On the facts and in the circumstances
of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is erred in allowing the claim of depreciation of Rs. 41,87,941/- to the assessee ignoring the fact that the assessee had claimed the amount incurred on purchase of assets in earlier years as application of income, on which depreciation will be tantamount to double deduction.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is erred in allowing the claim of depreciation of Rs. 41,87,941/- to the assessee in view of the recent decision
of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case dated 18.3.2014.
3. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend any ground of appeal
raised above at the time of hearing.
The brief facts of the case are that Return of income in this case was filed on 22-09-2010 declaring Nil income.
The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 7.4.2011. The case of the assessee-society was selected for scrutiny under compulsory category through CASS as provided in Action Plan for FY 2011-12. Notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act dated 12.9.2011 was issued and served upon assessee. In response to the statutory notice, 3 the AR of the assessee attended the proceedings from time to time and filed the requisite details / information as called by the AO. The assessee-society was registered with the Registrar of Societies vide Registration No. S- 27839 dated 01.5.1995. As per MOA, the main aims and objects of the assessee society are to invest in Human Resource Development Programme and facilities that bring all around development of human beings, directly or indirectly especially in the areas of Education, Medical, Art & Cultural, Sports and Games and to do all such lawful things, either by itself or in conjunction with other Bodies with similar Objectives, as area incidental or conductive to the attainment of the above objects. The assessee-society registered u/s.12A(a) of the Act vide order dated 28.8.1995. The society was also granted exemption u/s. 80G of the Act, vide order dated 24.11.2008 for the period from 1.4.2008 to 31.3.2011. AO observed that the objects are charitable within the meaning of section 2(15) of the Act, the benefit of section 11 & 12 was allowed to the assessee and accordingly, the retuned income was accepted and assessed at Rupees NIL and deficit was not allowed to be carried forward vide order dated 05.03.2013. Against the aforesaid assessment order, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A)-40, New Delhi who vide his impugned order dated 11.03.2015 has allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
Ld. DR relied upon the Order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal.
In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor its authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to 5 the assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeal exparte qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the relevant records, especially the impugned order. We find that Ld. CIT(A) in his order has observed that assessee like charitable or religious institution and therefore by applying the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(Exemption) vs. Indraprastha Cancer Society in 348, 406, 463 and 464/2014 vide order dated 18.11.2014, has allowed the appeal of the assessee. We further note that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(Exemption) vs. Indraprastha Cancer Society (Supra) has held that assessee is eligible for depreciation in the case of charitable or religious institution also. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A), hence, we uphold the same and reject the ground no. 1 raised by the Revenue.
6.1 As regards ground no. 2 is concerned, we find this ground is wrong raised by the Revenue, because the decision cited therein i.e. DIT(E) vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust dated 18.3.2014 was not relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) in his order while allowing the appeal of the Assessee. Hence, this ground of appeal is rejected. 6 6.2 Following the consistent view as taken by us in Assessment Year 2010-11, as aforesaid, the identical grounds raised by the Revenue in respect of assessment year 2011-12 are also rejected.
In the result, both the Appeals filed by the Department stand dismissed.
Order pronounced on 21/06/2018.