ITO (E) I(1), MUMBAI vs. BOMBAY GOWRAKSHAK MANDALI, MUMBAI
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 issues regarding depreciation, set off of brought forward deficit, and dividend exemption were covered in favour of the assessee by previous decisions of the Tribunal and the jurisdictional High Court. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was upheld.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a trust, filed its return declaring Nil income. The Assessing Officer (AO) assessed a taxable income of Rs. 1,68,06,405/-. The CIT(A) allowed the claim of depreciation, setting off of brought forward deficit, and exemption of dividend.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was correct in allowing depreciation, set off of brought forward deficit, and exemption of dividend to the assessee 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.
- DIT (Exemption) v. Jasubhai Foundation45 citing374 ITR 315 · 2015 · HC
- Jamsetji Tata Trust v. Joint Director of Income-tax (Exemption) Range-II11 citing44 Taxmann.com 447 · 2014 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM
आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)- 1, Mumbai dated 18/10/2016 for A.Y.2012-13 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) of the IT Act.
In this appeal Revenue is aggrieved by the action of CIT(A) allowing claim of depreciation, setting off of the brought forward deficit of earlier years and allowing claim of exemption of dividend u/s.10(35) of the IT Act.
At the outset, learned AR placed on record the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case wherein ground raised by the Revenue was decided in favour of the assessee.
Bombay Gowrakshak Mandali 4. We have considered rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below.
Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered with DIT (E), Mumbai u/s, 12A dated 19.08.1975. The assessee filed its return of income on 28.09.2012 along with the Income & Expenditure Account, Balance Sheet and Audit Report in Form 10B declaring total income at Rs. Nil. However,, the A.O completed the assessment vide order dated 10.03.2015 u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 at taxable income of Rs. l,68,06,405/-.
By the impugned order CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of depreciation of Rs.4,13,619/- on fixed assets.
This issue is covered in favour of the assessee in its own case by the following decisions of the Mumbai Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal ["ITAT"] • in for the Assessment Year 2010-2011 • in ITA No. 5311/Mum/2012 for, the Assessment Year 2009-10 8. The contrary decisions referred to by the Assessing Officer in Ground No.2 of the appeal have been considered and held to be not applicable in a series of decisions cited by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1-Mumbai CIT(A).
CIT(A) also allowed setting off of brought forward deficit of earlier years and the deficit of earlier years to be carried forward for setting off in the subsequent years, after having observation at para 6.2.
Bombay Gowrakshak Mandali 10. We found that this issue is covered in favour of the "assessee in its own case by the following decisions of the Mumbai Bench of the ITAT:
• in for Assessment Year 2010-2011 • in ITA No. 5311/Mum/2012 for Assessment Year 2009-10
The CIT(A) has also allowed claim for the exemption of dividend u/s.10(35). We found that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of DIT (Exemption) v/s. Jasubhai Foundation reported in [2015] 374 ITR 315 and the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Jamsetji Tata Trust v/s. JDIT (Exemption) reported in [2014] 44 taxmann.com 447. Decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in the case of Seth Walchand Hirachand Memorial Trust vs. ITO in ITA No. 4852/M/2016.
Respectfully following the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case vis-à-vis decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court and other decisions referred above, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A). 13. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 27/11/2017 Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH ) (R.C.SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 27/11/2017 Karuna Sr.PS
More judgments on Section 10(35)
- Ramkrishna Bajaj Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle…ITA 66/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Shobha Harish Thawani, Mumbai vs DCIT - CC 8(4), MumbaiITA 5045/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Trc Engineering India Private Limited… vs ACIT, Circle-7(1)(1), BengaluruITA 1655/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed11 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Income Tax Officer 20(1)(1), Mumbai vs Aditya Birla Private Equity Sunrise Fund…ITA 4742/MUM/2026[2016]Status: Disposed26 Aug 2026
- Deven Chachra, New Delhi vs ACIT, Circle -22(2), New DelhiITA 2415/DEL/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed24 Aug 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026