Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM
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) for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. In this appeal, revenue is aggrieved for deleting disallowance of depreciation of fixed assets of Rs.24,81,427/-. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 4. Facts in brief are that the assessee is a public charitable trust constituted as per the trust deed dated 11th October,1971. It is registered under The Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. It is also registered' u/s. 12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The objects of the trust are as stated in Clause 3 of the Trust Deed which are summarized as under: a. Education M/s. Parmeshwaridevi Gordandas Garodia Charitable Trust b. Relief of poverty or distress c. Medical Relief d. Any other object which is recognized by law as charitable and / or for public.
During the course of assessment, AO disallowed assessee’s claim of depreciation.
By the impugned order CIT(A) deleted the same after observing as under:- “The Ground No. 1 & 2 of appeal are regarding the disallowance of depreciation claimed by the assessee amounting to Rs.24,81,427/-. The AO stated that the assessee trust has claimed depreciation of Rs.24,81 ,427/- on its fixed assets and the expenditure incurred on acquiring these assets has already been claimed as application of income. He further stated that allowing the depreciation of the same assets will amount to granting of double deduction. The AO relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Limited vs. Union Bank of India, 199 ITR (SC) and further stated that decision of Hon'ble High Court in CIT v. Institute of Banking Personn~1 Selection 264 ITR 110 (Ban) is not applicable.”
We have considered rival contentions and found that in assessee’s own case in the preceding assessment year, similar issue has been decided by the Tribunal by following the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking 264 ITR 110. We also found that against the order of Tribunal dated 06/12/2013, the department has approached to the Bombay High Court and Bombay High Court vide order dated 12/09/2014 declined substantial question of law.