CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection

264 ITR 110High Court2003#181 most cited

What is CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection authority for?

Depreciation is allowable on assets for which the cost has been fully allowed as an application of income under Section 11 in previous years, when computing the income of a charitable trust. Charitable trusts are also entitled to carry forward their deficit.

398

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 372,576 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection · Section 11 · Section 11(1) · depreciation allowance for trusts · application of income · capital expenditure trusts · carry forward of deficit · charitable trust exemption · computing trust income

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(6)Section 12Section 13(8)

Issues it is cited on

section 11(1)(a)section 11(1)application of incomecapital expendituresection 12asection 11section 10section 12previous yearsection 13personsection 25

Judgments citing CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection

Pr.Commissioner of vs. M/S Sackhumvit Trust

ITA/394/2018HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 15Section 260Section 32Section 70

…r Vs. M/s Sackhumvit Trust 20/22 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 tr…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Green Wood High School

ITA/231/2018HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 32

…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 tr…

Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. Manipal Hotel & Restaurant

ITA/201/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260Section 32

…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 tr…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Medical Relief Society of South Kanara

ITA/537/2017HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 15Section 260Section 32

…t 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.537/2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & another Vs. M/s Medical Relief Society of South Kanara 19/21 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 tr…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Medical Relief

ITA/534/2017HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 32

…of Income Tax (Exemptions) & another Vs. M/s Medical Relief Society of South Kanara 19/21 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 tr…

Commissioner of Income vs. M/S Manipal Hotel and

ITA/13/2016HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 32

…ions) & another Vs. M/s Manipal Hotel and Restaurant Management College Trust 19/21 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 tr…

DCIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 120/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit (Exemption)1(1), Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai C-1, Aditya Birla Centre, Vs. A K Ahire Marg, Worli, Mumbai 400 030

For Appellant: Shri R Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Shri Ronak Doshi & Ms. Ayushi Modani
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12A

…the first appellate authority has allowed assessee’s claim of depreciation. Further, he found that the issue is directly covered in assessee’s favour by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (264 ITR 110) and Director of Income Tax (Exemption) vs. Shri Vile Parle Kelvani Mandal [2015] 59 taxmann.com 288. Accordingly, he allowed assessee’s claim of depreciation. Being aggrieved, the department is in appeal before us. 3. We have heard Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, learned DR appearing for the department and Shri Ronak Doshi the learned counsel appearin…

ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai vs. Rustom Irani Foundation Ideal Farm, Mumbai

Appeal stand dismissed

ITA 69/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.69/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Income Tax Officer (Exemptions)-2(2) Rustom Irani Foundation बनाम/ Room No.502, 5Th Floor Ideal Farm, West Of Railway Line Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Dahisar(W) Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 077 Mumbai-400 068 "थायीलेखासं./ Pan : Aaatr-2735-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Satish R. Mody, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari, Ld. DR
Section 11Section 32

…ITA No.69/Mum/2017 Rustom Irani Foundation Assessment Year-2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “डी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.69/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Income Tax Officer (Exemptions)-2(2) Rustom Irani Foundation बनाम/ Room No.502, 5th Floor Ideal Farm, West of Railway Line Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug Dahisar(W) Vs. Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 077 Mumbai-400 068 "थायीलेखासं./ PAN : AAATR-2735-D (अपीलाथ"/Appell…

Assistant Oint Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Pyc Hindu Gymkhana, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 187/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri "याियक सद"य के सम" D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.179/Pun/2015 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Pathak
Section 11Section 2(15)

…hat depreciation is allowable on capital assets whose cost is allowed as an application of income u/s.11 because, the income of the trust has to be calculated after allowing depreciation on the assets. a. CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (2003) 264 ITR 110 (Born) held that depreciation is allowable on the assets the cost of which has been fully allowed as application of income under Section 11 in past years. b. CIT v. Market Committee Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H) 3.4] Further the Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01.04.2015 inserted sub- section (6) to provide that depreciation shall not be allowed…

DCIT (E)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4104/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Jacinta Zimik Vashai, D.R
Section 11Section 32

…lready allowed as deduction as application of income fully and thus the same amounted to double deduction. The AO also noted that the assessee had claimed the depreciation as per the decision in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel and Selection 264 ITR 110 (Bombay) and finally after 3 ITA No.4104/M/2017 & Ors. M/s. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation discussing the issue in para 4.3.1 to 4.5.5 disallowed and added the same to the income of the assessee. 4. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee by observing and holding as under: “9.2 I have cons…

Commisisoner of Income Tax vs. Ohio University Christ College

ITA/312/2016HC Karnataka17 Jul 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 12ASection 260

…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 Date of Judgment: 17.07.2018 in ITA Nos.312 & 313 of 2016 Commissioner of Income-tax & another…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Samundra Institute of Maritime Studies Trust, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7018/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Sh.Shamim Yahya, Am & Hon’Ble Sh. Sandeep Gosain, Jm

For Appellant: Ms. ArjuGarodia, DRFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Thakur
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)

…Bench, ground No. 1 is dismissed. 7. The issue relating to the claim of depreciation has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel Services 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon'ble High Court has inter alia held as under: "In all such cases, section 32 of the Income-tax 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 allo…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Society of the Servants of the Holy Spirit, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 7021/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7021/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. Cit(Exemptions) – 2(1) Society Of The Servants Of The Holy Holy Spirit Hospital, Spirit बनाम/ Room No. 519, 5Th Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 093 Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaaas 0148 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. Arju Garodia ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Dharan Gandhi सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 04.06.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 02.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Is An Appeal By The Revenue Arising Out Of The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 27.09.2016, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. "Whether On The Facts Of The Case & In Law The Id. Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee On Account Of Disallowing Depreciation On Fixed Assets Of Rs. 6,82,68,576/- In Contravention Of The Decision Of Escorts Ltd. Vs Uoi 199 Itr 43 Wherein It Was Held That Since 'Section 11 Of The Income Tax Act Provides For Deduction Of Capital Expenditure Incurred On Assets Acquired For The Objects Of The Trust As Application & Does Not Specifically & Expressly Provide For Double

For Appellant: Ms. Arju GarodiaFor Respondent: Shri Dharan Gandhi
Section 11Section 32

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “जे” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7021/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dy. CIT(Exemptions) – 2(1) Society of the Servants of The Holy Holy Spirit Hospital, Spirit बनाम/ Room No. 519, 5th Floor, Mahakali Caves Road, Andheri (E), Vs. Mumbai-400 093 Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 012 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAAAS 0148 J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Ms. Arju Garodia ""यथ" क" ओ…

DCIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. D.Y Patil Sports Academy, Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 811/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ram TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Balan Narayanan
Section 11

…et-off of deficit has also been discussed by Hon'ble ITAT and allowed in favour of the appellant. Further it is noted that the issue is also covered in appellant's favour by the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Banking Personnel Selection 264 ITR 110. Respectfully following the judgement of Hon'ble courts, the assessing officer is directed to allow carry forward and set off of deficit after due verification of facts. ii. Ground No. 2 of appeal is therefore allowed. . 6. We further note that the Hon’ble Apex court in a recent decision has also upheld the view taken by the Hon'ble jurisdictio…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Nav Nirman Sewa Samiti, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2621/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.R. Senapati, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 70

…Bahadur Calavala Cnnan Chetty Charities, 135 ITR 198 (1982) (Mad); 4) CIT vs. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust, 1198 ITR 598 (1992) (Guj). 5) CIT vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne, 146 ITR 28 (1984) (Karn). 6) CIT vs. Institute of Banking, 264 ITR 110 (2003) (Bom). 7) CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society, 330 ITR 21 (2011)(P & H) 8) CIT vs. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust, 1198 ITR 598 (1992) (Guj) 9) CIT vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne, 146 ITR 28 (1984)(Karn) 10) CIT vs. Institute of Banking, 264 ITR 110 (2003) (Bom) 11) CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society, 330 ITR 21…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Nav Nirman Sewa Samiti, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2620/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri S.R. Senapati, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 70

…Bahadur Calavala Cnnan Chetty Charities, 135 ITR 198 (1982) (Mad); 4) CIT vs. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust, 1198 ITR 598 (1992) (Guj). 5) CIT vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne, 146 ITR 28 (1984) (Karn). 6) CIT vs. Institute of Banking, 264 ITR 110 (2003) (Bom). 7) CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society, 330 ITR 21 (2011)(P & H) 8) CIT vs. Sheth Manilal Ranchhoddas Vishram Bhavan Trust, 1198 ITR 598 (1992) (Guj) 9) CIT vs. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne, 146 ITR 28 (1984)(Karn) 10) CIT vs. Institute of Banking, 264 ITR 110 (2003) (Bom) 11) CIT vs. Tiny Tots Education Society, 330 ITR 21…

ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Bombay Gow Rakshak Mandali, Mumbai

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5474/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan, D.R
Section 32

…e raised in ground No.1, 2 & 3 by the revenue is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) directing the AO to allow the claim of depreciation by relying on decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Services reported in 264 ITR 110 (Bom) ignoring the ratio of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgments in the case of 2 M/s. Bombay Gow Rakshak Madali Escorts Ltd. vs. Union of India (199 ITR 43). The Revenue further challenged whether the depreciation under section 32 of the Act was available to the charitable trust whose income is not assessable under the head ‘Profit and gains from bus…

ITO (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Bombay Natural Histroy Society, Mumbai

In the result, Cross objection is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5473/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No.5473/Mum/2015 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Ito (Exemption)-1(1), Mumbai M/S. Bombay Natural History Society, Vs. Horn Bill House, Opp Lion Gate, Sbs Road Mumbai – 400 023 Pan No.Aaatb1708Q (Appellant) Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ganesh K. BhatFor Respondent: Shri T.A. Khan
Section 1Section 11Section 11(1)Section 143(3)

…rred in allowing the c/f of deficit of earlier year amounting to Rs. 57,38,572/- against income for subsequent assessment years relying on the decision of the Honfale Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Services reported in 264 ITR 110 (Bom) without appreciating the facts that the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Services is distinguishable to the facts of the assesse's case?" 3. The common issue raised in all the Grounds of appeal is against the action of CIT(A) directing the AO to allow carry forward off the exce…

DCIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Jaslok Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as above

ITA 6702/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negithe Dcit (Exemption)-1(1), Room No.506,5Th Floor, Piramal Chamber, Lalbaug, Mumbai 400 012. ...... Appellant Vs. Jaslok Hospital & Research Centre, Jaslok Hospital, 15, Dr. G.Deshmukh Marg, Mumbai 400 026. Pan: Aaaaj 0028Q .... Respondent Appellant By : Ms Aarju Garodia Respondent By : Ms Indra G. Anand Date Of Hearing : 17/04/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 27/04/2018 Order Per G.S.Pannu,A.M:

For Appellant: Ms Aarju GarodiaFor Respondent: Ms Indra G. Anand
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

…Grounds of appeal as Rs.17,75,76,609/-) is concerned, the Tribunal in Assessment Years 2010- 5 11 and 2011-12 has allowed the claim following the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel Selection, 264 ITR 110 (Bom). Following the same, in this year too, the action of CIT(A) is affirmed. In view of the above, for assessment year 2012-13 also the issue in Grounds of appeal No.1 to 3 above are decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. We hold so. 8. Insofar as the issue raised in Ground of appeal no. 4 relating to assessability of pharm…

Otc Exchange of India, Mumbai vs. ITO (E) 2(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeals for the Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12

ITA 7191/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon’Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri V. MohanFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Ningshen
Section 11Section 11(5)Section 13(2)(a)Section 154

…the setoff of earlier years loss against current year’s income. 9. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection [264 ITR 110]. Referring to the said decision, it is submitted that the Hon'ble High Court held that excess expenditure incurred in the earlier years can be adjusted against income of subsequent years and such adjustment would be application of income for subsequent years. Therefore, it is submitted that the excess of expenditure incurred by the assessee in e…