CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection

Otc Exchange of India, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT (E) II(1), Mumbai

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

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

…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…

Otc Exchange of India, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT (E) II(1), Mumbai

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

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

…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…

Income Tax Officer (E)-2(3), Mumbai vs. Seth Walchand Hirachand Memorial Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain , Jm Income Tax Officer (E)-2(3) Vs. M/S. Seth Walchand 11Th Floor, Hincon House Hirachand Memorial Trust Room No.513, 5Th Floor, 247 Park, Lal Bahadue Shastri Marg Piramal Chambers, Vikhroli (W) Lalbaug, Lower Parel Mumbai – 83 Mumbai – 400 012 Pan/Gir No.Aaatw0014E (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

…clined by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A). The learned representative of the assessee has argued that this issue is decided in favour of the assessee, the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking (264 ITR 110). It is also argued that the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has also decided this issue in favour of the assessee In the decision of ADIT (E)-l(2) Vs. Sayaji Ubakhin . Memorial Trust (ITA No. 5646/Mum/2011) and in case of ITO (E) Vs. Shri Sadguru Seva Trust (ITA No, 3387/Mum/2015). Before going further, it is necessary to advert the case d…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Mohd Haji Saboo Sidik Institution, Mumbai

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.7019/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) बिाम/ Dcit (E) 2(1) Mohd. Haji Saboo Sidik R.No 519, 5 T H Floor, Institution, Piramal Chamber, C/O. Anjuman I Islam, V. Lalbaug, Badruddin Tayabji Marg, Lower Parel, 92, Dr. D.N. Road, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabtm6917D (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

…ber of judgments, depreciation had been allowed as application of income u/s, 11. In this regard I find that the issue is directly covered in appellant's favour by the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed as under : "4. Question No. 2 herein is identical to the question which was raised before the Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Framjee Cawasjee Institute (1993) 109 CTR 463 (Bom). In that case, the facts were as follows: The assessee was the Trust. It derived its income…

ITO (Exemption)-2(3) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Sayaji-U-Ba Khin Memorial Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

…has considered a similar issue in the light of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of 4 ITA 5883/Mum/2016 Escorts Ltd vs UOI and by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Institute of Banking Personnel Selection 264 ITR 110 (Bom) allowed depreciation claimed on fixed assets. The relevant portion of the order is extracted below:- “4. We have considered submissions of ld.representatives of parties and orders of authorities below. We observe that there is no reason to interfere with the order of ld.CIT(A) on this issue as the income of the trust is required to be comp…

The Excutive Board of the Methodist Church in India, Mumbai vs. Asst DIT (E) 1(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3341/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) The Executive Board Of The Methodist Asst. Dit (Exemptions)-1(2), 5Th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Church In India बनाम/ 1, Prospect Chambers, Ground Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Vs. 313, D. N. Road, Flora Fountain, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaatt 5754 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Shankar K. Jalghar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal सुनवाई क" तार"ख / : 13.02.2018 Date Of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 01.03.2018 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Dated 02.03.2016 & Pertains To The Assessment Year 2005- 06. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Read As Under: 1. Ground No. 1 - Re: Reopening Of Assessment For Assessment Year 2005- 06 Is Invalid & The Consequent Re-Assessment Is Illegal:

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “सी” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3341/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2005-06) The Executive Board of the Methodist Asst. DIT (Exemptions)-1(2), 5th Floor, Piramal Chambers, Church in India बनाम/ 1, Prospect Chambers, Ground Floor, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Vs. 313, D. N. Road, Flora Fountain, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAATT 5754 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Shankar K.…

Dr.Mohanlal Piramal Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)

…3. In the appeal filed before the learned CIT(A), the first appellate authority allowed the claim of set off deficit of earlier years by following decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (264 ITR 110). The learned CIT(A) also allowed the depreciation claim of Rs. 6.18 lakhs by following the decision rendered in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (supra). With regard to claim of Rs. 5.71 lakhs, which was claimed by way of transfer of sinking fund, the learned CIT(A) treated the same as provision for replacement of asset and a…

ITO (Exemption)-1(3) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Garware Charitable Trust, Mumbai

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Garware Charitable Trust (Exemption)-1(3), Mumbai Garware House, 50-A, 5Th Room No. 511, Floor, Swami Nityanand Marg, Vile Vs. Piramal Chamber, Parel, Parele (E), Mumbai-400 057 Lalbaug, Mumbai-400 012 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaatg0045M

…at deficit of the current year is required to be carried forward to the subsequent years. On perusal of the facts I find that the case of appellant is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon. Jurisdictional High Court has observed as under – ........"5. Now coming to question No. 3, the point which arises for consideration is: whether excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against the income of the subsequent year and whether such adjustment should be treated as application of income in subsequent…

ITO (Exemption)-1(3) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Gulabchand Foundation, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarincome Tax Officer M/S. Gulabchand Foundatoin (Exemptions) 1(3) Hincon House Room No. 511, 5Th Floor Vs. Lal Bahadur Shastri Marg Piramal Chambers, Parel Vikhroli (W), Mumbai 400083 Lalbaug, Mumbai 400012 Pan – Aaccg1683N Appellant Respondent

…chand Foundatoin subsequent years. On perusal of the facts of the case and submissions of the appellant as above, I find that the case of appellant is squarely covered by the judgement of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon. Jurisdictional High Court has observed as under – ..........."5. Now coming to question No. 3 the point which arises for consideration is: whether excess of expenditure in the earlier years can be adjusted against the income of the subsequent year and whether such adjustment should be treated as application of income in subsequen…

DCIT (E) I(1), Mumbai vs. Lokhandwala Foundations, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Dcit (E) 1(1), Vs. M/S.Lokhandwala Foundations R.No.506, 5Th Floor 48, Indranarayan Road Piramal Chambers Santacruz (West) Lalbaug, Mumbai – 400 054 Parel, Mumbai – 400 012 Pan/Gir No. Aaatl0068K Appellant) .. Respondent)

…ber of judgments, depreciation had been allowed as application of income u/s. 11. In this regard I find that the issue is directly covered in appellant's favour by the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed as under : "4, Question No. 2 herein is identical to the question which was raised before the Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exempt/on) v. Framjee Cawasjee Institute (1993) 109 CTR 463 (Bom). In that case, the facts were as follows: The assessee was the Trust. It derived its income…

DCIT (E) 1(1), Mumbai vs. Karamshi Jethabhai Somaiya Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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. Karamshi Jethabhai Somaiya Trust, Somaiya Bhavan, 45/47, M.G.Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 Pan: Aaatk0474C .... Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav Respondent By : Ms.Aarati Vissanji

…a double deduction and he, therefore, disallowed the assessee’s claim for depreciation. The CIT(A) has since allowed the claim of the assessee following the 4 judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel Selection, 264 ITR 110 (Bom). 5. Before us, the plea of the Department is that the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (supra) has not been accepted by the Department. Further, it is contested that allowing of depreciation would amount to a double deduction, which was impermissible having regard to the judg…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. Saifee Hospital Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2009-2010

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Saifee Hospital Trust, Income Tax (Exemptions)-2(1), 15/17, Maharshi Karve Marg, 510, 5Th Floor, Charni Road Railway Station Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. (West), Mumbai - 400012 Mumbai – 400004 Pan: Aabts7800D (Appellant) (Respondent)

…favour of the assessee by relying upon the decision of the coordinate Bench rendered in the assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2008-09 aforesaid and the decision of Hon’ble High Court in the case of 4 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Institute of Bombay Personnel Section 264 ITR 110. We further notice that the coordinate Bench has decided the said issue relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Bombay Personnel Section (supra). Since, the issues involved in this case are identical to the issues involved in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2008-09 (supra) and the coordinate Ben…

Nandlal Tolani Charitable Trust, Mumbai vs. ADIT (E) II(2), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Ramlal Negi (Jm)

…business income. 6. The next issue raised by the AO related to rejection of claim of depreciation. This issue has also been decided in favour of the assessee by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Institution of Banking Personnel Selection (264 ITR 110). Accordingly we direct the AO to allow the depreciation as application of income. 7. Even though the Ld CIT(A) has made observations about amounts accumulated u/s 11(1) and 11(2) and observed that the assessee is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act, he has not given any direction to the assessing officer in this regard. By making the a…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Sadhu Vaswani Mission Bombay, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.4144/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Ito(E)-2(3), Sadhu Vaswani Mission बनाम/ Room No. 513, Piramal Chambers, 13/14, Geetanjali, Lal Baug, Parel Mumbai-400 012 Behind Radio Club, Colaba, Vs. Mumbai-400 005 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aacts 1706 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Ms. N. Hemlatha ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri M. Subramanian

…g discussed and decided here in under: i. After careful consideration of the facts and the legal position, I find that the case of the appellant is directly covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel 264 ITR 110 wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed as under: " 4. Question No. 2 herein is identical to the question which was raised before the Bombay High Court in the case of Director of Income Tax (Exemption) v. Framjee Cawasjee Institute (1993) 109 CTR 463 (Bom). In that case, the facts were as follows: The assessee was the Trust. It derived its income…