CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona

402 ITR 441Supreme Court of India2018#504 most cited

What is CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona authority for?

Depreciation is allowable as a deduction even if the expenditure for acquiring the capital asset was treated as application of income for charitable purposes. This does not constitute a double benefit.

187

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,418 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona · section 11(1)(a) · depreciation allowance · application of income · charitable trust · double benefit · capital asset expenditure

Also reported as

300 CTR 1

Sections most often in play

Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 10(23C)(vi)Section 143(3)Section 13(1)(c)Section 145(3)Section 69Section 11

Issues it is cited on

section 11(6)advancement of general public utilitysection 11(1)(a)section 11(4a)section 11(1)proviso to section 2(15)section 13(3)application of incomesection 13(1)corpus donationsection 10(23c)section 11(2)

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona

ITO (E), New Delhi vs. M/S. Indian Olympic Association, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1130/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh[A.Y 2011-12] The D.C.I.T. Vs. India Olympic Association Circle - 1 Olympic Bhavan, B -29 Dehradun Qutub Institutional Area New Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Hiren Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Varma, CIT- DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G

…dismissed. 27. Next grievance relates to allowance of depreciation. 28. This issue is now well settled in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan and Gujarat Charitable Foundation 402 ITR 441 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that even though the expenditure incurred for acquisition of capital assets was treated as application of income for charitable purposes u/s 11A(1) of the Act, yet depreciation would be allowed on assets so purchased. Ground No. 2 is, accordingly, dismissed. 29. Grievance raised vide Ground No. 3 is rel…

M/S Zeen -Zar Charitable Foundation Trust Noon Hospital & Research Centre, Jhalawar vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Kota

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 337/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2018AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Soni (Advocate)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai (DCIT)
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 32

…the disallowance of 4. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona [2018] 300 CTR 1 (SC) and decision of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-II vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti [2016] 388 ITR 605 (Raj). Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that the department has not accepted the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Vijaya Shanti Educational Trust and Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti and has prefe…

DDIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Paramasiva Naidu Muthurvelraj Educational Trust, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed and the

ITA 2005/CHNY/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jul 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Abraham P George & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Mr.R.V.Aroon Prasad, JCIT,D.RFor Respondent: Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate
Section 11Section 12ASection 13(1)(c)

…able trust registered/s.12AA of the Act. It was a submission that the issue of depreciation was squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-III, Pune Vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona reported in (2018)402 ITR 441(SC). 4. In reply, the ld.D.R vehemently supported the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer and the Ld.CIT(A) on this issue. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material on record. As it is noticed that the issue of depreciation in respect of charitable trust is squarely covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Raja…

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)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SH.SHAMIM YAHYA, AM & HON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 7018/Mum/2016 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT(E) 2(1) Samundra Institute of R. No. 507, 5th floor, Sai Maritime Studies Trust, R. No. 519, 5th floor, बिधम/ Commercial Complex, BKS, Piramal Chamber, Devshi Marg, Govandi, Vs. Lalbaug, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400088 Mumbai-400012 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AACTS9557L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant by : Ms. ArjuGarodia, DR प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Ashish…

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

…cision mentioned here in above, we not find any infirmity in the same. Hence, we uphold the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 7. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC) has affirmed the above proposition. 8. In the result, this appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 02.07.2018 (Sandeep Gosain) (Shamim Yahya) "या"यक सद"य / Judicial Member लेखा सद"य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated : 02.07.2018 5 Society of the Servants of The Holy Spirit व."न.स./Roshani…

ADIT (E), New Delhi vs. Natrip Implementation Society, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4278/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10

Section 12ASection 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 ADIT(E), Vs. M/s. Natrip Implementation Inv. Circle-II, Room No. 306, Society, 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, BBCC Place, South Tower, District Centre, Laxmi Nagar, 3rd Floor, Bhisham Pitamah New Delhi Marg, Lodhi Road, New Delhi PAN : AAATN7662F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. S.R. Senapati, Sr.DR Respondent by None Date of hearing 24.04.2018 Date of pronouncement 08.05.2018 ORDER PER O.P. KANT, A.M.: This appeal by the Revenue is dir…

Official Liquidator

In the result, the appeal is disposed of

OLR/1/2017HC Karnataka20 Apr 2017

Bench: RAGHVENDRA S.CHAUHAN

Section 11Section 260Section 260A

…, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the second substantial question of law is no longer res integra and has already been answered against the revenue in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. RAJASTHAN AND GUJARATI CHARITABLE FOUNDATION' (2018) 402 ITR 441 (SC)Iand another decision of Supreme Court in 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. PROGRAMME FOR COMMUNITY ORGANISATION' (2001) 248 ITR 1 (SC). The aforesaid submission could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. 5 4. From perusal of the record, we find that the substantial question of law No.2 is covered by…