Escorts Ltd. v. UOI

199 ITR 43Supreme Court of India1993#306 most cited

What is Escorts Ltd. v. UOI authority for?

A statute should not be construed to permit double deduction for the same expenditure unless specifically provided by law.

267

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Escorts Ltd. v. UOI · 199 ITR 43 · Section 11 · Section 48 · double deduction · same expenditure · application of income · charitable trust · cost of acquisition

Also reported as

1 SCC 249

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 12AASection 48Section 10(23C)(iv)Section 11(2)Section 14

Issues it is cited on

section 36(1)(v)application of incomerevenue expendituresection 36(1)section 36commissioner (appeals)section 10section 11previous yearsection 143(2)transferprescribed

Judgments citing Escorts Ltd. v. UOI

Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt.Director of Income Tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1256/AHD/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…nue that allowance of depreciation on the assets, the cost of which has already been allowed as a deduction on account of application of income, would amount to double deduction in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd., 199 ITR 43. iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, deduction of depreciation u/s. 32 which falls under the head “Profit and Gains from business and profession” of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would be available to a charitable trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013…

Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt.Director of Income Tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1254/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…nue that allowance of depreciation on the assets, the cost of which has already been allowed as a deduction on account of application of income, would amount to double deduction in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd., 199 ITR 43. iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, deduction of depreciation u/s. 32 which falls under the head “Profit and Gains from business and profession” of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would be available to a charitable trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013…

Gujarat Cricket Association, Ahmedabad vs. The Asstt.Director of Income Tax(Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessing Officer for the assessment year 2007-

ITA 1253/AHD/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Us. It Is, Accordingly, Dismissed For Want Of Prosecution.

Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(3)

…nue that allowance of depreciation on the assets, the cost of which has already been allowed as a deduction on account of application of income, would amount to double deduction in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd., 199 ITR 43. iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, deduction of depreciation u/s. 32 which falls under the head “Profit and Gains from business and profession” of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would be available to a charitable trust whose income is otherwise not assessable under the above head. ITA Nos.1253, 1254, 1255 & 1256/Ahd/2013…

DCIT (E) 2(1), Mumbai vs. National Institute of Consgtruction Management and Research, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3310/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3310/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) Dy. Commissioner Of Income National Institute Of Tax (Exemptions) 2(1), Construction Management Room No. 519, 5Th Floor & Research Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Walchand Centre Walchand Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 012 Terrace, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaatn1348J

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya S. Anjaria, DRFor Respondent: Shri Firoz B. Andhyarujina
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 32

…3: - “GROUNDS OF APPEAL 1. Whether on the facts of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on account of disallowing depreciation oil assets of Rs.4,28,36,473/- 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 capital expenditure incurred on assets acquired for the objects of the trust as application and does not specifically & expressly provide for double deduction on account of depreciation on the same very assets acquired from such capital expenditure, no deduction…

Asst CIT Cir 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Ask Investment Managers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

…me though part of which is relatable to exempt income. In this regard ld. CIT(DR) referred to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in ITA. No.534/Mum/2017 21 M/s Ask Investment Managers Pvt. Ltd. the case of Escorts Ltd. & another vs. Union of India & others 199 ITR 43, wherein it has been held as under: “There is a fundamental, though unwritten, axiom that no Legislature could have at all intended a double deduction in regard to the same business outgoing; and if it is intended, it will be clearly expressed. In other words, in the absence of clear statutory indication to the contrary, the statute should not be…

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

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

ITA 434/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kambleito (Exemptions) Vs Indian Olympic Association Ward-1(2), Room No. 2417, 24Th Olympic Bhawan, Floor, B-29. Qutub Institutional E-2-Block, Pratyaksh Kar Area Bhawan, Dr. Shyama Prasad New Delhi Mukherjee Civil Centre, Jawahar Aaat13010J Lal Nehru Marg New Delhi (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)Section 32

…1961. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition on account of income in respect of depreciation in view of the case laws Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts & others reported in 199 ITR 43 and recent decision of the Hon'ble Delhi Court in the case of DIT(E) Vs. Charanjiv Charitable Trust dated 18.03.2014. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing.” 3. The assessee organization was registered under Societies Act, 1860 on 12/6/1965. It is registered u/s 12A of the…

The Director of Income Tax vs. M/S. Krupanidhi Education

ITA/306/2015HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 11Section 260Section 28Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…ucation Trust 3/23 “1. Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal was correct in law in not following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Limited & another vs. Union of India 199 ITR 43 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically held when deduction under section 35(2)(iv) is allowed in respect of capital expenditure on scientific research, no depreciation is allowable under section 32 on the same asset and in the absence of clear statutory indication to the contrary, the statute should not be read as to…

Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) vs. M/S International Institute of Information

ITA/317/2014HC Karnataka14 Aug 2018

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

Section 260Section 32Section 35

…ncome resulting in double deduction? 2. Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in not following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Limited & another vs. Union of India 199 ITR 43 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has categorically held when deduction under Section 35 (2) (iv) is allowed in respect of capital expenditure on scientific research, no depreciation is allowable under Section 32 on the same asset and in the absence of clear statutory indication to the contrary, the statute should not be read as to pe…

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

…ssessment Year-2012-13 1. “Whether on the facts of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on account of disallowing depreciation on fixed assets of Rs.95,97,199/- in contravention of the decision of Escorts Ltd. V. UOI 199 ITR 43 wherein it was held that since section 11 of the Income Tax Act provides for deduction capital expenditure incurred on assets acquired for the objects of the trust as application and does not specifically & expressly provide for double deduction on account of depreciation on the same very assets acquired from such capital expenditure, no deduction…

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)

…itime Studies Trust 1. "Whether on the facts of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on account of disallowing depreciation on fixed assets of Rs. 1,24,46,138/- in contravention of the decision of Escorts Ltd. vs UOI 199 ITR 43 wherein it was held that since section 11 of the Icome Tax Act provides for deduction of capital expenditure incurred on assets acquired for the objects of the trust as application and does not specifically and expressly provide for double deduction on account of depreciation on the same very assets acquired from such capital expenditure, no deduc…

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

…f Charanjiv Charitable Trust and Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions vs CIT 76 DTR (Ker) 372 has decided the issue in the favour of the department after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd (199 ITR 43). 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A) erred in relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection without appreciating the fact that the Department has not accepted the decision on merit, but due to smallness of tax effect appeal was no…

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

…of Charanjiv Charitable Trust and Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions vs CJT 76 DTK (Ker) 372 has decided tlie issue in tlte favour of the department after considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd (199 ITR 43)". 3. " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Id CIT(A) erred in allowing appeal on the issue of depreciation ignoring the fact that the Revenue has filed SLPs on this issue in other cases inclusive the case of G.D. Birla Medical Research & Educational Foundation in which leave has been granted by the Hon'ble Ap…

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

…the AO the assessee is claiming depreciation and capital expenditure both as of application of income and therefore, it amounts to double deduction. After referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. vs Union of India 199 ITR 43, he disallowed the claim of depreciation. He further held that the provision of section 11 r.w.s 12 and 13 do not envisage set off of deficit/excess expenditure of earlier assessment years and accordingly, he disallowed the set off of loss of earlier deficit with current year income. 3. Before the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee relied upon the foll…

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

…the AO the assessee is claiming depreciation and capital expenditure both as of application of income and therefore, it amounts to double deduction. After referring to the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. vs Union of India 199 ITR 43, he disallowed the claim of depreciation. He further held that the provision of section 11 r.w.s 12 and 13 do not envisage set off of deficit/excess expenditure of earlier assessment years and accordingly, he disallowed the set off of loss of earlier deficit with current year income. 3. Before the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee relied upon the foll…

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

…on 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 business and profession’ and also the fact that the whole of the value of assets has been allowed as deduction in the application of income. 3. At the outs…

Sova Ispat Ltd., Kolkata vs. PCIT, -I, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with aforesaid observations

ITA 564/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 May 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.564/Kol/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Sova Ispat Ltd. Vs. Principal C.I.T, Kolkata

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tulsian, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Hangshing, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

…sfied with the interpretation given by the Tribunal or the Calcutta High Court to s. 33(6) of the Act, accepting those decisions by applying the test of beneficial interpretation does not arise.—Escorts Ltd. vs. Union of India (1992) 108 CTR (SC) 275 : (1993) 199 ITR 43 (SC)” 8. Taking light from the aforesaid dictum of law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Hon’ble High Court, we note that the assessee’s plea before us is that while adjudicating the nature of subsidy received by the assessee whether it is capital/Revenue in nature. The Assessing Officer shall follow the ratio decidendi laid by the Hon’b…

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

…ead as under:- 2 1. "Whether on the facts of the case and in law the Id.CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assessee on account of disallowing Depreciation on fixed assets of Rs. 17,75,76,609/- 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 capital expenditure incurred on assets acquired for the objects of the trust as application and does not specifically & expressly provide for double deduction on account of depreciation on the same very assets acquired from such capital expenditure, no deduction…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Hubballi vs. Lok Shikshana Trust, Hubballi

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 is dismissed

ITA 2598/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT (D.R)For Respondent: None
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

…rounds raised (supra) and placed strong reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer in disallowing the assessee's claim for depreciation on fixed assets in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. Vs. Union of India (1993) 199 ITR 43. 4.2 According to the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee, the issue in respect of the claim of depreciation is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rajasthan & 4 Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona (2018) 89 Taxmann.com 127 (SC) and the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of DIT (E) Vs. A…

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

ITA 7019/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2013-14

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) ..

For Appellant: Jayesh ChughFor Respondent: Shri. Saurabh Kumar Rai , DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 32

…. No.7019/Mum/2016 1. "Whether on the facts of the case and in law the Id. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal of the assesses on account of disallowing depreciation on fixed assets of Rs. 1,35,84,224/- 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 and does not specifically and expressly provide for double deduction on account of depreciation on the same very assets acquired from such capital expenditure, no dedu…

ITO (E) 2(3), Mumbai vs. Sri Sri Radha Damodar Charitable Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4336/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singhito (E)-2(3) Shri Radha Damodar Charitable 513, 5Th Floor, Trust, Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-12. Pan:Aafts2570L (Appellant) (Respondent) Ddit (E) I (1) Shri Radha Damodar Charitable 504,5Th Floor, Trust, Hare Krishna Land, Juhu, Vs. Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Mumbai-400049 Mumbai-12. Pan:Aafts2570L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Hiten Chande ARFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar ( Sr DR)
Section 11Section 253Section 254(1)

…uble deduction claimed by the assessee. Recently the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Market Committee, Pipli (2011) 330 ITR 16 (P&H) after considering various decisions while distinguishing the decision in Escorts Ltd. v. UOI (1993) 199 ITR 43 (SC) has held as under (page 20 & 21):- "In the present case, the assessee is not claiming double deduction on account of depreciation as has been suggested by learned counsel for the Revenue. The income of the assessee being exempt, the assessee is only claiming that depreciation should be reduced from the income for determining the percentage o…