How many judgments cite Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT?

164 judgments on BharatTax cite Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT (348 ITR 344), spanning 2013 to 2025.

Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT

Q: Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act, Section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act, Section 271(1)(c) r.w.s.274 of the Act, Section 28 of the Income Tax Act, Section 139(1), Section 139(5).

348 ITR 344High Court2012#596 most cited

What is Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT authority for?

The Kerala High Court held that charitable institutions claiming exemption under Section 11 are not entitled to claim depreciation on assets used for charitable purposes, taking a view contrary to most other High Courts.

164

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Lissie Medical Institutions v CIT · Section 11 Income Tax Act · depreciation charitable trust · charitable institution depreciation · Section 11(6) amendment · carry forward depreciation · accumulation of income · application of income · Kerala High Court depreciation

Also reported as

24 Taxmann.com 9209 Taxmann 19

Sections most often in play

Section 11 to 13 of the Income Tax Act Section 11(6) of the Income Tax Act Section 271(1)(c) r.w.s.274 of the Act Section 28 of the Income Tax Act Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 17

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 11(6)section 10(23c)(iv)accumulation of income section 11(1)(a)proviso to section 2(15)section 11(1)section 251(2)section 10(23c)section 2(15)application of income section 32 section 28

Judgments citing Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT

The DCIT, (Exemption), Circle-2, Ahmedabad vs. Shree Surat Jilla Leuva Patidar Samaj Trust, Surat

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3282/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat14 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No.3282/Ahd/2014/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shree Surat Jilla Leuva Patidar Income Tax, Samaj Trust, Circle-2, Ahmedabad. C/O.Sharadbhai D Patel, Afva Via, Vankaner, Tal.Bardoli, Surat – 394 610. [Pan: Aabts 2888 P] अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Mitish Modi – Ca िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sreenivas Bidari – Cit(Dr) राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/ Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2018 उ"ोषणा क" तारीख/Pronouncement On 14.11.2018

Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)

…lication 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 TIR 43,the decision of Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical institutions Vs.Commissioner of Income- tax,Kochi,348 ITR 344 and decision of Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) Vs.Charanjiv Charitable Trust in (2014)43 taxmann.com 300(Delhi). iv) The Ld.Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts deleting the disallowance of expenditure of Rs.27,32,9185/- stating that these expenses incurred out of its income accumulated from year to year and…

M/S.Maj Hospital, Ernakulam vs. The DCIT9Exemption), Kochi

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

ITA 499/COCH/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.K.M.JoseFor Respondent: Smt.A.S.Bindhu, Sr.DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(4)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 271BSection 44ASection 44J

…rom running a hospital and nursing school as business activity and exemption u/s 11 of the I.T.Act was denied. The Assessing Officer also relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [(2012) 348 ITR 344 (Ker.)] and denied depreciation on the assets, the cost of which was allowed as application of income. The A.O. further observed that the assessee has failed to get its books of account audited u/s 44AB of the I.T.Act and hence penalty proceedings u/s 271B is to be initiated against the assessee. ITA No.499/Coch/2017. 3 M/s.MAJ Hospital Edappall…

The Assistant Commisioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Circle-1, Mangalore vs. M/S Sri Jagadguru Murugarajendra Vidyapeeta, Chitradurga

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1639/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. A. K. Garodia

For Appellant: Shri. Sandeep C, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nandini Das, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 11(1)

…same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344 (Ker.)'. 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so,…

M/S.Marymatha School Trust, Cochin vs. The ITO(Exemption), Cochin

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

ITA 285/COCH/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.285/Coch/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Mary Matha School Trust, Vs. The Income Tax Officer Thrikkakara P.O. (Exemption), Kochi. Kochi-682 021. [Pan:Aabtm 0241L]

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 272A(2)(e)Section 272A(3)Section 272A(4)

…4-2015 to contend that the said amendment applies retrospectively being clarificatory in nature and reliance was also placed on the jurisdictional High Court judgment in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) reported in 348 ITR 344. 4.1 Regarding School Development fee of Rs.26,35,000/- and building fund collected of Rs.75,000/-, the CIT(E) was of the opinion that the contribution received as development fee and building construction fund has to be taken as income or has to be deducted from the development expenses and the net expenses can only be considered as application…

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

…Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation, Poona [89 Taxmann.com 127] which has been rendered after considering the decisions of CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (IBPS) [2003] 131 Taxman 386 (Bom.) & Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT [2012] [348 ITR 344 (Ker.)]. The Hon’ble court has concluded the matter in the following manner:- 2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the aforesaid view taken by the Bombay High Court correctly states the principles of law and there is no need to interfere with the same. 3. It may be mentioned that most of the High Courts hav…

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

…oned that most of the High Courts have taken the aforesaid view with only exception thereto by the High Court of Kerala which has taken a contrary view in 'Lissie Medical Institutions v. Commissioner of Income Tax'.[2012] 24 taxmann.com 9/209 Taxman 19 (Mag.)/348 ITR 344 (Ker.) 4. It may also be mentioned at this stage that the legislature, realising that there was no specific provision in this behalf in the Income Tax Act, has made amendment in Section 11(6) of the Act vide Finance Act No. 2/2014 which became effective from the Assessment Year 2015-2016. The Delhi High Court has taken the view and rightly so, t…

DCIT Exemptions, Coimbatore vs. Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Erode

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2989/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A.Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2989/ Chny/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs M/S. Saveetha Institute Of Medical The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax & Technical Sciences, Exemptions, No.333, Saveetha Hospital Coimbatore. Building, Brough Road, Erode – 638 001. Pan: Aafts0845L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: 17.05.2018

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 28Section 29Section 30Section 32

…as application of income while determining the income of the assessee for the purpose of Sec.11 of the Act. While doing so, the Ld.AR placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions Vs. CIT reported 348 ITR 344. 5. At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that the issue is settled by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona, wherein it was held that normal depreciation has to be considered as legitimate deduction in computing real income of the assessee on general principles or u/s.11(1)(a)…

DCIT (Exemptions), Chennai vs. Sri Vekkaliamman Educational & Charitable Trust, Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 2722/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2722/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-2012. Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Sri Vekkaliamman Educational Income Tax, Vs. & Charitable Trust, (Exemptions) No.10, East Mada Church Street, Chennai Circle, Royapuram, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 013. [Pan Aafts 7863Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri. G. Seetharaman, C.A

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 32

…ng Officer had denied the claim of depreciation 3. made by the assessee which is a trust registered u/s.12A(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’ the Act’’) relying on the judgment of Kerala High Court in the case of M/s Lissie Medical Mission vs. CIT, 348 ITR 344. Ld. Assessing Officer had taken a view that allowing a claim of depreciation on assets, cost of which were claimed as application of income would result in double deduction. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on the other hand had held in favour of the assessee. The issue in our opinion is no more res- integra, in view of judgment of Hon…

Ramananda Adigalar Foundation, Coimbatore vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3052/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 156

…r the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13 in the case of the assessee, M/s. Ramananda Adigalar Foundation, the AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of :-3-: ITA Nos. 3051 & 3052/Chny/2017 Lissie Medical Institutions Vs. CIT 348 ITR 344 (Ker.) read with CBDT Circular refused to allow the assessee’s claim of depreciation on the capital expenditure incurred from year to year holding that when the entire costs of assets have already been claimed as application of income towards objects of the Trust, the claim of depreciation on the cost of the very same assets results in double…

Ramananda Adigalar Foundation, Coimbatore vs. DCIT (Exemptions), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 3051/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Clement Ramesh Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 156

ACIT Exemptions, Erode vs. M.P.Nachimuthu M.Jagannathan Educational Trust, Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3002/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs.Sumathi Venkataraman

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस जयरामन, लेखा सद"य के सम% BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3002/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Asst. Commissioner of Income- Vs. M/s. M.P.Nachimuthu – Tax (Exemptions), M.Jagannathan – Coimbatore. Educational Trust, 145, Thirunagar Colony, Erode-638 003. [PAN: AAATM 4135 E] (अपीलाथ'/Appellant) (()यथ'/Respondent) Department by : Mrs.Sumathi Venkataraman, JCIT Assessee by : None : 22.05…

DCIT Exemptions, Coimbatore vs. Erode Sengunthar Educational Trust, Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3001/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3001 /Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs.Sumathi Venkataraman

…running colleges with hostel under the name & style as ‘Erode Sengunthar Engineering :- 2 -: College’, which include the courses of MBA & MCA, the AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions Vs. CIT 348 ITR 344 (Ker.) read with CBDT Circular refused to allow the assessee’s claim of depreciation on the capital expenditure incurred from year to year holding that when the entire costs of assets have already been claimed as application of income towards objects of the Trust, the claim of depreciation on the cost of the very same assets results in double…

DCIT Exemptions, Coimbatore vs. P.S.Govindaswamy Naidu & Sons Charities, Coimbatore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 3000/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mrs.Sumathi Venkataraman

…ndoned the delay. 3. While making the assessment for the AY 2013-14 in the case of the assessee, M/s. P.S.Govindaswamy Naidu & Sons Charities, the AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions Vs. CIT 348 ITR 344 (Ker.) read with CBDT Circular refused to allow the assessee’s claim of depreciation on the capital expenditure incurred from year to year holding that when the entire costs of assets have already been claimed as application of income towards objects of the Trust, the claim of depreciation on the cost of the very same assets results in double…

ACIT Exemptions, Coimbatore vs. Al Ameen Educational & Charitable Trust, Erode

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2999/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Mr.A.S.Sriraman, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs.Sumathi Venkataraman

…with ‘Anna University of Technology’, Coimbatore & ‘Al- Ameen Polytechnic College’, approved from ‘All India Council for Technical Education’, the AO relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions Vs. CIT 348 ITR 344 (Ker.) read with CBDT Circular refused to allow the assessee’s claim of depreciation on the capital expenditure incurred from year to year holding that when the entire costs of assets have already been claimed as application of income towards objects of the Trust, the claim of depreciation on the cost of the very same assets results in double…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Circle-1, Bangalore vs. M/S. Karnataka State Muslim Federation, Bangalore

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

ITA 1684/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raodeputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Exemptions) Circle 1, Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs. Karnataka State Muslim Federation, No.06/1, Cantonment Railway Station Road, Bengaluru. … Respondent Pan:Aaatk 5933C

For Appellant: Dr.P.V.Pradeep Kumar, Addl.CIT(DR)For Respondent: Shri C.R.Nulvi, CA

Section 11(6)

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Mangaluru vs. M/S. T.A. Pai Management Institute, Manipal

In the result, the appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2692/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan & Shri A.K Garodiathe Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, (Exemptions), Circle-1, Mangaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S T.A Pai Management Institute, Post Box No.9, 80 Badagabettu, Manipal. . Respondent Pan – Aaatt2248R.

For Appellant: Shri C.H Sundar Rao, C.I.TFor Respondent: Shri Sridhar Kamat, C.A

Section 11(1)Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35(2)(iv)

…already been recovered by way of exemption as application of income amounts to double deduction and double benefit on the same asset. The AO referred to the decision of the of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of DDIT(E) v. Lissie Medical Institutions, 348 ITR 344 (Ker) wherein it was held that allowing depreciation of a depreciable asset when the cost of acquisition of depreciable asset was allowed as application of income for charitable purpose amounts to double depreciation and therefore depreciation cannot be allowed. The AO also distinguished the cases cited by the Assessee. ITA No.2692/B/17 5. On…

ITO Exemption Ward 3, Chennai vs. Shri Shirdi Saibaba Spiritual and Charitable Trust, Chennai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 2859/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं/.I.T.A. No. 2859/Chny/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2012-13 Income Tax Officer, M/S. Shri Shiridi Saibaba Spiritual & Exemption Ward 3, Vs. Charitable Trust, 121, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Sai Business Point, No. 17, 2Nd Floor, Mount Road, Little Mount, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 015. [Pan: Aats 3448J] (&'यथ)/Respondent) (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) Revenue By : Shri. N. Madhavan, Addl. Cit : Shri Saroj Kumar Parida, Advocate Assessee By सुनवाईक/तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03.04.2018 घोषणाक/तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.04.2018

For Respondent: Shri. N. Madhavan, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…e view that depreciation is an "expenditure" to be treated as "application of income" for charitable purposes is incorrect. 2.3 The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions Vs CIT 348 ITR 344 (Ker.), which decision was rendered after seeking the view of the CBDT. In that case, the igh Court held that "if the assessee treats expenditure on acquisition of assets as application of income for charitable purposes under section 11(1)(a), then assessee cannot claim depreciation on value of such assets." 2.4 The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have consi…

Bannariamman Educational Trust, Coimbatore vs. DCIT, Coimbatore

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3342/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3342/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-2013. M/S. Bannariamman Educational Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Trust, Income Tax, No.1212, Trichy Road, Exemptions, Coimbatore 641 018. Coimbatore. [Pan Aaatb 1235C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, Adv

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 28Section 32

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए‘ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ाहम पी. जॉज", लेखा सद"य के सम" । [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3342/CHNY/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2012-2013. M/s. Bannariamman Educational Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Trust, Income Tax, No.1212, Trichy Road, Exemptions, Coimbatore 641 018. Coimbatore. [PAN AAATB 1235C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. Saroj Kumar Parida, Adv : S…

Income Tax Officer Exemptions Ward-1, Mangalore vs. M/S Shiruru Welfare Trust, Udupi

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for asst

ITA 2165/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Mar 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazthe Income-Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward-1, Mangaluru. . Appellant Vs. M/S Shiruru Welfare Trust, Udupi. . Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B.R Ramesh, JCITFor Respondent: Shri Shambu Sharma, C.A

Section 12ASection 143(3)

…rejected the assessee’s claim of depreciation placing reliance on the decisions of the Hon’ble Court in the case of Escorts and Another Vs. UOT & Others (199 ITR 43) and the decision of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions (348 ITR 344) (Kerala). On appeal the ld CIT(A) allowed the assessee’s appeal on this issue. 5.2 The ld DR was heard and supported the decision of the authorities below, submitting that the expenditure on acquisition of the capital asset has already been claimed as exempt on account of ITA No.2165/B/17 5 application of income and, therefore, depreciation on…

The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bangalore vs. M/S. Rams Education Foundation, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1464/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. P.V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(a)

…ouble deduction when already full expenditure has been allowed in earlier years. ITA Nos.1381 & 1464/Bang/2017 Page 8 of 14 3. The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the fact that the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lissie Medical Intuitions Vs. CIT (348 ITR 344) has held that depreciation cannot be allowed on assets, where cost of such assets has already been allowed as application of income in the year of acquisition/ purchase of asset. 4. The CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. & another Vs. Union of India (199 ITR 43), while dealing with the issu…