“application of income”

Judicial DoctrinesDiversion vs ApplicationDiversion vs Application1,603 judgments

The decision most relied on for application of income is Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (402 ITR 640), cited in 1,596 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on application of income

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

402 ITR 640 · 2018 · Supreme Court

1,596

citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A is not automatic and requires the Assessing Officer to record satisfaction before applying Rule 8D. Only investments yielding exempt income are considered for disallowance, irrespective of their strategic nature.

Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT

328 ITR 81 · 2010 · High Court

1,183

citing judgments

Rule 8D, for computing disallowance under Section 14A for expenses related to exempt income, applies from Assessment Year 2008-09 onwards; for prior years, a reasonable disallowance must be made. The disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned.

CIT v. Max India Ltd.

295 ITR 282 · 2007 · Supreme Court

1,162

citing judgments

Under Section 263, an assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue merely because the Principal Commissioner disagrees with the Assessing Officer's (AO) view, particularly if the AO has adopted one of two permissible views in law, unless that view is completely unsustainable. If due inquiries were made, the AO's order does not become erroneous solely because the fact of inquiries was not recorded.

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT

394 ITR 449 · 2017 · Supreme Court

683

citing judgments

Expenditure can only be disallowed under Section 14A if the income is exempt and not part of the total income. The Assessing Officer must first record dissatisfaction with the assessee's accounts or computation before proceeding to make a disallowance under Section 14A or applying Rule 8D.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Nova Promoters and Finlease (P) Ltd.

342 ITR 169 · 2012 · High Court

658

citing judgments

To make an addition under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits, the Assessing Officer must conduct proper inquiry into the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the creditor, especially concerning share application money. The assessee's initial discharge of burden by providing necessary details shifts the onus back to the AO for further investigation, including the source of source.

Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. UOI

440 ITR 26 · 2022 · High Court

614

citing judgments

The fee under Section 234E of the Income-tax Act cannot be levied for defaults in filing TDS statements committed prior to June 1, 2015, as the provision for its levy became effective only from that date.

Dilip N. Shroff v. JCIT

291 ITR 519 · 2007 · Supreme Court

565

citing judgments

A penalty notice issued under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to strike out the inapplicable limb (concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars) from the standard proforma, indicating non-application of mind. The initial burden of proving concealment or inaccurate particulars rests on the Revenue.

CIT v. Kaushalya

216 ITR 660 · 1995 · High Court

511

citing judgments

A penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is not invalidated by the Assessing Officer's failure to strike off irrelevant portions in the show cause notice, provided the assessee understood the exact charge and suffered no prejudice, indicating an application of mind by the AO.

Judgments citing application of income

Caritas India, New Delhi vs. ACIT (E), Circle- 1(1), Delhi

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

ITA 4581/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma[Assessment Year: 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Anil Bhalla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha, Sr. DR

Section 11(5)Section 143(3)

consideration, the assessee trust disposed of its mutual fund and suffered loss of Rs. 1,49,80,675/- which was inadvertently claimed as application of income by the assessee as is evident from the computation of income exhibited at pages 11 and 12 of the Paper Book. 5. The Assessing ... Officer denied this set off holding that it cannot be allowed as application of income. 6. Before us, it was strongly contended that the assessee trust returned capital gains. It was allowed to be part of the income of the trust and, therefore, when the assessee trust has incurred capital

DCIT(E), Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Delhi & District Circket Association, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3058/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2015-16 The Dcit 1(1), Exemption, New Delhi M/S. Delhi & District Cricket Association 110002 Ferozshah Kotla Ground, Bahadur Shah Vs. Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110002 Pan Aaatd 0828 P (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Ms. Maimun Alam, Sr. Dr For Assessee : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. Shri Aman Garg, Ca Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.06.2023 Order Per Chandra Mohan Garg, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of Cit(A)-40, New Delhi Dated 15.01.2019 For Ay 2015-16. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Are As Follows:- (I) On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Cit (A) Has Erred In Directing The Ao To Allow Exemption Us. 11 Of The Act Particularly When The Assessee Has Shown Receipts From Sponsorship Income, Sale Of Liquor, Income From Corporate Boxes & Sale Of Tickets Which Are Purely Commercial In Nature. (Ii) On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Id Cit (A) Has Erred In Treating Prior Period Expenses, Provisions For Gratuity & Leave Encashment As Consequential To Allowing Exemption To The Assessee Ignoring The Fact That Such Expenses Are Not Incurred During The Year & Cannot Be Treated As Application Of Income. (Iii) On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld Cit(A) Has Erred In Deleting The Addition Made U/S 40(A) (3) Of The Income Tax Act, Such Addition Being Consequential In Nature To Disallowance Of Benefit Of Exemption To The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Maimun Alam, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 12ASection 40

allowing exemption to the assessee ignoring the fact that such expenses are not incurred during the year and cannot be treated as application of income. (iii) On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made ... allowing exemption to the assessee ignoring the fact that such expenses are not incurred during the year and cannot be treated as application of income. It is also submitted that Ld CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made u/s 40(A) (3) of the Income Tax Act, such

Ramnath Goenka Memorial Foundation, Mumbai vs. ITO (Exemption) 2(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1004/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleramnath Goenka Ito (Exemp)-2(2), Memorial Foundation, Room No. 601, 6Th बनाम/ 7Th Floor, Mafatlal Floor, Mtnl Bldg, Vs. Centre, Ramnath Dadar Road, Goenka Marg, Cumballa Hill, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400026 Mumbai – 400021. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabtr9441D (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr. S.Venkatraman.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavita Kaushik.DR

Section 11Section 11(1)Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

religious purpose and accordingly debited against income. > It is further noted that capital expenditure on construction / acquisition of asset is also treated as application of income and hence the amount of capital expenditure to the extent of available income is deductible from the current income. ➤ Any excess expenditure over income

Shri 108 Gol Visha Shrimali Jain Charites Surat, Surat vs. DCIT, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 262/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Shri 108 Gol Visha Shrimali Jain D.C.I.T., (Cpc), Charities Surat, Bangalore. Vs. Jain Wadi Bh Bhulka Bhavan School, Anand Mahal Road, Adajan, Surat-395009. Pan No. Aabts 3025 N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 254(1)

disallowing sum of Shri 108 Gol Visha Shrimali Jain Charities Surat Vs DCIT(CPC) Rs. 11,93,059/- claimed as application of income and Rs. 2,42,185/- claimed as accumulated of income u/s 11(1)(a) of the I.T. Act, 1961 on the ground that registration certificate u/s 12AA ... dated 01/08/1996 which has not been withdrawn and still valid. The assessing officer /CPC while processing return of income of assessee disallowed the application of income. The ld AR for the assessee submits that he undertakes on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in attending the hearing and making

DCIT, Central Circle-8, New Delhi vs. Subhshree Investment Management P.Ltd, Kolkata

Appeals is allowed

ITA 3301/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmadcit, Vs. M/S. Subhshree Investment Central Circle-8, Management Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi Flat -1A, Block-2, Silver Spring Bldg., 5, Jbs, Haldane Avenue, Kolkata, West Bengal-700105. Pan : Aamcs4230P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)

Therefore prima facie the case of the assessee shows that there is a double addition, once the source of income and secondly the application of income. Therefore according to us the balance of convenience lies in favour of the assessee. 20. Learned DR has contended that the conclusion drawn ... Therefore prima facie the case of the assessee shows that there is double taxation, once the source of income and secondly the application of income. We entirely agree with the above finding of the ITAT in the order passed in the stay petition filed by M/s Surya Processed Food Pvt.Ltd

Vijayakumar Kanaiyalal Matta, Mumbai vs. ITO 26 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 53/MUM/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhvk-Vk-La- 52@Eaqcbz@2020 ¼Fu-Oa- 2013&14½ Vk-Vk-La- 53@Eaqcbz@2020 ¼Fu-Oa- 2014&15½ Vijaykumar Kanaiyalal Matta 8/B/104, 10Th Floor, S. S. Nagar, Sion Koliwada, Sion Mumbai-400 037 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aropm6060D Cuke Vs. Income Tax Officer – 26(3) (4) Room No.507, 5Th Floor, Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, B. K. C. Bandra (E), ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sr. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 69

does not undertake any economic activities in India. The unexplained investments, which are inherently in the nature of the application of income rather than earning of income, cannot thus be taxed in India under Article 22(1). Article 22(2) only restricts the scope of article 22(1) by providing

Vijayakumar Kanaiyalal Matta, Mumbai vs. ITO 26 (3)(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 52/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tejveer Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, Sr. AR

Section 131Section 147Section 148Section 69

DCIT(E) Circle-2(1), New Delhi vs. Natrip Implementation Society, New Delhi

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

ITA 1617/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: PendingITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Adv & Ms. Suman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2Section 2(15)

have erred in not considering the amount of Rs. 5,55,000/- spent by the assessee society as investment in FDRs as of application of income which cannot be disallowed because the entire funds are held by assessee society as Trustee of the Government of India which

DCIT, Circle- 2(1), New Delhi vs. Natrip Implementation Society, Delhi

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

ITA 1251/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: PendingITAT Delhi31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Adv & Ms. Suman Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR

Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 2Section 2(15)

ITO (E), Ward- 2(3), New Delhi vs. The Managing Committee of Shivala Apa Gangadhar, Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the petition under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 226/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं .I.T.A No. 226/Del/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer (E) The Managing बनाम Committee Of Shivala Vs. Ward : 2 (3) Apa Gangadhar, Near Red Fort, New Delhi. Chandni Chowk, Delhi – 110 006. Pan No. Aaatt7829A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""थ"/ Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. Raj Kumar, Adv

Section 11(1)(d)

assessee the Assessing Officer treated the entire corpus amount of Rs.2,47,33,537/- as general receipt. The Assessing Officer also denied application of income on account of renovation of temple building to the extent of Rs.34,82,434/- as the assessee did not furnish any details of expenditure ... assessee by way of pleadings under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules submitted that the ld. CIT (Appeals) in so far as the application of income on account of renovation of temple building expenses of Rs.34,82,434/ is concerned held that the claim is infructuous as there

M/S. Kanpur Fertilizers & Cement Ltd., Noida vs. ITO, Noida

Appeal are allowed

ITA 308/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia[Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 234B

exclusively for such investment. 4) It is fallacious to hold that the interest-cost of borrowed-and- 8 invested funds was an application of income even though such cost attached to the borrowed funds from their origination. The borrowed funds had no existence sans the interest-liability. To say that

ACIT, Circle 8(2), New Delhi vs. Etawah Chakeri (Kanpur) Highway Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 9200/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaacit Vs. Etawah Chakeri (Kanpur) Circle – 8(2), Highway Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi Ose Commercial Block, Asset 5B, Aerocity, Hospitality, District, Igi Pan No. Aacce 8963 D Airport, New Delhi – 110 037 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri K. V. S. R. Krishna, C.A. Revenue By Shri Javed Akhter, Cit-D.R. Date Of Hearing: 22.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.05.2023

Section 143(3)

hence not chargeable to tax in hands of the assessee. 6 Diversion of income by overriding title is to be distinguished from the application of income after it is earned. Application of Income means spending of Income after it is being earned by the assessee. Such amount shall

DCIT(Exemp), Circle-1(1), New Delhi vs. Institute of Marketing & Management, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7074/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2023AY 2014-15

Section 11Section 13(1)(c)Section 2(15)

erred in allowing the claim of depreciation for the assets purchased in earlier years cost of which has been allowed as application of income, such claim being consequential in nature of allowance of benefit of exemption to the assessee. 4. Drawing our attention towards relevant part of the assessment order ... assets acquired during the year under consideration as cost of fixed assets acquired during earlier years had been treated and allowed as application of income in the year of purchase. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by deleting both

ACIT, Circle- 4(1), Gurgaon vs. Lemon Tree Land and Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 3749/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR

Section 3Section 36Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

more specifically, it is Mr. Rai's contention, that the funds utilized by the respondent/assessee to effectuate its CSR obligation involved application of income and not an expense which had been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of carrying on business. ~ 4.3 In support of this plea ... same is incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of carrying on business or profession. As the CSR expenditure (being an application of income) is not incurred for the purposes of carrying on business, such expenditures cannot be allowed under the existing provisions of section 37 of the Income

Lemon Tree Land and Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 2, Gurgaon

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

ITA 3087/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala, Sr.AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR

Section 3Section 36Section 37Section 37(1)Section 40A(2)

DCIT, Central Circle-27, New Delhi vs. Gian Sagar Educational & Charitable Trust, Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 954/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs Gian Sagar Educational & Central Circle-27, Charitable Trust, New Delhi. Ram Nagar, Banur, Patiala, Punjab – 140 601. Pan: Aaatg5827B (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.05.2023 Order Per M. Balaganesh, Am: This Appeal In Ita No.954/Del/2021 For Ay 2016-17 Arises Out Of The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, New Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Cit(A)’, In Short] In Appeal No.187/2018-19 Dated 17.02.2021 Against The Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 28.12.2018 By The Ld. Assessing Officer, Central Circle 27, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Ld. Ao’). 2. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Pratap Mall, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 40A(3)Section 80G

Based on this, the ld. AO held that the exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 11 of the Act by way of application of income for charitable purposes could not be granted to the assessee and made an addition of Rs.2,84,33,532/- in the assessment. 4. Further

Seth Pannalalji Dhool Chandjki Kataria Parmathik Trust, Indore vs. Them CIT (Exemption ), Bhopal

ITA 363/IND/2022[00]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 May 2023

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniseth Paannalalji Cit, Exemption Dhoolchandji Kataria Bhopal Parmarthik Trust, बनाम/ 10-13, Industrial Area, Vs. Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aafts 2492 D Assessee By Shri Rajesh Mehta & C.A. Kaide Kangsawala Revenue By Shri P.K.Mishra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 03.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.05.2023

Section 10Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(i)

clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub- clause (via) of clause (23C) of section 10, shall not be treated as application of income for charitable or religious purposes, either during the period of accumulation or thereafter”. [Emphasis added] Ld. AR submitted that the language of Explanation to section ... other trusts/societies in furtherance of its charitable activities. Needless to mention that the donations given to other trusts/societies is treated as a valid application of income for the purpose of giving exemption u/s 11(1)(a) and the department has accepted this in assessee’s own case year after year

ITO, Ward-1(Exemption), Patna vs. Aishwarya Foundation, Patna

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 103/PAT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna03 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 103/Pat/2020 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Aishwarya Foundation, Patna Exemption Vs 46, Patliputra Colony Near Sahyog Hospital Patliputra Colony Patna - 800013 [Pan: Aacta0834A] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 13/04/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 1, Patna, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 10/09/2020, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Sole Issue Raised By The Department Before Us In The Instant Lis Relates To The Deletion Of Addition Of Rs.2,61,72,000/- By The Ld. Cit(A) Made By The Assessing Officer In The Assessment Framed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 30/12/2016 On Account Of Alleged Anonymous Donations Made U/S 115Bbc Of The Act. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Trust Is A Charitable Organization Registered U/S 12Aa Of Act. It Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 24/06/2015 Declaring Total Income At ‘Nil’. Case Of Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Cass Followed By Issuance Of Notice U/S 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Act. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Noted From The Income & Expenditure Account That The Assessee Had Shown Income At Rs.2,61,72,000/- Which Was Received As Donation & Incurred Expenses To The Tune Of Rs.2,22,47,910/- Which Resulted In Income Over Expenditure At

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. D/R

Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

trusts or institutions is exempt from income-tax under sections 11 and 12, subject to the fulfilment, inter alia, of certain conditions of application of income and investment in specified modes. Anonymous donation has been defined in the new section to mean any voluntary contribution referred to in section

Maheshwari Pragati Mandal, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Income Tax Department, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee allowed

ITA 3225/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blemaheshwari Pragati Mandal V. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre 2Nd Floor Maheshwari Bhavan Delhi Girgaon Road, Kalbadevi Mumbai-400002 Pan: Aaatm0226G (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)

under: - “From the computation of total income, you will please observe that, the capital cost of fixed assets has not been claimed as application of income. Only depreciation in respect thereof has been claimed in computing the income of the trust. It may be added here that, for earlier years ... again when depreciation on this asset is claimed it would amount to double claim in the form of application of income. When the capital asset is written off in the books, there is no asset pending in the books for claiming depreciation allowance. Such double deduction is not provided

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Centra Cir.2, Surat vs. Dagina Jewellers India Pvt. Ltd., Surat

In the result, grounds Nos

ITA 51/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Apr 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble Accountnat Member (Physical Court Hearing) Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT(DR) and Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

During the appellate proceedings, the assessee strongly urged that addition is required to be made either for source of income or for application of income whichever is higher. The assessee further submitted that the estimate of profit on undisclosed turnover is merely source of income and the same was lying ... survey proceedings and, therefore, the undisclosed income is to be arrived at either considering source of income or investment in undisclosed stock (asset) (application of income) whichever is higher. Hence, ld CIT(A) noted that there is merit in the arguments of the assessee. Higher of source of income