← All Phrases

“Section 32(1)(ii)(12)”

Section References (mined)Section 32Section 32(1)(ii)(12)1 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 32(1)(ii)(12) is Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona (89 Taxmann.com 127), cited in 130 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 32(1)(ii)(12)

Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona
89 Taxmann.com 127 · 2018 · Supreme Court
130
citing judgments

The claim of depreciation under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act for assets used by charitable trusts is permissible, affirming the Bombay High Court's view that such a claim does not amount to a 'double benefit'.

CIT v. Nirbheram Deluram
91 Taxmann 181 · 1997 · Supreme Court
35
citing judgments

The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) can make enhancements to an assessment during appellate proceedings, provided such enhancements do not amount to introducing an entirely new head of income.

DIT v. Vishwa Jagriti Mission
262 CTR 558 · 2013 · High Court
19
citing judgments

Depreciation is allowable on capital assets for charitable trusts even if expenditure was allowed as deduction, as long as it doesn't amount to double deduction. The principles of commercial accountancy apply when computing business income.

Judgments citing Section 32(1)(ii)(12)

ACIT., Circle-3(1), Hyderabad vs. Synergies Castings Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed in its favour

ITA 641/HYD/2024[2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Sept 2024

Bench: Shri Prakash Chand Yadav & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: : Shri Srikanth Reddy Y, DR
Section 143(1)(a)Section 32(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(va)

against the cost of moulds as the Appellant inadvertently claimed the deduction of Rs.2,21,53,320/-as per the provisions of section 32(1)(ii)(12). Thus the same was added to the depreciation and thereby the deprecation was wrongly shown in the ROI amounting to Rs.16,32 ... alloy wheels during the year under review. While claiming the same, the Appellant inadvertently claimed the deduction as per the provisions of section 32(1)(ii)(12). Thus the same was added to the depreciation and thereby the deprecation was wrongly shown in the ROI amounting to Rs.16,32