THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION (MEDICAL)

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set-aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 10 9. In all these appeals

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S KARNATAKA REDDY JANASANGHA

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set-aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 10 9. In all these appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S GOKULA EDUCATION FOUNDATION

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set-aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 10 9. In all these appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set-aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 10 9. In all these appeals

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME vs. SRI ADICHUNCHANAGIRI

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set-aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 10 9. In all these appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS vs. AL-AMEEN CHARITABLE FUND TRUST

The appeals are dismissed

Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set-aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 10 9. In all these appeals

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI SRI ADICHUNCHUNAGIRI SHIKSHANA TRUST

In the result, all the appeals are

Bench: JAYANT PATEL,B.SREENIVASE GOWDA

8. ITA No.431/2013, ITA Nos.56/2013 and 108/2014 are filed by the revenue challenging the orders passed by the Tribunal whereby, the orders passed by Revisional Authority under Section 263 of the Act are set- aside, restoring the assessment order, thus, allowing the depreciation under Section 11 of the Act as claimed by the assessee. 5 9. In all these appeals

THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. KRUPANIDHI EDUCATION

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13 only application of income during the year is allowable under section 11 of the Act and depreciation being a notional expenditure is not allowable?” 3. This Court in case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Pune v. Rajasthan & Gujarati Charitable Foundation Poona’ [2018] 89 taxmann.com 127 [SC] with regard to allowability and Depreciation in the hands of Religious

THE COMMISSIONER OF vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE

Bench: ABHAY SHREENIWAS OKA (CJ),S.G.PANDIT

8 - The present appeals are filed suggesting several substantial questions of law. But, we are clearly of the view that the issues involved in the appeals i.e., allowing of depreciation to a Trust and accumulation of income under Section 11(2) of the Act stand settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported

M/S PADMINI PRODUCTS (P) LTD., vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

In the result, the aforesaid

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

8 Officer in questioning the claim of depreciation by citing the provision of Section 43(1) and Explanation 3 thereof. The Tribunal therefore, dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Learned counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that he does not want to press the substantial question

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S YENEPOYA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on assets put into use during the accounting year relevant to assessment year, even though the entire cost of these assets has been claimed by the assessee as Date of Judgment 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.546/2017 Pr. Commissioner

PR COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S YENEPOYA UNIVERSITY

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on assets put into use during the accounting year relevant to assessment year, even though the entire cost of these assets has been claimed by the assessee as Date of Judgment 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.548/2017 Pr. Commissioner

PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S MEDICAL RELIEF

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on assets put into use during the accounting year relevant to assessment year, eventhough the entire cost of these assets has been claimed by the assessee as Date of Judgment 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.531/2017 Pr. Commissioner

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on assets put into use during the accounting year relevant to assessment year, even though the entire cost of Date of Judgment 14 -08-2018 I.T.A.No.539/2017 Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) & another Vs. M/s Medical Relief

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on assets put into use during the accounting year relevant to assessment year, eventhough the entire cost of these assets has been claimed by the assessee as application of income for charitable activities and Date of Judgment

PR.COMMISSIONER OF vs. M/S SACKHUMVIT TRUST

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13 and therefore, the provisions relation to set-ff of loan from one source against the income from another source, set-off of loss from one head against income from another head and carry forward and set off of loss against the income of subsequent years as envisaged under Section 70 to 79 are also not applicable to the charitable

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. MEDICAL RELIEF SOCIETY OF SOUTH KANARA

Bench: S.SUJATHA,VINEET KOTHARI

13? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in allowing depreciation on assets put into use during the accounting year relevant to assessment year, eventhough the entire cost of these assets has been claimed by the assessee as application of income for charitable activities and further failed to notice

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. SRI N LEELA KUMAR

Bench: N.KUMAR,RATHNAKALA

depreciation under sub-section (2) of section 32 shall not be set off against the undisclosed income determined in the block assessment under this Chapter, but may be carried forward for being set off in the regular assessments. 7. This chapter was introduced for the assessment of undisclosed income determined as a result of carrying out search under Section