CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai v. M. L. Charitable Trust
[Citation -2020-LL-0205-143]
| Citation | 2020-LL-0205-143 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | CIT (Exemptions), Mumbai |
| Respondent Name | M. L. Charitable Trust |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 05/02/2020 |
| Assessment Year | 2011-12 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | carry forward of deficit • accumulation of income • application of income • excess expenditure • charitable trust • double deduction |
| Bot Summary: | Borey 1/5 spb/ 12itxa88-18.odt 3 The Appeal has been filed on the following substantial questions of law : i. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) whereby the CIT(A) allowed the claim of depreciation of Rs. 1,74,16,069/- relying on the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection reported at 264 ITR 110 ignoring the ratio of Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Escorts Ltd., vs. Union of India wherein Hon ble Supreme Court has held that double deduction cannot be presumed if the same is not specifically provided by law, in addition to normal deduction ii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in upholding the order of the CIT(A) when the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Charanjiv Charitable Trust and Hon ble Kerala High Coiurt in the case of Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT 76 DTR 372 have decided the issue in favour of the Revenue after Borey 2/5 spb/ 12itxa88-18.odt considering the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. vs. Union of India iii. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT erred in allowing the claim of the assessee for carry forward of the said deficit by relying upon the judgment of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Institute of Banking Personnel Selection, ignoring the fact that the Revenue has Borey 3/5 spb/ 12itxa88-18.odt not accepted the said decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court on merit of the case, but due to smallness of tax effect appeal was not filed before Hon ble Supreme Court. v. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was right in allowing the claim of the assessee for carry forward of the said deficit, ignoring the fact that there was no express provision in the Income Tax Act, 1961 permitting allowance of such claim. Are concerned, the same have been decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation 2018 402 ITR 441. Borey 4/5 spb/ 12itxa88-18.odt 5 Mr. Patil, learned counsel for Respondent also submits that in respect of the above two questions in the case of the Respondent itself for the assessment year 2010-11, this court vide order dated 05.03.2019 had dismissed the Revenue s Appeal No. 1804 of 2016 by following the decision of the Supreme Court, as referred above. 6 Insofar question Nos., and are concerned, it is submitted at the Bar that those would be covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Subros Educational Society 2018 303 CTR 0001, wherein the Supreme Court has decided the issue in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. |