The Belgaum Zavier Company Pvt. Ltd., Belgaum V. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2, Belgaum., Belgaum

ITA 163/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1036 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K M MAHESH LD
• Assessee Lawyers: P DINESH
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 32; 12

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN , HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 163 /PNJ/2014 5 (ASST. YEAR : 20 1 0 - 11 ) THE BELGAUM ZAVIER C O . ( P ) LTD. , C/O ST. PAULS HIGH SCHOOL, CAMP BELGAUM. VS. ACIT , CIRCLE - II , BELGAUM . PAN NO. AABCT 3857 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : P. DINESH ADVOCATE. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI K.M. MAHESH LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 04 / 0 6 /2015 . DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04 / 0 6 /201 5 . O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), BELAGAVI IN APPEAL NO. 298 /BGM/ 2010 - 11 DATED 23 /0 2 /201 5 FOR THE A.Y. 20 1 0 - 11 . 2. SHRI P. DINESH , ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K.M. MAHESH , LD. DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT THE ONLY ISSUE IN THE ASSESSEE S A P P E A L W A S A G A I N S T T H E A C T I O N O F T H E LD. CIT(A) I N C O N F I R M I N G 2 ITA NO. 1 6 3 /PNJ/201 5 T H E D E N I A L O F B E N E F I T U/S. 1 1 O F T H E ACT IN RESPECT OF DEPRECIATION C L A I M E D B Y T H E ASSESSEE . I T W A S T H E S U B M I S S I O N T H A T T H E ASSESSEE I S A T R U S T W H I C H I S D O I N G E D U C A T I O N A L A N D C H A R I T A B L E A C T I V I T I E S . T H E ASSESSEE H A D B E E N G R A N T E D B E N E F I T U/S. 1 2 A O F T H E ACT . T H E ASSESSEE H A D C L A I M E D DEPRECIATION O N T H E F I X E D A S S E T S I N T H E INCOME & EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT . I T W A S T H E S U B M I S S I O N T H A T T H E ASSESSING OFFICER H A D I N T H E C O U R S E O F ASSESSMENT , D I S A L L O W E D T H E S A I D C L A I M O F DEPRECIATION A N D T R E A T E D T H E S A M E A S INCOME . T H E ASSESSING OFFICER H A D P L A C E D R E L I A N C E O N T H E D E C I S I O N O F HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N T H E C A S E O F E S C O R T S LTD. A N D A N O T H E R VS. U N I O N O F I N D I A A N D O T H E R S R E P O R T E D I N 1 9 9 ITR 4 3 . I T W A S T H E S U B M I S S I O N T H A T O N A P P E A L , LD. CIT(A) H A D C O N F I R M E D T H E A C T I O N O F T H E ASSESSING OFFICER . I T W A S T H E S U B M I S S I O N T H A T T H E P R E S E N T I S S U E I S S Q U A R E L Y C O V E R E D B Y T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E C O O R D I N A T E B E N C H O F T H I S T R I B U N A L I N T H E C A S E O F T H E K A R N A T A K A L A W S O C I E T Y VS. D C I T I N I T A N O . 9 4 / P N J / 2 0 1 4 D A T E D 1 9 / 1 2 / 2 0 1 4 W H E R E I N T H E D I V I S I O N B E N C H O F T H I S T R I B U N A L B Y F O L L O W I N G T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT O F K A R N A T A K A I N T H E C A S E O F CIT VS. S O C I E T Y O F T H E S I S T E R S O F S T . A N N E . R EPORTED I N 1 4 6 ITR 2 8 ( K A R . ) H A D A L L O W E D T H E ASSESSEE S A P P E A L A N D D I R E C T E D T H E ASSESSING OFFICER T O A L L O W T H E DEPRECIATION T O T H E ASSESSEE U/S. 3 2 O F T H E ACT W H I L E C O M P U T I N G T H E INCOME E L I G I B L E F O R A P P L I C A T I O N U/S. 1 1 ( 1 ) ( A ) O F T H E ACT . 3 ITA NO. 1 6 3 /PNJ/201 5 I T W A S T H E S U B M I S S I O N T H A T T H E ASSESSEE M A Y B E G R A N T E D T H E B E N E F I T O F DEPRECIATION A S C L A I M E D . 4 . I N R E P L Y , LEARNED DR V E H E M E N T L Y S U P P O R T E D T H E O R D E R S O F ASSESSING OFFICER A N D T H E LD. CIT(A) . I T W A S T H E S U B M I S S I O N T H A T T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N T H E C A S E O F E S C O R T S LTD. (SUPRA) W A S S U B S E Q U E N T T O T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE K A R N A T A K A HIGH COURT I N T H E C A S E O F S O C I E T Y O F T H E S I S T E R S O F S T . A N N E . (SUPRA) . 5. I H A V E C O N S I D E R E D T H E R I V A L S U B M I S S I O N S . 6. A T T H E O U T S E T , A P E R U S A L O F T H E D E C I S I O N O F HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N T H E C A S E O F E S C O R T S LTD. (SUPRA) S H O W S T H A T T H E S A I D D E C I S I O N I S I N N O W A Y C O N N E C T E D T O T H E I S S U E O F A N Y C H A R I T A B L E I N S T I T U T I O N . T H E I S S U E I N T H E S A I D D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE SUPREME COURT W A S IN RESPECT OF T H E A L L O W A N C E O F C L A I M O F DEPRECIATION O N S C I E N T I F I C R E S E A R C H A S S E T S . T H E HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N T H E S A I D D E C I S I O N H A S C A T E G O R I C A L L Y H E L D T H A T I N T H E A B S E N C E O F C L E A R S T A T U T O R Y I N D I C A T I O N T O T H E C O N T R A R Y , T H E S T A T U T E S H O U L D N O T B E R E A D S O A S T O P E R M I T A N ASSESSEE T W O D E D U C T I O N S . T H E HONBLE K A R N A T A K A HIGH COURT I N T H E C A S E O F S O C I E T Y O F T H E S I S T E R S O F S T . A N N E . (SUPRA) H A S H E L D T H A T T H E INCOME D E R I V E D F R O M P R O P E R T Y H E L D U N D E R T R U S T C A N N O T B E T H E T O T A L INCOME B E C A U S E S E C . 1 1 ( 1 ) S A Y S T H A T T H E F O R M E R S H A L L N O T B E I N C L U D E D I N T H E L A T T E R , O F T H E P E R S O N IN RESPECT 4 ITA NO. 1 6 3 /PNJ/201 5 OF T H E INCOME . T H E E X P R E S S I O N T O T A L INCOME H A S B E E N D E F I N E D U/S. 2 ( 4 5 ) O F T H E ACT T O M E A N T H E T O T A L AMOUNT O F INCOME R E F E R R E D T O I N S E C . 5 C O M P U T E D I N T H E M A N N E R L A I D D O W N I N T H I S ACT . H E R E W H A T I S U N D E R S T O O D I S T H A T S E C . 3 2 O F T H E ACT P R O V I D E S F O R D E D U C T I O N . S E C . 1 1 O F T H E ACT P R O V I D E S F O R A P A R T I C U L A R INCOME N O T T O B E I N C L U D E D I N T H E T O T A L INCOME O F T H E P R E V I O U S Y E A R O F T H E P E R S O N I N R E C E I P T O F T H A T INCOME . T H U S , W H E N T H E DEPRECIATION I S G R A N T E D T O T H E ASSESSEE W H O H A S B E E N G R A N T E D B E N E F I T O F R E G I S T R A T I O N U/S. 1 2 A O F T H E ACT , I T D O E S N O T M E A N T H A T T H E ASSESSEE H A S RECEIVED D O U B L E D E D U C T I O N . I N T H E S E CIRCUMSTANCES RESPECTFULLY F O L L O W I N G T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E C O O R D I N A T E B E N C H O F T H I S T R I B U N A L I N T H E C A S E O F T H E K A R N A T A K A L A W S O C I E T Y (SUPRA) A S A L S O T H E D E C I S I O N O F T H E HONBLE J U R I S D I C T I O N A L HIGH COURT I N T H E C A S E O F S O C I E T Y O F T H E S I S T E R S O F S T . A N N E . (SUPRA) , T H E ASSESSING OFFICER I S D I R E C T E D T O G R A N T T H E B E N E F I T O F DEPRECIATION U/S. 3 2 O F T H E ACT A S C L A I M E D B Y T H E ASSESSEE . 7 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE S T A N D S A L L O W E D . ( ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 4 T H JUNE , 201 5 ). S D / - ( GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 0 4 T H JUNE , 201 5 . VR/ - 5 ITA NO. 1 6 3 /PNJ/201 5 COPY TO: 1 . THE APPELLANT 2 . THE RESPONDENT 3 . THE LD. CIT 4 . THE CIT(A) 5 . THE D.R 6 . GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PANAJI 6 ITA NO. 1 6 3 /PNJ/201 5 DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ORDER ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE . 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 0 4 .06.2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 0 4 .06.2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER N/A JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER N/A JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 0 4 /06/2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 0 4 /06/2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 0 4 /06/2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER