ITO, Coimbatore V. M/s. Vidya Vikasini Society, Coimbatore

ITA 1935/CHNY/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 73739 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 27-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 04-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Charitable institution
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A B ENCH, CHENNAI . , ! ' , # $ BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I.T.A.NO. 1935/MDS/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11) INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD-I, 1 ST FLOOR, 63-A RACE COURSE ROAD, COIMBATORE. VS. M/S. VIDYA VIKASINI SOCIETY, 66-D, METTUPALAYAM ROAD, THUDIYALUR, COIMBATORE-641 034. PAN: AAAV0673R ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. SHAJI P.JACOB, ADDL. CIT /RESPONDENT BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 27 TH FEBRUARY, 2014 ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7 TH MARCH, 2014 % / O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE OR DER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I, COIMBAT ORE DATED 21.8.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. TH E ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT COMMISSIONER OF IN COME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEPREC IATION HOLDING IT AS APPLICATION OF INCOME ON STATED CHARI TABLE OBJECTS. ITA NO.1935/MDS/2013 2 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE. THEREFORE WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL ON HEARING DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 3. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS THAT ASSESSI NG OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT DENIED CLAI M OF DEPRECIATION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE STATING THAT DEPR ECIATION CLAIMED IS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND TREATED AS NOT APPLIED TOWARDS OBJECTS OF THE TRUST , SINCE THE COST OF ASSETS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED AS APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISI ON OF HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S. LISSI E MEDICAL INSTITUTION, DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITS TH AT ASSESSING OFFICER IS WELL JUSTIFIED IN DENYING DEPR ECIATION OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON GOING THROUGH THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), WE FIND TH AT THE ISSUE IN APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF TH E ASSESSEE ITA NO.1935/MDS/2013 3 BY VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF TH IS TRIBUNAL AND IN FACT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FO LLOWED THOSE DECISIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL AND ALLOWED THE CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 6. I HAVE GONE THROU G H THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND ALSO THE ORDE R OF T HE ASSESS I NG OFFICER . O N SIM I LAR SET OF FA C TS OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 , I HA VE D I RECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO A L LOW THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION IN THE CASE O F M/S. C OIMBATORE WELFARE ASSOC I ATION IN IT APPEAL NO.165/11-12 DATED 02.07 . 2012 . T HE HON'BLE ITAT 'C' BENCH RECENTLY IN APPEAL NO.ITA NO . 1773 /MDS/2013 PASSED ON 22 ND F EBRUARY 2013 HAS UPHELD THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX (APPEALS) AND ALLOWED ' THE DEPRECIAT I ON . FURTHER, THE HON ' BLE ITAT ' A' BENCH, CHENNA I IN THE CASE OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD-I VS BANNARI AMMAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST ( IT A NO.2262/MDS/12) HELD THAT 'IN CASE OF DIVERGENT JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS WHICH FAVOUR THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ADOPTED AND HELD THAT THE CLA I MS OF DEPRECIATION, DO NOT RESULT IN DOUBLE DEDUCTION ' . RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF THE ITAT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO ALLOW DEPRECIATION CLAIMED BY THE TRUST . 7. THE HON'BLE ITAT ' A BENCH , CHENNAI IN ITS ORDER DATED 17TH APR I L, 2013 IN THE CASE OF M/S. CMS EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, M/S B . A.EDUCATIONAL TRUST, M/S SAKTH I FOUNDATION IN ITA NOS.2261, 2262 AND 2263 CLEARLY H ELD THAT 'AS ALREADY STATED HEREIN ABOVE , THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IS DEPRECIATION IN CASE OF TRUST, WHERE IT AMOUNTS TO DOUBLE DEDUCTION OR NOT . WE FIND THAT REVENUE HAS RELIED ON A DECISION OF KERALA HIGH COURT (PLEADED IN THE GROUNDS) AND ON THE OTHER HAND , THE APPELLANT DREW SUPPORT FROM THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT. FACED WITH THIS SITUATION , WE DRAW SUPPORT FROM THE CASE LAW CIT VS VEGETABLE PRO DUCT 88 ITR 192 (SC) HELD THAT IN CASE OF DIVERGENT JUD I CIAL PRECEDENTS, THE ONE WHICH FAVOUR THE ASSESSEE HAS T O BE ITA NO.1935/MDS/2013 4 ADOPTED AND CONFIRMED THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA X (APPEALS) ' S FINDINGS'. SIMILARLY, THE HON'BLE ITAT 'A ' BENCH, CHENNAI IN ITA NOS . 1790 , 1792 HAVE HELD THAT DEPRECIATION I S ALLOWABLE ON THE FIXED ASSETS . RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDERS OF THE JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUNAL , I DIRECT THE ASSESS I NG OFFICER TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT . THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE ALLOWED. 5. ON GOING THROUGH THE ABOVE FINDINGS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), WE FIND THAT THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE FO LLOWING VARIOUS DECISIONS OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDE R PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IN ALLOWIN G THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND UPHOLD THE SAME. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON FRIDAY, THE 7 TH DAY OF MARCH, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (CHALLA NAGEN DRA PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 7 TH MARCH, 2014. SOMU COPY TO: (1) APPELLANT (4) CIT(A) (2) RESPONDENT (5) D.R (3) CIT (6) G.F.