, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , , # BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / I .T.A. NOS: 3051 & 3052/CHNY/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S RAMANANDA ADIGALAR FOUNDATION, CHINNAVEDAMPATTI, COIMBATORE 641 006. [PAN: AAATR 3640M] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD -1, COIMBATORE [PRESENT, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOE TAX, (EXEMPTIONS), COIMBATORE.] ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. SAROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY : SHRI. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDL. CIT % /DATE OF HEARING : 13.06.2018 % /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.06.2018 / O R D E R PER S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ASSESSEE FILED THESE APPEALS AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, COIMBATORE IN ITA NO. A266/2013- 14 & ITA NO. 8/2015-16 DATED 28.03.2016 & 31.03.201 7 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12 & 2012-13, RESPECTIVELY. :-2-: ITA NOS. 3051 & 3052/CHNY/2017 2. THE APPEAL RELATED TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 WA S FILED WITH A DELAY OF 521 DAYS AND THE APPEAL RELATED TO ASSESSMENT YE AR 2012-13 WAS FILED WITH A DELAY OF 175 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE PLEADED THAT THE STAFF OF THE ASSESSEE ENTRUSTED IN HANDLING OF TAXATION ISSUES WAS UNDER THE BONAFIDE IMPRESSION THAT SINCE THERE IS A NIL DEMAND IN THE NOTICE U/S. 156, THE ORDERS ARE IN FAVOUR OF THE TRUST AND DID NOT BRING TO THE NOTICE OF THE RESPONSIBLE PERSON. ON AN IDENTICAL ISSUE, THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COUR T IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE HELD IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE CA VERIFI ED WITH THE COMPANY, WHETHER ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED FOR THE SUBSEQUENT YE ARS ONLY IT CAME TO NOTICE AND ASSESSEE TOOK STEPS TO FILE THESE APPEAL S. SINCE, THE DELAY IN FILING THESE APPEALS ARE NEITHER WILFUL NOR WANTON BUT ONL Y DUE TO AFORESAID BONAFIDE REASONS, IT PLEADED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THESE APPEALS MAY BE CONDONED. 3. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE HONBLE SUP REME COURT HELD IN THE CASE REPORTED IN 167 ITR 471, INTER ALIA, THAT WHEN THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS ARE PITTED AGAINST EACH OT HER, THE CAUSE OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE DESERVES TO BE PREFERRED, FOR THE OTHER SID E CANNOT CLAIM TO HAVE A VESTED RIGHT IN INJUSTICE BEING DONE BECAUSE OF A N ON-DELIBERATE DELAY ETC. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CONDONE THE DELAY. 4. WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2011-12 & 2012-13 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, M/S. RAMANANDA ADIGALAR FOUNDATION, THE AO RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE KERAL A HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF :-3-: ITA NOS. 3051 & 3052/CHNY/2017 LISSIE MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS VS. CIT 348 ITR 344 (KE R.) READ WITH CBDT CIRCULAR REFUSED TO ALLOW THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OF DEPRECIATI ON ON THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE INCURRED FROM YEAR TO YEAR HOLDING THAT WHEN THE ENTIRE COSTS OF ASSETS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CLAIMED AS APPLICATION OF INCOME TOWARDS OBJECTS OF THE TRUST, THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION ON THE COST OF THE VERY SAME ASSETS RESULTS IN DOUBLE DEDUCTION. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESS EE FILED THE APPEALS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THEM. 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT T HIS ISSUE IS SETTLED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAJASTHAN AND GUJARATI CHARITABLE FOUNDATION, POONA , IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.7186 OF 2014 DATED 13.12.2017, AND HENCE THE ASSESSEES APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEALS IN ITA NOS . 3051 & 3052/CHNY/2017 ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH JUNE, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! ' /JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) ' /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :-4-: ITA NOS. 3051 & 3052/CHNY/2017 /CHENNAI, * /DATED: 13 TH JUNE, 2018 JPV %-./0/ /COPY TO: 1. 1 / APPELLANT 2. -31 /RESPONDENT 3. 4 ) ( /CIT(A) 4. 4 /CIT 5. /- /DR 6. /GF