ASST CIR (E)-1(1), MUMBAI V. HINDI VIDYA BHAVAN, MUMBAI

ITA 312/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9717 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V JUSTIN
• Keywords: Depreciation; Charitable institution
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 312/MUM/2016 : A.Y : 2011 - 12 ACIT, CIT (EXEMPTION) - 1(1), MUMBAI (APPELLANT) VS. HINDI VIDYA BHAVAN, 79, MARINE DRIVE, MUMBAI 400 020. PAN : AAATH0196E (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI V. JUSTIN RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 03/07/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 /07/2017 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU , AM : THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - 1 , MUMBAI DATED 4.11.2015 , PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 , WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 27.3.2014 UNDER SECTION 143( 3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT WAS SEEN THAT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT - ASSESSEE AND NOR ANY ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION HAS BEEN MOVED INSPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING BY RPAD. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. CIT - DR APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT. 2 HINDI VIDYA BHAVAN ITA NO. 312/MUM/2016 3. ACCORDINGLY, IN VIEW OF RULE 25 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES, 1963, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS BEING DISPOSED OFF ON MERITS AFTER HEARING THE LD. DR . 4 . IN THIS APPEAL, ALTHOUGH THE REVENUE HAS RAISED MULTIPLE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, BUT THE SOLITARY ISSUES ARISES FROM THE ACTION OF CIT(A) IN ALLOWING ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR DEPRECIATION OF FIXED ASSETS AMOUNTING TO RS.56,20,717/ - . 5 . IN BRIEF, THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT THE R ESPONDENT - ASSESSEE IS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION REGISTERED THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 AND ALSO U/S 12A OF THE ACT. IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEPRECIATION ON FIXED ASSETS OF RS.56,20,717/ - , WHEREAS THE COST OF THE CORRESPONDING FIXED ASSETS HAD ALSO BEEN CLAIMED AS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME U/S 11(1 )(A ) OF THE ACT WHILE CLAIMING EXEMPTION EITHER IN THE EARLIER YEAR OR DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION ON THE GROUND THAT IT WOULD AMOUNT TO A DOUBLE DEDUCTION; ONCE AS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME AND, SECONDLY, AS ALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION. THE AFORESAID CLAIM OF ASSESSEE HAS SINCE BEEN ALLOWED BY THE CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION, 264 ITR 11 0 (BOM) . AGAINST SUCH A DECISION OF THE CIT(A), REVENUE IS BEFORE US. 3 HINDI VIDYA BHAVAN ITA NO. 312/MUM/2016 6 . BEFORE US, THE LD. DR POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JU STIFIED IN DENYING THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION AS IT WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE DEDUCTION AND, FOR THAT MATTER, HE REFERRED TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ESCORTS LTD., 199 ITR 43 (SC) . AS PER THE LD. DR, THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT LAYS DOWN THAT DOUBLE DEDUCTION CANNOT BE PERMITTED IF THE SAME IS NOT SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED BY LAW. ACCORDING TO HIM, IN THE PRESENT CASE, ONCE THE COST OF FIXED ASSETS HAS BEEN ALLOWED AS AN APPLICATION OF INCOME WHILE COMPUTING THE TAXAB LE INCOME, DEPRECIATION ON THE CORRESPONDING COST OF FIXED ASSETS CANNOT BE AGAIN ALLOWED AS A DEDUCTION. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE REVENUE, BUT FIND NO MERIT IN THE SAME. PERTINENTLY, THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH CO URT IN THE CASE OF INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION (SUPRA) COVERS THE CONTROVERSY IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHERMORE, INSOFAR AS THE RELIANCE PLACED BY THE REVENUE ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ESCORTS LTD. (SUP RA) IS CONCERNED, THE SAME HAS BEEN DULY CONSIDERED BY THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MARKET COMMITTEE, PIPLI, 330 ITR 16 (P&H) . IT HAS BEEN OPINED BY THE HON'BLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MARKET COMMITTEE, PIPLI ( SUPRA) , AFTER CONSIDERING THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ESCORTS LTD. (SUPRA) THAT ALLOWING OF DEPRECIATION CLAIM IN THE INSTANT CIRCUMSTANCE S WOULD NOT AMOUNT TO DOUBLE DEDUCTION. THE CIT(A) HAS CLEARLY BROUGHT OUT THE AFORESAID LEGAL POSITION AND IN VIEW THEREOF, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH HIS DECISION, WHICH IS IN CONFORMITY WITH 4 HINDI VIDYA BHAVAN ITA NO. 312/MUM/2016 THE JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION (SUPRA) . ACCORDINGLY, THE DECISION OF CIT(A) IS AFFIRMED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 1 S T JULY, 2017. SD/ - SD/ - (RAVISH SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( G.S. PANNU ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 3 1 S T JULY, 2017 * SSL * COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, A BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI