Madras High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Unknown on 21 June, 2021
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATE: 21.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Coimbatore. ... Appellant
v.
M/s.Ramananda Adigalar Foundation
Kumaraguru College of Tech Campus,
Chinnavedampatti
Coimbatore - 641 035. ... Respondent
Tax Case Appeal preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax
Act, 1961, against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Madras, "A" Bench, dated 14.02.2013 in I.T.A.No.1790/Mds/2012 for
the Assessment Year 2009-2010.
For Appellant : Mr.J. Narayanaswamy
Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent : Mr.R.Venkatnarayanan
Page 1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
Challenging the order passed in I.T.A.No.1790/Mds/2012 in
respect of the Assessment Year 2009-2010 on the file of the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai,"A" Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal), the
Revenue has filed the above appeal.
2. The respondent-assessee is a Charitable Trust registered under
section 12A of the Income Tax Act. The assessee filed its return of
income for the Assessment Year 2009-2010 on 06.11.2009. The
Assessing Officer issued a notice under section 143(2) of the Act on
31.08.2010 and the order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed on
01.12.2011. In concluding the assessment, the Assessing Officer
inter alia held that the depreciation claimed by the assessee would not
be allowable as a deduction in the computation of the funds available for
application by the asessee on the premise that the entire cost of the assets
were allowed as an application of the funds in the year when the same
were purchased. The Assessing Officer, held that the provisions of
Page 2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
section 11 is distinct from that of section 14 and that the deductions and
the allowances that are provided in chapter V cannot be applied in
determining the income for the purpose of section 11 of the Act.
Aggrieved over the order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee
filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and
the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal.
Challenging the order passed by the CIT (Appeals), the Revenue filed
an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which confirmed
the order of the CIT (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved
over the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the
Revenue has filed the above appeal.
3. The above appeal was admitted on the following substantial
questions of law:-
“ (i) Whether In law and in the facts and
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal Is right,
holding that depreciation is allowable as application
of income on charitable objects?
Page 3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right In
holding ¢hat the assessee is entitled to claim
depreciation on the assets jn the form of application
of income, even though cost of purchase of asset was
treated as application of income under Section 11?
(iii) Whether in law and in the facts and
circumstances of thé case, the Tribunal is right in
holding that allowing the depreciation claim of the
assessee would not result in double deduction,
though the entire cost of the depreciable assets has
already been allowed as application of income
towards object of the trust?”
4. When the appeal is taken up for hearing, Mr.J.Narayanasamy,
learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant-revenue
fairly submitted that the substantial questions of law that are raised in
the above appeal were already decided by the Division Bench of this
court in the Common Judgment in T.C.A.Nos.343 to 345 & 347 of 2014
[Commissioner of Income Tax, Trichy Vs. M/s.National College
Page 4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
Council, Teppakulam, Tiruchirapalli – 620 002] wherein the Division
Bench held as follows:-
" ................. 4.When the appeals were taken up for
hearing, Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing
Counsel appearing for the appellant – Revenue in all the
appeals, fairly submitted that the substantial question of
law, which has been framed in these appeals, have been
answered against the Revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in CIT Vs. Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable
Foundation reported in [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC).
Further, the learned Senior Standing Counsel submitted
that following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, by judgment
dated 26.08.2019, made in T.C.A.Nos.680 & 681 of 2011
[Commissioner of Income Tax – I, Tiruchirapalli Vs.
M/s.National College Council, P.B.No.369, Chatram
Bus Stand, Teppakulam, Tiruchirapalli – 620 002]
dismissed the appeals and answered the substantial
questions of law against the Revenue. The appeals in
T.C.A.Nos.680 & 681 of 2011 relates to the very same
assessee. Hence, following the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court reported in [2018] 402 ITR 441 (SC) and
the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
made in T.C.A.Nos.680 & 681 of 2011, the substantial
question of law is answered against the Revenue and the
appeals are dismissed. No costs.
5. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the
appellant submitted that following the Judgment dated 26.02.2021 made
in T.C.A.Nos.343 to 345 & 347 of 2014 [cited supra], this Bench
Page 5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
already decided the questions of law against the Revenue by its
Judgement dated 08.04.2021 made in T.C.A.No.407 of 2014 [The
Commissioner of Income Tax,Coimbatore. v. M/s. Kovai Medical
Centre and Educational Trust, Coimbatore] and dismissed the appeal.
6. In view of the fair submission made by the learned Senior
Standing Counsel, following the Judgment dated 26.02.2021 made in
T.C.A.Nos.343 to 345 & 347 of 2014 [cited supra] and the Judgement
dated 08.04.2021 made in T.C.A.No.407 of 2014 [cited supra], the
questions of law are answered against the Revenue and the Tax Case
Appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[M.D., J.] [R.H., J.]
21.06.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Rj
To
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai, "A" Bench
Page 6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
R.HEMALATHA, J.
Rj
T.C.A.No.188 of 2014
21.06.2021
Page 7/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
