Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal quashes DIT order, allows assessee appeal on depreciation for charitable trust income.</h1> <h3>Karnataka State Muslim Federation Versus Director of Income Tax</h3> Karnataka State Muslim Federation Versus Director of Income Tax - TMI Issues Involved:1. Jurisdiction of the DIT (E) in passing the order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.2. Setting aside the claim of depreciation for application of income by the Trust.Detailed Analysis:1. Jurisdiction of the DIT (E) in passing the order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act:The primary issue in this case revolves around the jurisdiction of the Director of Income Tax (Exemptions) [DIT (E)] in passing the order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The DIT (E) scrutinized the assessment records and found that the assessee, a Trust engaged in educational activities, claimed both capital expenditure and depreciation on assets as application of funds towards the objects of the Trust. The DIT (E) viewed this as a case of double deduction, thus setting aside the assessment passed under Section 143(3) and directing the Assessing Officer to disallow the depreciation after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard.The DIT (E) relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. & Anr. v/s Union of India (199 ITR 43), which held that when deduction under Section 35(2)(iv) is allowed in respect of capital expenditure on assets for scientific research, no depreciation is allowable under Section 32 on the same assets. The DIT (E) also referenced several other judicial precedents and CBDT clarifications to support the view that allowing both capital expenditure and depreciation amounts to double deduction, which is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.2. Setting aside the claim of depreciation for application of income by the Trust:The assessee contested the DIT (E)'s order, arguing that the issue of allowance of depreciation as application of income for the objects of the Trust is a settled position of law. The assessee cited decisions from the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the cases of Karnataka Reddy Janasangha and M/s Cutchi Memon Union, which held that depreciation should be allowed while computing the income of the Trust under Section 11 of the Act. These decisions emphasized that income for the purposes of Section 11 should be computed on commercial principles, which include deducting depreciation to arrive at the income.The Tribunal, after hearing both parties, noted that the income of the Trust should be computed under Section 11 on commercial principles without reference to the heads of income specified under Section 14 of the Act. It should be computed as per the book income, not the total income as defined in Section 2(45) of the Act. The Tribunal referred to various judgments from different High Courts and the CBDT Circular No.5-P (LXX-6) dated 19th June 1968, which confirmed that the income of the Trust should be computed on a commercial basis, including the deduction of depreciation.The Tribunal also distinguished the Supreme Court judgment in Escorts Ltd., stating that the issue in that case pertained to business income and deductions under Sections 32 and 35(1)(iv), whereas in the case of a charitable trust, depreciation is a deduction to arrive at income, and capital expenditure is an application of such income. The Tribunal preferred to follow the judgments of various High Courts over the Cochin Bench Tribunal's decision, holding that the assessee is eligible for claiming depreciation.Conclusion:The Tribunal quashed the order passed under Section 263 by the DIT (E), thereby allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal's decision was based on the established legal position that depreciation should be allowed while computing the income of a charitable trust under Section 11, as it is necessary to preserve the corpus of the Trust and does not amount to double deduction. The order was pronounced in the Open Court on 09th October 2013.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found