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>Depreciation Allowable for Charitable Trusts under Income-tax Act: Tribunal Decision Clarifies Rules</h1> <h3>Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption) Versus Vishwachetan Foundation IBMR</h3> Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax (Exemption) Versus Vishwachetan Foundation IBMR - [2016] 48 ITR (Trib) 481 Issues Involved:1. Adherence to Supreme Court decisions regarding double deductions.2. Applicability of the Kerala High Court decision on double deductions.3. Legislative intent on preventing double deductions.4. Allowability of depreciation for charitable trusts under sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income-tax Act.5. Applicability of commercial principles for depreciation in charitable trusts.Detailed Analysis:1. Adherence to Supreme Court Decisions Regarding Double Deductions:The Revenue contended that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) erred by not following the Supreme Court's decision in Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India, which held that when a deduction under section 35(2)(iv) is allowed for capital expenditure on scientific research, no depreciation is allowable under section 32 on the same asset. The Supreme Court emphasized that the statute should not permit an assessee to claim two deductions for the same expenditure.2. Applicability of the Kerala High Court Decision on Double Deductions:The Revenue argued that the CIT(A) did not follow the Kerala High Court's decision in Lissie Medical Institutions v. CIT, which held that judicial pronouncements by various High Courts were not applicable to the issue of double deductions. The Kerala High Court's decision emphasized that double deductions should not be allowed.3. Legislative Intent on Preventing Double Deductions:The Revenue highlighted that the legislative intent was to prevent double deductions at any point in time. This was clarified by an amendment effective from the assessment year 2015-16, which explicitly disallowed double deductions.4. Allowability of Depreciation for Charitable Trusts Under Sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income-tax Act:The CIT(A) held that depreciation is allowable for charitable trusts on normal commercial principles, even when their assessments are covered under sections 11, 12, and 13 of the Income-tax Act. The CIT(A) reasoned that only the application of income during the year is allowable under section 11, and depreciation, being a notional expenditure, is not allowable.5. Applicability of Commercial Principles for Depreciation in Charitable Trusts:The CIT(A) further held that commercial principles are applicable, and depreciation is allowable for charitable trusts. The CIT(A) reasoned that under sections 11, 12, and 13, only the application of income during the year is allowable, and depreciation, being a notional expenditure, is not allowable.Tribunal's Findings:The Tribunal noted that the issue was covered by decisions of various High Courts and the Tribunal, including the jurisdictional High Court's decision in DIT (Exemptions) v. Al-Ameen Charitable Fund Trust. The High Court held that while acquiring the capital assets, what is allowed as exemption is the income out of which such acquisition is made. When depreciation is allowed in subsequent years, it is for the wear and tear of such capital assets. If depreciation is not allowed, there is no way to preserve the corpus of the trust for deriving its income.Relevant High Court Findings:The High Court in CIT v. Society of the Sisters of St. Anne held that the income derived from property held under trust cannot be the total income. Depreciation is considered a necessary outgoing and should be allowed as it represents the decrease in value of property through wear and tear. Similar views were taken by other High Courts, including Gujarat, Punjab and Haryana, Delhi, Madras, Calcutta, and Madhya Pradesh.Distinguishing Escorts Ltd. Case:The Tribunal distinguished the Escorts Ltd. case, noting that it dealt with specific provisions regarding scientific research and not with the general principles applicable to charitable trusts. The High Court's decision in Al-Ameen Charitable Fund Trust clarified that section 11 deals with the application of income, which is different from revenue expenditure or allowances.Prospective Application of Section 11(6):The Tribunal noted that section 11(6), inserted with effect from April 1, 2015, clarified that no depreciation is allowable if the acquisition of the asset has been claimed as an application of income. This amendment was prospective and applied from the assessment year 2015-16 onwards.Conclusion:The Tribunal found no error or illegality in the CIT(A)'s order and dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the allowability of depreciation for charitable trusts on commercial principles. The Tribunal's decision was pronounced on May 20, 2016.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found