TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing that the assessee is eligible for claim of exemption under section 11, even in absence of approval under sub-clause (vi) to the Section 10(23C). 3. The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that approval under sub-clause (vi) to the Section 10(23C) is distinct from registration U/s. 12A of the Act. 4. The learned CIT(A) failed to see that sub-clause (vi) to the section 10(23C) as inserted by the Finance Act, 1998 w.e.f. 01.04.1999, states that the University or other educational institution existing solely for educational purpose, and which may be approved by the prescribed authority. The issue is explicitly dealt with by the Act itself and the intention of the Legislature is quite clear from it. 5. The learned CIT(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Revenue authorities and other material available on record. The claim of the assessee for exemption of its income for assessment years 2009-10 even under S.11 of the Act has been rejected by the assessing officer on the ground that the assessee-society has not obtained the approval u/s. 10(23C)(iv) of the Act. He accordingly, denying the assessee's claim for exemption, and also disallowing claim for depreciation of Rs.54,97,141, completed the assessment on a total income of Rs.77,66,642, vide order of assessment dated 15.12.2011, passed under S.143(3) of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) following the decisions of the Tribunal in similar maters held that the assessee would be eligible for claiming exemption under S.11 of the Act, subjec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... admission of the student has to be constructed as capitation fee. The Apex Court, further observed that the concerned university and regulated body has to take action for withdrawal of the recognition in case it is found that the educational institution received any money over and above the fees prescribed for the courses. Same view was taken by Apex Court in the case of Islamic Academy of Education and another Vs. State of Karnataka & another (2003) 6 SCC 697. If the donations were received compulsorily for admission of students, the assessee is not entitled for exemption either u/s 10(23C) or u/s 11 of the IT Act. Since the Revenue authorities have not examined the collection of capitation fees in this case for both the years, in our opi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the prescribed fee for admission of students. We direct accordingly. 6. The other issue involved in this appeal relates to disallowance of assessee's claim for depreciation. We find that this issue is also covered by the consistent decisions of the Tribunal in similar matters, as in the case of ADIT V/s. Vyjayanthi Educational Society, Mahaboobnagar in ITA No.1417/Hyd/- 2010 for assessment year 2007-08, and the CIT(A), in the impugned orders, in fact, has also noted some such decisions of the Tribunal on this issue. The Tribunal in its order dated 8.6.2012, in the case of Vyjayanthi Educational Society (supra), to which both of us are parties, has dealt with this issue in the following manner- "6. We heard both the parties on this is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... allowed under S.11, and if it was so allowed, the depreciation would not be allowed in respect of such asset. Only if the value of the asset was not allowed as expenditure under S.11, the Assessing Officer is required to allow depreciation thereon, as per the rate applicable to those assets, as held in the case of Mahila Sidh Nirman Yojna, cited supra. This issue raised by the Revenue is also set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration, in the light of the above observations. The Assessing Officer shall accordingly redecide the issue in accordance with law and after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee." 7. In consonance with the consistent view of the Tribunal in similar matters, we set as....