TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 1598
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned was withdrawn by way of payments to the persons referred u/s 13(3) of the I.T. Act. (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in allowability of depreciation of assets u/s 32 even where the same had already been claimed as application of income in the previous years. (iii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting addition made for foreign travelling expenses u/s 37 of the Act despite of the fact that the assessee failed to prove the justification of these expenses. (iv) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and has acted perversely in deleting the addition of disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) despite of the fact that assessee failed to discharge its onus of furnishing the evidence of use of the assets." (2) Appeal No. 107/2009 " (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and has acted perversely in allowing the benefit of section 11(1) as charitable trust to the assessee despite of the fact that the huge surpluses earned was withdrawn b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d u/s 13(3) of the I.T. Act. (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in allowability of depreciation of assets u/s 32 even where the same had already been claimed as application of income in the previous years. (iii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting addition made for foreign travelling expenses u/s 37 of the Act despite of the fact that the assessee failed to prove the justification of these expenses. (iv) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and has acted perversely in deleting the addition of disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) despite of the fact that assessee failed to discharge its onus of furnishing the evidence of use of the assets." (5) Appeal No. 70/2010 " (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and has acted perversely in allowing the benefit of section 11(1) as charitable trust to the assessee despite of the fact that the huge surpluses earned was withdrawn by way of payments to the persons referred u/s 13(3) of the I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in allowability of depreciation of assets u/s 32 even where the same had already been claimed as application of income in the previous years. (iii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in deleting addition made for foreign travelling expenses u/s 37 of the Act despite of the fact that the assessee failed to prove the justification of these expenses. (iv) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and has acted perversely in deleting the addition of disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) despite of the fact that assessee failed to discharge its onus of furnishing the evidence of use of the assets." (8) Appeal No. 235/2012 " (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the ITAT was justified in law and has acted perversely in allowing the benefit of section 11(1) as charitable trust to the assessee despite of the fact that the huge surpluses earned was withdrawn by way of payments to the persons referred u/s 13(3) of the I.T. Act. (ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3. The issues if read in tabular form reads as under:- Issue No. Issue 1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and in allowing the benefit of section 11(1) of the IT Act without considering the huge surpluses being by the society which was being withdrawn by way of payments made to persons referred to u/s 13(3) of the I.T. Act. 2. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the decision of CIT(A) with regard to allowability of depreciation on assets u/s 32 even where the same had already been claimed as application of income in the previous years. 3. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in deleting addition made for foreign travelling expenses u/s 37 of the Act despite of the fact that the assessee failed to prove the justification of these expenses. 4. Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and has acted perversely in deleting the addition of disallowance of interest u/s. 36(1)(iii) despite of the fact that assessee failed to discharge its onus of furnishin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant is persuading consistently for past several years. There is no denial to the fact that the AO is entitled to examine the application of income for "charitable purpose" and can also examine the breach of any condition/falling into any disqualification criteria under section 13 but he cannot be allowed to go into the existence of the trust for "charitable purpose". This is for the reason that else it would imply that the subordinate authority has "set at naught" the judgment of a superior authority. This is against the principles of Administrative law as well as jurisprudence. The "charitable Purpose" can be questioned only by the Commissioner and he has been granted the statutory powers even to cancel the registration if a doubt arises about the "charitable purpose" subsequent to granting of registration. 19. Without prejudice to above, reliance is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Deputy Commissioner Income-Tax v. Cosmopolitan Education Society 244 ITR 494 where the appeal of the department was rejected by affirming the finding of ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax Appeals that in case there wa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Rs. 8 lakhs for charitable purposes in India by purchasing a building which is to be utilised as a hospital. This income, therefore, is entitled to an exemption Under Section 11(1). In addition, Under Section 11(1)(a), the Assessee can accumulate 25% of its total income pertaining to the relevant assessment year and claim exemption in respect thereof. Section 11(1)(a) does not require investment of this limited accumulation in government securities. The balance income of Rs. 1,64,210.03 constitutes less than 25% of the income for Assessment Year 1970-71. Therefore, the Assessee is entitled to accumulate this income and claim exemption from income tax Under Section 11(1)(a). We set aside the judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court dated 24th September, 2007. The reasoning of the ITAT (set aside by the High Court) is more in consonance with the law laid down by this Court, and we approve its decision. (ii) In Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Chandigarh vs. St. Peter's Education Society (2016) 385 ITR 66 (SC), the Supreme Court observed as under:- We may record at this stage that there was a difference of opinion among various High Courts on the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled by the Department of Income-tax except one from the Gujarat High Court, the High Court has followed its aforesaid judgment in Pinegrove International Charitable Trust. Since this view stands approved, all these appeals are dismissed. We, however, make it clear that observations made in para. 25, reproduced above, shall apply in these cases. One appeal is from the Gujarat High Court which has also followed the view taken by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Pinegrove International Charitable Trust, which also stands dismissed. We also make it clear that the observations made in para. 25 in Queen's Educational Society v. CIT MANU/SC/0287/2015 : [2015] 8 SCC 47 : [2015] 372 ITR 699, 729 (SC) shall be followed. 6.2 He strongly relied on decision of this Court in the case of Jhunjhunu Academy Sammittee Vs. Income Tax Officer Jhunjhunu, D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 123/2006, decided on 8th February, 2017, this Court while considering the identical question observed as under: "15. Before coming to the basic contentions, it is not in dispute that the appellant is as by name itself suggests that it is an academic Samiti carrying on acti....