TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 924
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....03.2017. Through the impugned proceedings, the first respondent reopened the assessment under section 147 of the said Act in respect of the Assessment Year 2010-11 only on the reason that the depreciation to the extent of Rs. 6,74,60,921/- claimed and allowed as an application of income was not in consonance with ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Limited vs Union of India reported in 189 ITR 44 and followed by the Hon'ble High Court, Ernakulam in the case of M/s.Lissie Medical Institutions vs. CIT reported in 76 DTR (Kerala) 372. In other words, it is the contention of the Revenue that allowing such depreciation would amount to a double benefit. 2.This Court, while entertaining the writ petition on 20.12.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s.Lissie Medical Institutions Vs. CIT [reported in 76 DTR (Kerala) 372] and the clarification given by the Central Board of Direct Taxes before the High Court in the said case. Therefore, the respondent stated that he has reason to believe that excess depreciation allowance under the said Act has been computed and that as per Clause c (iv) to Explanation 2 to Section 147 of the said Act, income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. 4. The petitioner submitted their objections dated 04.12.2017 pointing out, among other things, that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of DIT Vs. M/s.Medical Trust of the Seventh Day Adventists [TCA.No.844 of 2010 etc. cases dated 08.8.2017] considered similar assessments and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sment by relying upon those two decisions, when the jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s.Medical Trust of the Seventh Day Adventists has taken a different view, which would bind the first respondent. That apart, this Court finds from the return of income filed by the petitioner that the claim regarding depreciation has been disclosed and that the Assessing Officer, who completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the said Act, observed that the Accounts Officer of the trust appeared for the hearing held on various dates and produced books of accounts, bills, statements and other details, based on which, the case was heard and the details produced were verified. In such circumstances, the basic facts, if furnished by the petition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jarati Foundation reported in (2018) 300 CTR Reports (SC) 1. 4.Perusal of the said judgment would show that the Apex Court, has in fact, overruled M/s.Lissie Medical Institutions decision rendered by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam by categorically observing that depreciation is allowable to charitable trust even if the entire expenditure incurred for acquisition of capital assets has been treated as application of income for charitable purposes under Section 11(1)(a), while insertion of Section 11(6) by way of Finance (No.2) Act, 2014 is effective only from Assessment Year 2015-16. Admittedly, the present case involves the Assessment Year 2010-11. 5.Learned Senior Standing counsel for the respondents fairly conceded that the is....