TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 600
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 30th July 2020 in the ITA Nos. 361/Ahd/2014, 1662/Ahd/2014, 829/Ahd/2017, 803/Ahd/2017, 91/Ahd/2014, 330/Ahd/2014, 2283/Ahd/2014, 752/Ahd/2017, 753/Ahd/2017 and 2321/Ahd/2017 respectively for the Assessment Years 2009-2010 to 2014-2015. 3. The Revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law for the consideration of this Court: In Tax Appeal No. 157 of 2020 "(A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in negating the findings of the CIT(A) as well as the Assessing Officer denying the benefits of Sections 11 and 12 of the Act by invoking proviso to Section 2(15) r.w. Section 13(8) of the Act? (C) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in allowing the accumulation of 15% without appreciating the fact that once the provision of Section 2(15) r.w. Section 13(8) is applicable, the assessee forfeits all the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act? (D) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the deduction in the fixed assets of Rs. 34,49,94,135/without ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lled by the CIT? (C) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in allowing the accumulation of 15% without appreciating the fact that once the provision of Section 2(15) r.w. Section 13(8) is applicable, the assessee forfeits all the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act? (D) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the deduction in the fixed assets of Rs. 34,49,94,135/without appreciating the fact that once the provision of Section 2(15) r.w. Section 13(8) is applicable, the assessee forfeits all the exemptions under Sections 11 and 12 of the Act?" In Tax Appeal No. 160 of 2020 "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in allowing depreciation on assets, full cost of which was already allowed as application in earlier years. The ratio of decision of the Supreme Court in Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation is not applicable in the present case as in that case exemption under section 11 and 12 was available to the assesse, whereas in the present case, the exemption under secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich has been allowed as application of income in earlier years, will tantamount to double deduction particularly when benefit of section 11 & 12 has not been allowed and proviso to section 2(15) has been held to be applicable?" In Tax Appeal No. 163 of 2020 "[A], [B], [D] and Whether the Hon'ble ITAT has erred in allowing the claim for exemption u/s. 11 & 12 to the assesse, without appreciating the findings of the CIT (Appeals) that the assesse has also violated the provisions of section 11(2)(b) r.w.s. 11(5) of the Act and thereby making it in-eligible for claim of exemption u/s. 11 & 12, in view of provisions of section 13 (1)(d) of the Act? Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal is justified in allowing the accumulation of 15% without appreciating the fact that once the provisions of section 2(15) is applicable to the assesse, the assesse forfeits all the exemptions u/s. 11 and 12 of the Act in view of the provisions of section 13(8) of the Act? Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in deleting dividend income without appreciating that in case the assesse i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e claim was disallowed. This was carried in appeal before the CIT(A) by the Assessee. 4.2 The CIT(A), after due consideration of the fact that the Gujarat Maritime Board Employees Pension Trust Fund was duly approved by the CIT, Gandhinagar with effect from 28.03.2003 and the contribution was paid in compliance of the terms of the appointment on the respective erstwhile state government employees in the earlier year, which was constantly allowed by the department, reversed the finding of the assessing officer and allowed the Assessee's appeal since those findings could not be controverted by the Revenue before the CIT(A). 4.3 The Tribunal affirmed the view of the CIT (A) after holding that the Revenue has not been able to controvert the findings of the CIT(A). 4.4 The issue relating to the contribution to pension fund under Section 36(1)(iv) of the Income Tax Act read with Rule 87 and 88 of the Income Tax Rules would not constitute a question of law and would be in the realm of factual issue. The ITAT has observed in its order that no evidence was led by the Revenue-Appellant to dispute the correctness of the findings recorded by the CIT (Appeals). 5. SECOND ISSUE: WHET....