TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (10) TMI 567
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed U/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for the AY 2015-16. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable institution registered U/s. 12A of the Act and under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) filed its return of income for the AY 2015-16 admitting a total income of Rs. NIL. The return was summarily processed U/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS to verify "Large Corpus donations received by the Trust" and statutory notices U/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served on the assessee. In response to the notices, the assessee's Authorized Representative appeared and produced the details called for by the Ld. AO. Considering the subm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons and raised a tax demand of Rs. 73,51,516/-. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) considering the submissions made by the assessee and by admitting the additional ground raised by the assessee, allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal before the Tribunal: "(i) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in both law and facts of the case. (ii) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in treating the amount of Rs. 3,96,45,981/- as corpus fund in the absence of specific directions from the Donor as per the provisions of section 11(1)(d) of the Act. (iii) The Ld.CIT(A) erred in allowing ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion. Similarly, the Ld. AR also further submitted that section 11(6) was introduced by the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f 1/4/2015 and it is a settled law that it has to be applied prospectively. The Ld. AR also further submitted that the assessee filed an additional ground before the Ld. CIT(A) with respect to unabsorbed depreciation and unabsorbed expenditure over income which was admitted by the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR therefore pleaded that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record and the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities. Admittedly the Revenue is in agreement with the activities carried on by the Trust. The only issue here is whether the donation received by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of $6,50,000 as corpus fund. Ground No.3 is adjudicated." 6. We agree with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and hence no interference is required on this ground. Accordingly, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 7. The ground No.(iii) raised by the Revenue regarding allowing the claim of carry forward of unabsorbed excess of expenditure over income and unabsorbed depreciation, we find that the assessee has filed a petition u/s. 154 of the Act before the Ld. AO. However, the Ld. AO has rejected the claim of the assessee since the assessee has not made any claim in the return of income. Therefore, the assessee filed an additional ground along with the evidences before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) as per the provisions of section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ears of Rs. 4,51,52,791/-. 9. We find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and hence no interference is required on this ground. Thus, this ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 10. Similarly, the allowance of excess of expenditure over income in earlier years as carry forward loss the Ld. CIT (A) relying on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation 164 ITR 439(Raj) Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sri Plot Swetamber Murthy Pujak Jain Mandal 211 ITR 293 (Guj.), Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Institute of Banking Personal Selection has concluded that the assessee is eligible for claiming excess expenditure over income of earlier assessment....