| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 2731 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 11
Where assessee had claimed the benefit of adjustment of the carried forward deficit of the earlier year while determining the assessable income then the same was allowable in view of the fact that the assessee brought to the notice that Supreme Court in the case of CIT(E) v. Subros Educational Society [(2018) 303 CTR (SC) 1 : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 3810 (SC)] had impliedly affirmed the position of law enumerated by High Court while considering a similar question raised by revenue before it, as Supreme Court did not find any merit in the same, therefore, appeal of Revenue was dismissed.
|
Charitable trust - Exemption under section 11 - Assessee claimed benefit of adjustment of carried forward defecit of earlier year -
In the course of assessment proceedings, AO noted that assessee had claimed the benefit of adjustment of the carried forward deficit of the earlier year while determining the assessable income. AO took the view that excess expenditure incurred by the trust in the earlier years could not be adjusted against the income of current year, inasmuch as the same could not be treated as an application of the income of the current year. In this manner, AO assessed the total income being the excess of income over expenditure. Before CIT(A), assessee canvassed that action of AO in not allowing the adjustment of deficit carried forward from earlier years was expressly contrary to the law laid down by High Court of Delhi in case of DIT v. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust & Ors. (2011) 197 Taxman 0170 (Delhi) : 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0368 (Del-HC).Held: It was a common ground between the parties that legal position laid down in the case of Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust [(2011) 197 Taxman 0170 (Delhi) : 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0368 (Del-HC)] continued to hold the field. Assessee brought to the notice that Supreme Court in the case of CIT(E) v. Subros Educational Society [(2018) 303 CTR (SC) 1 : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 3810 (SC)] had impliedly affirmed the position of law enumerated by High Court while considering a similar question raised by the revenue before it, as Supreme Court did not find any merit in the same. Therefore, appeal of Revenue was dismissed.
Followed:Director of Income Tax v. Raghuvanshi Charitable Trust & Ors. (2011) 197 Taxman 0170 (Delhi) : 2011 TaxPub(DT) 0368 (Del-HC) CIT v. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (2003) 264 ITR 110 (Bom) : 2003 TaxPub(DT) 1343 (Bom-HC) CIT (Exemption) v. Subros Educational Society (2018) 303 CTR 1 (SC) : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 3810 (SC) CIT v. Matriseva Trust (2000) 242 ITR 20 (Madras) : 2000 TaxPub(DT) 0571 (Mad-HC) CIT v. Shri Plot Swetamber Murti Pujak Jain Mandal (1995) 211 ITR 293 (Gujarat) : 1995 TaxPub(DT) 0204 (Guj-HC) CIT v. Maharana of Mewar Charitable Foundation (1987) 164 ITR 439 (Rajasthan) : 1987 TaxPub(DT) 0670 (Raj-HC)
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : In assessee's favour
A.Y. : 2013-14
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|