Commissioner Of Income Tax-I,Tiruchirapalli v. M/S.national College Council,P.b

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 26.08.2019 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN Tax Case Appeal Nos.680 and 681 of 2011 Commissioner of Income Tax-I,Tiruchirapalli. .. Appellant/Respondentin both Appeals -vs- M/s.National College Council,P.B.No.369, Chatram Bus Stand,Teppakulam, Tiruchirapalli-620 002... Respondent/Appellantin both Appeals Appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961against the common order dated 24.06.2011, on the file of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'A', Chennai inI.T.A.Nos.402 & 403/Mds/2010 for the assessment years 2005-06and 2006-07 respectively, as agiasnt the the order of theCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)No.44 Willams Road,Contonment, Tiruchirapalli-620 001 made in ITA.NO.138 & 176/08-09 dated 27/01/2010 as against the order dated 18/12/2008Depurty Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-II, Trichy inPAN/GIR.NO. AAATT6266H for the Assessment year 2006-07 and asagainst the order dated 27/12/2007 by the AssisstantCommissioner of Income Tax Company Circle-11, Tiruchirapally inPan/Gir No.AAATT6266H for the Assessment year 2005-2006. For Appellant:Mr.J.Narayanaswamy,(In both Appeals)Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent :No appearance(In both Appeals) ****** 1/4 (Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.) These appeals filed by the appellant/Revenue under Section260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are directed against thecommon order dated 24.06.2011, passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal Bench 'A', Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos.402 &403/Mds/2010 for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07respectively. 2.The above appeals were admitted, on 14.02.2012, on thefollowing substantial questions of law:- “(i) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that theassessee could claim depreciation on its capitalassets even though the expenditure on such capitalassets itself was allowed as a deduction being anapplication and that such allowance would notamount to double deduction? (ii) Whether on the facts and in thecircumstances of the case, the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal was right in holding that theassessee would be entitled to claim depreciationeven though the assessee has not used the assetsin any business carried on by it, which is a pre-requisite for allowance of depreciation underSection 32?” 3.Heard Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counselfor the appellant/Revenue. 4.The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for theRevenue fairly submits that the substantial questions of law,which have been framed in these appeals, have been answeredagainst the Revenue by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs.Rajasthan and Gujarati Charitable Foundation reported in [2018]402 ITR 441 (SC). 2/4 5.Following the same, these appeals stand dismissed and thesubstantial questions of law are answered against the Revenue.No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// (abr) Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-II, Trichy. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), No.44, Williams Road, Cantonment, Tiruchirapalli-620 001. 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bench 'A', Chennai. 4.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Company Circle-II, Trichy. +1cc to Mr.J.Narayanaswamy, Advocate sr.73470 T.C.A.Nos.680 and 681 of 2011spd(co)nr 24/10/2019 3/4