Exemption) Delhi v. All India Football Federation
High Court
29 May 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Exemption) Delhi v. All India Football Federation
Date of order
29 May 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Exemption) Delhi v. All India Football Federation, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal.
Issue: The first question sought to be urged by the Revenue is whether the ITAT had erred in law and in facts by holding that the assessee is entitled to claim of exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the IT Act, 1961.
Decision: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
17+ ITA 246/2016
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
(EXEMPTION) DELHI
..... Appellant Through: Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung, Advocate
versus
ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION
..... Respondent Through: Ms. Anju Jain and Mr. Milesh Sachar, Advocates
CORAM:JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR O R D E R% 29.05.2017
1. This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dated 23[rd] September, 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in ITA No. 6352/Del/2013 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-2010.
2. The first question sought to be urged by the Revenue is whether the ITAT had erred in law and in facts by holding that the assessee is entitled to claim of exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the IT Act, 1961. The second question is whether the ITAT fell into error by holding that the Assessee is entitled to claim depreciation, even though the entire purchase cost was allowed as an application of income in the previous years.
3. In deciding the second question, the ITAT has relied on the decision of this Court in DIT (E) v. M/s. Indraprastha Cancer Society (decision dated 18th November 2014 in ITA No. 384/2014). The Court is, therefore, of the view that no substantial question of law arises therefrom.
4. As regards the first question, the ITAT has followed several decisions of this Court that have dealt with a similar issue. Therefore, even on this issue the Court declines to frame any substantial question of law.
5. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
MAY 29, 2017 B
CHANDER SHEKHAR, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.