Hon'ble Prakash Krishna,J.
Heard Sri R.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Shakeel Ahmad, appearing for the assessee.
The appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law:
"(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in directing the AO to allow deprecation of Rs.74,95,426/- without appreciating the fact that depreciation on an asset whose entire cost has been allowed deduction u/s 11 of I.T. Act amounts to double deduction and therefore, not admissible.
(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was justified in law in directing that the deprecation is an allowable deduction u/s 11 of the Act as application of income for charitable purposes without appreciating that the asset was acquired out of the income from property held under trust and entire cost of capital asset has been allowed as expenditure in the year of incurrence of capital expenditure and therefore, no further deduction on a/c of depreciation can be allowed in view of ratio of decisions Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. Vs. Union of India (1993) 199 ITR 43 and decision of Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Mahila Sidh Nirman Yozna Vs. IAC, Delhi Income Tax reported in 50 ITR 472."
When the case is listed again, the name of Sri Sambhu Chopra be shown in the cause list as counsel for the appellant.
(Prakash Krishna,J) (Ashok Bhushan,J) Order Date :- 11.4.2012 MK/