IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1120, 1121 & 1122/HYD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007- 08 AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE, ATMAKUR, MAHABOOBNAGAR. PAN AABTA 7120 J INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, MAHABOOBNAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY SHRI D. SATYANARAYANA REVENUE BY SHRI M. SITARAM DATE OF HEARING 19-01-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19-01-2016 O R D E R PER B. RAMAKOTAIAH, A.M.: THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY AN AGRICULTURAL MA RKET COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER A.P. (AGRICULTURAL PROD UCE AND LIVE STOCK) MARKETS ACT, 1966 AND ARE AGAINST THE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-4, HYDERABAD, ALL DATED, 30/04/2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 TO 2007-08. 2. WE FIND THAT THESE APPEALS ARE TIME BARRED BY 15 DA YS. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED ITS EXPLANATION FOR FILI NG THE APPEALS LATE BY 15 DAYS BEFORE US. TO THIS EFFECT, ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFIDAVIT AFFIRMING THE REASONS MENTIONED IN THE PE TITION FOR CONDONATION. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SUBMISSION MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD, WE ARE INCLINED TO CONDONE THE SAID DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEALS FOR DISPOSAL. 2 ITA NOS. 1120 TO 1122/HYD/2015 AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE, ATMAKUR. 3. THIS AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE WAS CLAIMING EXEMPTION EARLIER U/S 10(29) OF THE IT ACT, UPTO 31 /03/2002 AND SINCE THE PROVISION WAS REPEALED W.E.F. 01/04/2003, THE A GRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE HAS BECOME TAXABLE FROM AY 2003-04 ONWARD S. THEREAFTER, THE AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE FILED AN APPLICAT ION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT, TO GRANT REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 01/04/2002. THE LD. DIT(E) VIDE ORDER DATED 02/06/2 008 REJECTED THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE IT ACT. FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, ITAT VIDE ITS OR DER DATED 07/05/2009 (ITA NO. 1588/HYD/2008) DIRECTED THE DIT (E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FROM 0 1/04/2002. HOWEVER, IN SPITE OF CLEAR DIRECTIONS OF THE ITAT, LD. DIT(E ) HAS NOT GRANTED ANY REGISTRATION NOR PASSED ANY ORDERS. CONSEQUENTLY, A SSESSEES INCOMES WERE TREATED AS NON-EXEMPT AND ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED RAISING THE DEMANDS, EVEN THOUGH, THE ASS ESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE INCOMES WERE EXEMPT AND BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF AO AS WELL AS TO THE CIT(A), THE ITAT DIRECTIONS G RANTING OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE ACT AND SUBMITTED THAT ORDERS OF THE DIT(E) ARE AWAITED. HOWEVER, THE AO AND CIT(A) HELD THAT ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION AND ACCORDINGLY ASSES SMENTS WERE FRAMED AND CONFIRMED. 4. ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED AND IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US . EVEN THOUGH AS MANY AS TEN GROUNDS WERE RAISED, THE MAIN CONTENTION IS THAT LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DIRECTED THE AO TO GR ANT EXEMPTION U/S 11, PARTICULARLY, IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT ITAT DIR ECTED THE LD. DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION U/S 12A WITH EFFECT FROM 01/04/ 2002. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PLACED ON RECOR D THE INTERIM DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY THE SMC BENCH OF ITAT, HYDERABAD IN ANOTHER BATCH OF CASES BY AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMI TTEE, KOLLAPUR, MAHABUBNAGAR DISTRICT WHEREIN ON SIMILAR FACTS, THE SMC BENCH DIRECTED THE DIT(E) TO PASS THE ORDERS ON OR BEFORE 15/12/2015. IT WAS 3 ITA NOS. 1120 TO 1122/HYD/2015 AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE, ATMAKUR. SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL THAT SIMILAR DIREC TIONS MAY BE GIVEN TO THE DIT(E) IN THIS BATCH OF APPEALS ALSO. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE ISSUE. WE ARE SURPRISED TO NOTE THAT LD. DIT(E) HAS NOT PASSED THE ORDERS, EVEN THO UGH, THE MATTERS WERE CRYSTALLIZED BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEES, ALLOWING REGISTR ATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. IN FACT, IN THIS BATCH OF CASES, THE ITAT HAS DIRECTED DIT(E) TO GRANT REGISTRATION WITH EFFECT FROM 01/04/2002. IN SPITE OF CLEAR DIRECTIONS GIVEN AS EARLY AS 07/05/2009, LD. DIT(E) HAS NOT PASSED ANY ORDERS. THIS SHOWS EITHER CONTEMPT OF ITAT DIRE CTIONS OR SHEER IGNORANCE OF THE PENDING FILES. WHATEVER MAY BE THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE AO/CIT(A) COULD HAVE REQUESTED THE DIT(E) BEFOR E FINALIZING THE ORDERS DENYING BENEFIT TO ASSESSEE. NEITHER AO BROU GHT TO THE NOTICE OF DIT(E) NOR CIT(A) HAS TAKEN ANY STEPS IN POINTIN G OUT TO DIT(E) ABOUT THE PENDING REGISTRATION, EVEN THOUGH, THE A SSESSEE IS SUBMITTING THE SAME TO THE AUTHORITIES. ASSESSEES A RE UNNECESSARILY DRIVEN TO THE ITAT FOR RELIEF ON AN ISSUE, WHICH WA S ALREADY CRYSTALLIZED IN THEIR FAVOUR AND DIT(E) HAS TO SIMP LY PASS THE ORDERS GRANTING SUCH REGISTRATION. NO USEFUL PURPOSE WOUL D BE SERVED IF THE MATTERS ARE KEPT PENDING. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE DIT(E) TO PASS NECESSARY ORDERS IN THE ASSESSEES CASES IMMEDIATEL Y AND SEND THE COPY OF SUCH ORDER TO THE AO ON OR BEFORE 31/03/201 6. FOR THE PURPOSE OF DOING THE SAME, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AO AND CIT(A) IN THIS BATCH OF APPEALS AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO TAKE NECESSARY ACTION AFTER THE ORDERS OF DIT(E) ARE RECEIVED. 4 ITA NOS. 1120 TO 1122/HYD/2015 AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE, ATMAKUR. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF ASSESSEE ARE TREATED A S ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH JANUARY, 2016. SD/- SD/- (P. MADHAVI DEVI) (B. RA MAKOTAIAH) JUDICIAL MEMBER AC COUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED: 19 TH JANUARY 2016 KV COPY TO:- 1) AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE, ATMAKUR, MAHABUBN AGAR DIST. C/O SRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO. 102, SHR IYAS ELEGANCE, H. NO. 3-6-643, ST. NO. 9, HIMAYAT NAGAR, HYD ERABAD 500 029 2) ITO, WARD 1, MAHABUBNAGAR. 3) CIT(A)-4, HYDERABAD. 4) CIT-4, HYDERABAD 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD.