Exnora Green Pammal, CHENNAI V. ADIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1221/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8172 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 04-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V VIVEKANANDAN
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Commercial expediency
• Section: 143(3); 80G; 12A; 63; 12

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . , ! ' BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.1221/MDS/2015 ! # $# / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-2011. M/S. EXNORA GREEN PAMMAL, DOOR NO.27, PLOT NO.144/A, GANDHI MAIN ROAD, SRI SHANKAR NAGAR, PAMMAL, CHENNAI 600 075. VS. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, (EXEMPTION) CHENNAI. [PAN AAATE 2554P ] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) %& ' ( / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE )*%& ' ( /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. V. VIVEKANANDAN, CIT, DR ' + / DATE OF HEARING : 04-11-2015 ,-$ ' + / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-01-2016 / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE REVISION ORDER U/S.263 OF THE ACT OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI IN CIT (E)NO.263/2014-15, DT. 30.03.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-2011. ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 2 -: 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED GROUNDS AGAINST THE ORDER O F CIT(E) CANCELLING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER AND DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-DO THE ASSESS MENT. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ILLUSTRATED HEREUNDER:- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHENNAI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT (E) ERRED I N HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF LNCOME-TAX (EXEMPTIONS) IV, CHENNAI (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS ADIT (E) UNDER SECTION 143(3) DATED 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 WAS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF THE REVENUE. 2. THE CIT (E) ERRED IN ISSUING ORDER DATED 30 TH MARCH, 2015 CANCELLING THE ASSESSMENT MADE BY ADIT (E) VID E ORDER DATED 30 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED T O AS THE 'ACT') 3. THE CIT (E) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ADIT (E) TO REDO ASSESSMENT DENOVO IN LIGHT OF THE OBSERVATION MADE BY HIM IN HIS ORDER DATED SO' MARCH, 2015. 4. THE CIT (E) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE 1 ST PROVISO TO SECTION 2 (15) OF THE ACT APPLIED TO THE APPELLANT TRUST. 5. THE CIT (E) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ACTIVITY OF T HE APPELLANT TRUST DOES NOT FALL UNDER 'THE PRESERVATI ON OF ENVIRONMENT' LIMB UNDER SECTION 2(15) OF THE ACT. 6. THE CIT (E) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ENTIRE PROFIT ARISES OUT OF THE ACTIVITY OF SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT. 7. THE CIT (E) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE PREDOMINANT ACTIVITY OF THE APPELLANT TRUST IS COMMERCIAL IN NATURE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S A TRUST REGISTERED U/S.12A BY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEM PTION), CHENNAI VIDE DIT(E) NO.2(1181)06-07, DATED 24.09.2007. TH E ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 14.10.2010 ADMITTING NIL INCOME . THE RETURN WAS ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 3 -: PROCESSED U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT ON 08.08.2011 AND T HE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE U/S.143(2) WAS ISS UED. IN COMPLIANCE TO THE NOTICE, THE ASSESSEES AUTHORISED REPRESENT ATIVE APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FILED INFORMATION AND ALSO PRODUCE D VARIOUS DOCUMENTS. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSES SING OFFICER FOUND THAT <10,00,000/- WAS SHOWN AS CORPUS DONATIO N AND CLAIMED EXEMPTED U/S.11(1)(D) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OF FICER UPON EXAMINATION OF CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE DONOR AND B ANK STATEMENTS FOUND THAT THERE IS NO SPECIFIC DIRECTION FOR MAKIN G CORPUS DONATION AND DENIED EXEMPTION U/S.11(1)(D) OF THE ACT PASSED ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 30.11.2012. 4. THE LD.CIT(E) UNDER REVISIONARY POWERS ISSUED NOTI CE FOR INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S.263 OF THE ACT. THE LD.CIT(E) RELIED ON INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT WERE THE ASSESSEE HA S SHOWN CONTRIBUTIONS RECEIVED TOWARDS SOLID WASTE MANAGEM ENT IMPLEMENTATION <2,05,43,133/- AND ALSO FOUND THAT E XPENSES WERE DEBITED TO THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT ON AC COUNT OF AWARENESS EXPENSES, PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPENSES. T HE LD.CIT(E) ON PERUSAL OF THE TRUST DEED AND THE OBJECTS OF THE TR UST CAME TO A UNILATERAL CONCLUSION OBJECTS ARE OF GENERAL PUBL IC UTILITY AND MADE DISTINCTION WITH THE AMENDED PROVISIONS U/S.2(15) OF THE ACT EFFECTIVE FROM 01.04.2009 AND RELIED ON THE DECISION OF ITAT, PANAJI BENCH AND ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 4 -: CONCLUDED THAT THE INSTITUTION WHICH INCORPORATED F OR CHARITABLE PURPOSE CANNOT HAVE PROFIT MOTIVE AND COMPARED THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS RECEIVED BIG CONTRIBUTION AND THE SAME W AS NOT ASSESSED U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT AND CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. IN THE HEARING PROCEEDINGS, LD.CIT(E) FOUND THAT CONTRIBUTION FOR SOLID WASTE M ANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION FROM FOLLOWING PERSONS RECEIVED AFT ER ENTERING WITH WORKS CONTRACT AGREEMENT AS FOLLOWS:- (I) PAMMAL MUNICIPALITY : <49,48,148/- (II) INDIRA GANDHI CENTRE FOR ATOMIC RESEARCH, KALPAKKAM : <85,09,345/- (III) PEPSI FOOD PVT LTD : <64,06,587/- (IV) OTHERS : < 6,79,053/- ----------------- TOTAL : <2,05,43,133/- ----------------- AGAINST THE ABOVE RECEIPTS THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED VAR IOUS EXPENSES WHICH INTER ALIA INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING:- (I) AWARENESS EXPENSES : <13,07,517/- (II) PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPENSES : <50,11,379/- (III) SITE/ SHED EXPENSES : <1,12,37,398/- THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED THE SUM AFTER ENTERING IN TO A WORK CONTRACT AGREEMENT AND UPON PERUSAL OF CLAUSES OF TRUST DEED , THE LD.CIT(E) IS OF THE OPINION THAT THEY ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING MANAGING TRUSTEE MRS. MANGALAM BALASUBRAMANIAN APPE ARED AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER AFTER PROPER EXAMINATION AND IS NOT PREJUDIC IAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST FALL WITHIN THE M EANING OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE, NOT IN RESIDUAL CLAUSE OF ADVANCEMENT OF A NY OTHER OBJECT OF ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 5 -: PUBLIC UTILITY AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CIVIC OBJECTIVE OF THE TRUST COMES UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC2(15) OF THE ACT I .E. PRESERVATION OF ENVIRONMENT INCLUDING WATERSHEDS, FOREST AND WILDLI FE AND PRESERVATION OF MONUMENTS OR PLACES OR OBJECTS OF ARTISTIC OR HI STORIC INTEREST. THE TRUST ALSO STUDY ON PROMOTION OF ANIMAL AND BIRD WE LFARE AND THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST PREPARED INCLUDING VARIOUS SER VICES TO AVOID THE COMPLEXITIES IN FUTURE. FURTHER, IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE MAIN OBJECT OF THE TRUST ACTIVITY IS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND FALL UNDER THE MEANING OF CHARITABLE PURPOSE AS AGAINST RECEIPTS O F WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICE. ASSESSEE TRUST CLAIMED EXPENDIT URE REFERRED ABOVE AND CONCLUDED THAT THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT ERRONEOUS AND NOT PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF TH E REVENUE. THE CIT(E) THOUGH CONSIDERED THE OBJECTS BUT DISSENTED AS WORK AGREEMENT WAS ENTERED BY THE TRUST WITH VARIOUS MUN ICIPALITIES ARE IN THE NATURE OF WORKS CONTRACT AND PROFIT MOTIVE AND MADE A CATEGORICAL FINDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PARTICIPATED IN TENDE R PROCESS LIKE ANY SIMILAR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND SHALL NOT TAKE SHEL TER UNDER THE CHARITABLE TRUST. THE LD. CIT(E) CONSIDER THE WASTE SOLID MANAGEMENT IS NOT CHARITY AND TREATED THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TR UST AS COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND NOT AS PRESERVATION OF ENVIRONMENT. FURTHER WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE ITOTO OF SUBMISSIONS THAT THE TRUST IS CREATING CIVIC AWARENESS OF HEALTHIER ENVIRONMENT BY SANITATION AN D WASTE ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 6 -: MANAGEMENT BUT PRESUMED THAT THE PREDOMINANT ACTIVI TY OF THE TRUST IS TO UNDERTAKE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND ACCORDIN GLY CANCELLED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER REDO THE ASSESSMENT.. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(E) U/S.263 OF THE ACT ASSESSEE ASSAILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTAT IVE ARGUED ON THE GROUNDS AND EXPLAINED THAT THE ACTIV ITIES OF THE TRUST ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND TRUST WAS REGISTERED ON 7 TH SEPTEMBER, 2006 WITH FIVE AUTHORS AND ALSO REGISTERED U/S.12A BY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) VIDE LETTER DATED 24.09.200 7 AND APPROVAL WAS GRANTED U/S.80G OF THE ACT BY DIRECTOR OF INCOM E OF TAX (EXEMPTION) VIDE LETTER DATED 29.08.2008. THE ASSES SEE TRUST HAS BEEN FILING RETURN OF INCOME REGULARLY AND IN COMPL IANCE TO SEC.12A PROVISIONS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE TRUST ARE AU DITED BY CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AND THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-2009 ONWARDS. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIV E FILED PAPER BOOK WITH DETAILS OF UNDERTAKINGS AND MEMORANDUM O F UNDERSTANDING ENTERED WITH THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTION S WITH THE AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITIES AND SHARING OF WORK. THE MEMOR ANDUM CONTAINS THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE TOTAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND THE PURPOSE OF WORKING. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE EXPLAINE D THAT AS PER THE PREREQUISITES THE TENDER WAS ENTERED FOR SOLID WAST E MANAGEMENT ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 7 -: SYSTEM AT KALPAKKAM AND ANUPURAM AND THE CLAUSES AN D CONDITIONS OF TENDER ARE VERY CLEAR. THE MAIN OBJECT OF THE TRUST BEING SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND OTHER CLAUSES ALSO FALL UNDER DEFINI TION CHARITABLE PURPOSE U/S.2(15) OF THE ACT. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE O F THE CIT(E) BEING THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST ACTIVITIES ARE COMMERCIAL A CTIVITIES. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FILED STATEMENT OF INCOME FROM THE DATE OF INCEPTION TO THE LATEST FOR THE YEAR 2014 TO SHOW T HAT TRUST IS WORKING EFFECTIVELY IN THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PROJECTS AND PROFIT MOTIVE IS NOT PREDOMINANT OBJECTIVE AND THE MAIN OBJECT BEING SERVICE OBJECTIVE AND ALSO PRODUCED APPRECIATIONS FROM GOVERNMENT AU THORITIES, PHOTOGRAPHS, MEDIA COVERAGES AND SUPPORTED THE ARG UMENTS. THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT HAS NOT DISPUTED OPERATION OF THE TRUST FOR EARLIER YEARS AND ONLY FOR THIS YEAR ON THE TECHNIC ALITIES TREATED ACTIVITIES NOT COVERED U/S.2(15) OF THE ACT AND MAI N OBJECTIVE IS CLEANING THE CITIES, MUNICIPALITIES FOR THE PURPO SE OF WORKING, TRUST ALLOTTED CONTRACTS FROM ORGANIZATION SUPPORTING THE SANITATION DRIVE. THE LD.AR DREW ATTENTION TO PAGE NOS. 85 TO 87 OF P APER BOOK EXPLAINING THE SCOPE OF PROJECTS AND THE COST INCU RRED FOR EACH SECTOR AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF TRUSTEES. THEREFORE, ANY ACTION OF THE TRUST ARE WITHIN FOUR CORNERS OF BYELAWS AND HAS NOT VIOLATED ANY CLAUSE OF TRUST AND TO SUPPORT THE CASE RELIED ON THE DECISION OF PANAJI TRIBUNAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF ENTERTAINMENT SOCIETY OF GOA VS. CIT (2013) 34 ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 8 -: TAXMANN.COM 210 AND PLEADED FOR SQUASHING THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY CIT(E) AND ALLOW THE APPEAL. 6. CONTRA TO THE SUBMISSIONS, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE INCOME AND EXPENDITUR E ACCOUNT REFERRED AT PAGE NOS. 48 & 49 OF PAPER BOOK AND DREW ATTENT ION TO THE STATEMENT OF DEPRECIATION THAT THERE IS NO ASSET PU RCHASED BY THE COMPANY AND MOST OF THE ASSETS BEING TRICYCLES AND THE TRUST HAS VIOLATED THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.2(15) OF THE ACT AND THE ACTIVITIES ARE NOT CHARITABLE IN NATURE AND RELIED ON THE CIT(E) ORDER AND PLEADED FOR DISMISSAL OF APPEAL. 7. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND JUDICIAL DECISIONS CITED . THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS REGISTERED AND OBTAINED REGISTRATION U/SEC. 12 A AND APPROVAL UNDER SEC. 80G OF THE ACT. ON PERUSAL OF THE TRUST DEED, THE OBJECTS ARE MORE SERVICE ORIENTED AND THE TRUST IS IN THE THIRD YEAR OF OPERATION AFTER REGISTRATION. THE ACTIVITIES OF TH E TRUST ARE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT AND HAVE OTHER OBJECTIVES ALSO. ON PE RUSAL OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAS RECE IVED CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION <2,0 5,43,133/- AND ALSO INCURRED EXPENDITURE UNDER THE PROJECT MANAGEM ENT EXPENSES, SITE /SHED EXPENSES, TRAINING EXPENSES SUBSTANTIALL Y IN LIEU OF ABOVE ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 9 -: CONTRIBUTION. THE TRUST HAS COME INTO EXISTENCE FR OM 2006 ONWARDS ON VERIFYING THE STATEMENT OF SURPLUS, FILED FROM 31.0 3.2007 TO 31.03.2014, THE ASSESSEE TRUST ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITE D BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT AS PER THE PROVISIONS AND REGULARLY FILI NG RETURN OF INCOME. THE CIT(E) TREATING THE TRUST ACTIVITIES AS NOT CHA RITABLE IN NATURE IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIV E DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE PAPER BOOK FROM PAGE NOS.1 TO 75 W ERE APPRECIATION LETTERS AND PHOTOGRAPHS AND MEDIA COVERAGE WERE EXH IBITED IN ENGLISH AND REGIONAL LANGUAGE. IT SHOWS THAT THE TRUST IS VERY EFFECTIVELY WORKING FOR THE COMMON CAUSE OF THE SOCIETY AND WEL FARE OF THE CITIZEN UNDER THE BANNER OF CLEAN ENVIRONMENT. FOR THE PUR POSE OF BIG CONTRIBUTIONS THE ASSESSEE TRUST AS PER THE REQUIS ITE APPLIED FOR TENDERS NOT ON COMMERCIAL NOTE BUT ON SOCIAL RESPO NSIBILITY AND IF ANY PROFIT IS MADE OUT OF THE SUCH ACTIVITIES THEY ARE INCIDENTAL AS THE PREDOMINANT OBJECTIVE BEING ONLY SOLID WASTE MANAGE MENT WORKS. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THA T IN COMPLIANCE WITH SWATCH BHARATH PROGRAMME OF PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA SHRI. NARENDRA MODI, THE TRUST IS WORKING HARD WITH ITS O BJECTIVE OF CLEANING. ON PERUSAL OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND APPREHENSION LETT ERS THEY CONDUCTED VARIOUS AWARENESS PROGRAMMES AND REMOVED GARBAGES AND MAKING ENVIRONMENT CLEAN AND TIDE. IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS A SERVICE TO THE HUMANITY. CITIZENS OF THE SOCIETY ARE BENEFITED THROUGH CLEAN ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 10 -: ENVIRONMENT AND SAVED FROM DISEASES. THE LD.AR REL IED ON THE DECISION OF AHMADABAD TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (E) VS. NARODA ENVIROPROJECTS LTD (2015) 43CCH 84 WHERE SIMILAR ACTIVITIES FALL UNDER DEFINITION OF SEC.2(1 5) OF THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE ACT AND ALSO SUBMITTED THAT SURPLUS IS INC IDENTAL TO THE MAIN OBJECT. WE OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOU T THE GENUINESS OF THE TRUST AND ACTIVITIES AND COMPLIANCE OF LEGAL PR OVISIONS OF THE VARIOUS LAWS AND THE ACTIVITIES ARE NOT AGAINST AN Y PUBLIC OBJECTIVE BUT IN FAVOUR OF THE SOCIETY. THE TRUST BEING REGISTERE D UNDER THE STATE LAWS AND THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) GR ANTED REGISTRATION EXEMPTION UNDER 12A AND 80G AND THE A CCOUNTS ARE AUDITED AND ACCEPTED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT FOR EARLIER YEARS. THE SURPLUS GENERATED IS ONLY INCIDENTAL. I T IS APPARENT FROM THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE PRODUCED THE ASSESSEES MAIN OBJ ECT IS ONLY WASTE SOLID MANAGEMENT AND OTHER OBJECTS ARE INCORPORATED FOR FUTURE PROSPECTS. THEREFORE, THE CONTENTION OF THE CIT(E) ON THE GROUND OF NONCHARITABLE PURPOSE CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. FURTHER, PROCEDURE FOR APPLYING TENDER IS BASED ON THE CONTRIBUTOR TERMS AND SUCH ACTIVITIES IF CONSIDERED A COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY THERE WILL NOT BE ANY TRUST WORKING IN COMMERICAL ATMOSPHERE. SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT VERIFIED ON THE GROUNDS OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE MATTER HAS TO BE EXAMINED. SO CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND ITA NO.1221/MDS/2015. :- 11 -: CIRCUMSTANCES WE SET ASIDE THE REVISION ORDER U/S.2 63 OF CIT(E) FOR LIMITED PURPOSE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R TO VERIFY THE PROCESS OF TENDER AND APPLICATIONS AND WHETHER ACTIONS OF THE TRUST ARE IN THE NATURE OF PROFIT MOTIVE AND THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AND FILE DOCUMENTS TO SU PPORT THEIR CONTENTIONS AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL PASS TH E ORDER ON MERITS. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. . ORDER PRONOUNCED COURT ON FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2016, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI . / DATED:22.01.2016. KV / ' )!+12 32$+ / COPY TO: 1 . %& / APPELLANT 3. 4+ () / CIT(A) 5. 278 )!+! / DR 2. )*%& / RESPONDENT 4. 4+ / CIT 6. 89# : / GF