M/s Touching Hearts Ministries, Tuni V. The CIT, Rajahmundry, Rajahmundry

ITA 203/VIZ/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 20325314 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K V N CHARYA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 11

Judgement Text

ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : NA TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES TUNI VS. CIT RAJAHMUNDRY (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AABAT 4658D ASSESSEE BY: SHRI G.V.N. HARI, ADVOCATE REVENUE BY: SHRI K.V.N. CHARYA, CIT(DR) DATE OF HEARING : 03.07.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.07.2014 ORDER PER BENCH:- THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER D ATED 20.9.2011 PASSED BY THE CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY REJECTING ASSESSEES APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 172 DAYS IN FILING OF THE AP PEAL. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A PETITION FOR CONDONING THE DELAY BEING SUPP ORTED BY AFFIDAVITS OF THE CONCERNED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO WAS DEALING WITH THE CASE AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY. THE CAUSES OF D ELAY AS EXPLAINED IN THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION ARE AS UNDER: 1. AFTER RECEIVING THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TAX THE SAME WAS HANDED OVER IN THE OFFICE OF SRI D.L.S.V. RAMANA BABU, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT FOR HIS ADVICE ON FURTHER COUR SE OF ACTION TO BE TAKEN UP. AT THAT TIME, SRI D.L.S.V. RAMANA BABU W AS NOT IN THE OFFICE AND HENCE THE ORDER WAS HANDED OVER TO ONE SRI K. N AGESWARA RAO WORKING AS OFFICE ASSISTANT IN THE OFFICE OF SRI D. L.S.V. RAMANA BABU. 2. UNFORTUNATELY, SRI K. NAGESWARA RAO FORGOT TO HANDO VER THE ORDER TO SRI D.L.S.V. RAMANA BABU AND THE ORDER REMAINED WIT H HIM. IN THE MONTH OF MAY, 2012 WHEN THE PRESIDENT OF THE APPELL ANT SOCIETY CONTACTED SRI D.L.S.V. RAMANA BABU, IT CAME TO LIGH T THAT SRI K. ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI 2 NAGESWARA RAO FORGOT TO HANDOVER THE ORDER OF THE L D. CIT TO SRI D.L.S.V. RAMANA BABU. 3. WITHOUT FURTHER LOSS OF TIME, THE APPELLANT TOOK NE CESSARY STEPS AND COULD FILE THE APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE ITAT, VISA KHAPATNAM ON 29 TH MAY, 2012 AFTER A DELAY OF 172 DAYS. 4. THUS, THE DELAY OF 172 DAYS IN FILING THE APPEAL WA S NEITHER INTENTIONAL NOR DELIBERATE AND WAS ON ACCOUNT OF REASONS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE APPELLANT. THE LD. A.R. BY REFERRING TO THE CAUSE OF DELAY SHO WN IN THE DELAY CONDONATION PETITION AND THE AFFIDAVITS, REQUESTED FOR CONDONING THE DELAY. 3. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND OBJECTED FOR COND ONING THE DELAY. 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES , WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE APPEAL FOR HEARING ON MERIT. 5. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE ANDHRA PRADESH REGISTRATION OF SOCIETIES ACT W.E.F. 31.12.2007. CLAIMING ITSELF TO BE A SOCIETY EXISTING FOR CHARITABLE PURP OSE. ASSESSEE APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT BEFORE THE CIT ON 3 1.3.2011. THE CIT AFTER VERIFYING THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY, PRIMA FACIE W AS OF THE VIEW THAT THEY ARE OF RELIGIOUS CHARACTER. HE THEREFORE ASKED THE ASS ESSEE TO EXPLAIN ON THE SAME. AFTER VERIFYING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND OT HER DETAILS FURNISHED BEFORE HIM, THE CIT NOTED THAT ALL DONATIONS AND CO NTRIBUTIONS WERE RECEIVED FROM ABROAD AND AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,22,02,736/- WAS U TILIZED FOR PURCHASE OF VACANT SITE DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 AND A BUILDING WAS PURCHASED DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 FOR A SUM OF RS.7 1,68,100/-. HE FURTHER NOTED THAT SOME MORE VACANT SITES WERE PURCHASED AT TUNI DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10. ON VERIFYING THE DETAILS, THE CIT FOUND THAT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 SOME FLOOD RELIEF ACTIVI TIES WERE CARRIED OUT IN KRISHNA DISTRICT. FURTHER, EXAMINATION OF THE RECO RD REVEALED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS.5 LAKHS WAS GIVEN TO ONE SHRI KALAM BABU RAO BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY ON 15.7.2009 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CHURCH AT UPPADA. IT WAS CLAIMED ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI 3 THAT OUT OF THIS RS.5 LAKHS AN AMOUNT OF RS.4,32,00 0/- WAS PAID FOR PROVIDING FOOD DURING OCTOBER, 2009 FLOODS. HOWEVER, NO VOUC HERS WERE PRODUCED TO PROVE SPENDING THIS AMOUNT FOR THE SAID PURPOSE. I T WAS NOTICED THAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY HAS GIVEN ADVANCE TO THE S OCIETY ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS IN CASH AND TAKEN BACK THE ADVANCES IN CASH WHENEVE R MONEY IS AVAILABLE WITH THE SOCIETY. SIMILARLY, ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS AMOUNTS WERE BROUGHT INTO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS IN CASH FROM VARIOUS PERSONS AND ALSO REPAID. IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE TOTAL AMOUNT ADVANCED AND REPAID T O THE PRESIDENT DURING THE YEAR 2008-09 IS RS.8,83,000/-. SIMILARLY, SOME AMOUNTS WERE SPENT BY THE SOCIETY TOWARDS MAINTENANCE OF VEHICLE OWNED BY THE PRESIDENT. THE CIT ON RELYING ON SOME JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS HELD THAT AS THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE ARE OF RELIGIOUS NATURE COMING WITHIN PURV IEW OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT AND AS THE PRIMARY INTENT IS TO SPREAD CHAR ITY FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY OR CASTE I.E. FOR DI SPENSING CHARITY IN THE CHURCH PREMISES TO THOSE WHO PROFESS CHRISTIANITY, SOCIETY CANNOT BE GRANTED REGISTRATION. HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE MAIN THR UST IS TO PROPAGATE RELIGIOUS PRACTICES OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY ONLY. THE CIT OBSERVED THAT WHILE GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT THE SPECIF IC MANDATE U/S 12AA (1)(B) OF THE ACT IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS TO SATISFY HIMSELF NOT ONLY ABOUT THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION BUT ALSO ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. FINALLY, THE CIT CONCLUDED THAT AS THE ENTIRE OBJECT AND ACTIVITY OF THE SOCIETY IS TO DEVELOP CERTAIN RELIGIOUS PRACTIC ES, IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE EXISTING FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. HENCE, CANNOT BE GRANTED REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. 6. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THERE IS N O RESTRICTION UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT FOR A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION FOR HAV ING MIXED OBJECTS OF BOTH CHARITABLE NATURE AND RELIGIOUS NATURE. THEREFORE, THE CIT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING REGISTRATION OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY ON THE G ROUND THAT ASSESSEE IS HAVING ACTIVITIES OF RELIGIOUS NATURE. SO FAR AS T HE OTHER DEFECTS/DEFICIENCIES POINTED OUT BY THE CIT ARE CONCERNED, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT AT THE STAGE OF GRANTING REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, THE CIT CANNOT GO INTO THOSE ISSUES AS THEY ARE IN THE NATURE OF ALLOWABILITY OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI 4 WHICH IS IN THE DOMAIN OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING AS GRANTING OF REGISTRATION DOES NOT ENT ITLE OR CONFER ANY BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE AUTOMATICALLY. THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER WOULD BE FREE TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES AT THE TIME OF ASSESSING TOTAL IN COME. IT WAS THEREFORE CONTENDED THAT THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE BEING CH ARITABLE IN NATURE THOUGH MAY BE WITH SOME RELIGIOUS CONNOTATION, IT IS ELIGI BLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CONTENTION, THE LD. A.R. RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF CI T VS. DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT 364 ITR 31 (SC) AND DECISION OF THE ITAT VISA KHAPATNAM BENCH IN CASE OF M/S. NEERANJANEYA VIDYA PARISHAD IN ITA NO. 394/VIZAG/2010 DATED 10.2.2011. 7. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT TH E OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AS REPRODUCED BY THE CIT IN HIS IMPUGNED ORDER CLEA RLY SHOWS THAT IT IS MEANT FOR A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. EVEN THE SOC IAL OBJECTS CLAUSE SHOWS THAT ALL THE ACTIVITIES MENTIONED THERE IN ARE FOR A PARTICULAR RELIGION. THEREFORE, THE TRUST HAVING BEEN CREATED FOR THE BE NEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT IS VIOLATED. THEREFORE, THE CIT WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. THE LD. D.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE CIT IN PARA 3 & 4 OF HIS O RDER ALSO RAISES SERIOUS DOUBT OVER THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, DENIAL OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF TH E ACT IS JUSTIFIED. 8. IN THE REJOINDER, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE LANGUAGE IN SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT WOULD SHOW THAT THE RESTRICTION S IMPOSED THEREIN WOULD APPLY ONLY TOWARDS A TRUST CREATED WITH CHARITABLE OBJECTS AND NOT TOWARDS RELIGIOUS OBJECTS. THEREFORE, THERE CANNOT BE ANY VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT BY THE ASSESSEE. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT AS WELL AS OTHER MATERIAL S ON RECORD. WE HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON B Y THE LD. A.R. AS CAN BE ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI 5 SEEN FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE CIT, HE HAS REF USED TO GRANT REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE BASICALLY FOR TWO REAS ONS (I) THE ASSESSEE TRUST IS CREATED FOR BENEFIT OF A PARTICULAR RELIGIOUS COMMU NITY AND SECONDLY THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST WERE NOT GENUINE DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE SO CALLED EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS FLOOD RELIEF IS NOT PR OPERLY EXPLAINED, ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS TAKEN ADVANCE AND REPAID TO THE PRESIDE NT OF THE SOCIETY AND HAS SPENT MONEY TOWARDS MAINTENANCE OF VEHICLE OWNED BY THE PRESIDENT. SO FAR AS THE FIRST OBJECTION OF THE CIT IS CONCERNED, ON A PERUSAL OF SECTION 11 OF THE ACT, IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT EXEMPTION WOULD BE A LLOWABLE TO A TRUST OR INSTITUTION IF IT IS ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES FOR CHAR ITABLE PURPOSE AS WELL AS FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSE. THEREFORE, IF A TRUST OR INSTIT UTION IS HAVING EITHER CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS OBJECT OR BOTH, IT CANNOT B E DENIED REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. IN FACT THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CA SE OF CIT VS. DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT (SUPRA) WHILE CONSIDERING IDENTICAL ISS UE HAS HELD THAT TRUST AND INSTITUTION CAN HAVE MIXED OBJECTS I.E. BOTH CHARIT ABLE AND RELIGIOUS. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD AS UNDER: UNLIKE THE PHRASE CHARITABLE PURPOSE, RELIGIOUS PURPOSE IS NOT DEFINED UNDER THE ACT. ACCORDING TO LEXICOGRAPHERS , THE TERM RELIGIOUS WOULD MEAN OF OR RELATION TO RELIGION. (MERRIAM WEBSTER DICTIONARY, MACMILLAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY). THE SHORTER OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY DEFINES THE TERM AS FOLLOWS: DEVOTED TO RELIGION; EXHIBITING THE SPIRITUAL OR PRACTICAL EFFECTS OF REGION, FOLLOWING THE REQUIREMENTS OF RELIGION; PIO US, GODLY, DEVOUT. IN KANGA, PALKHIVALA AND VYAS, LAW AND PRACTICE OF INCO ME TAX, VOL.1, ED. 9 TH (AT PAGE 544) RELIGIOUS PURPOSES ARE INDICATED TO I NCLUDE THE ADVANCEMENT, SUPPORT OR PROPAGATION OF A RELIGION AND TENETS. T HUS, A RELIGIOUS PURPOSE WOULD BE ONE RELATING TO OBSERVANCE OF RITUALS AND CEREMONIES, PROPAGATION OF TENETS OF THE RELIGION AND OTHER ALLIED ACTIVITI ES OF THE RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY. AN EXAMPLE OF SUCH WOULD ENTAIL ACTIVITIES SUCH AS THE DANCE PERFORMANCES (GARBA) OR DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD SPECIFICALLY FOR PE OPLE ON FAST DURING THE HINDU FESTIVITIES OF NAVRATRI. IN CERTAIN CASES, THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST MAY C ONTAIN ELEMENTS OF BOTH: RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE AND THUS, BOTH THE P URPOSES MAY BE OVER LAPPING. MORE SO WHEN THE RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY CARRI ED ON BY A PARTICULAR SECTION OF PEOPLE WOULD BE A CHARITABLE ACTIVITY FOR OR TOW ARDS OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND ALSO PUBLIC AT LARGE. FOR EXAMPLE, T HE PRACTICE OF OPTIONAL CHARITY IN THE FORM OF KHAIRAT OR SADAQUAH UNDER TH E MOHAMMADAN LAW WOULD BE COVERED UNDER BOTH CHARITABLE AS WELL AS R ELIGIOUS PURPOSE. FURTHER, WHILE PROVIDING FOOD AND FODDER TO ANIMALS ESPECIAL LY COW IS RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY FOR HINDUS, IT WOULD BE CHARITABLE IN RESPECT TO NO N-HINDUS AS WELL. SIMILARLY, ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI 6 SERVICE OF WATER TO THE THIRSTY WOULD FIND MENTION AS RELIGIOUS ACTIVITY IN SACRED TEXTS AND AT THE SAME TIME WOULD QUALIFY AS A CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. 10. THEREFORE, CONSIDERED IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORE SAID PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT AND KEEPING IN VIEW TH E PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 11 AND 13 OF THE ACT, A TRUST AND INSTIT UTION, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN CREATED FOR PURELY RELIGIOUS PURPOSE OR HAS RELIGIO US OBJECT, IT CAN STILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. HOWE VER, IF THE TRUST/INSTITUTION IS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION OR HAS MIXED OBJECTS, IT H AS TO BE EXAMINED WHETHER THE CHARITABLE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT COM E WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT I.E. THE TRUST OR INSTI TUTION IS NOT CREATED OR ESTABLISHED FOR THE BENEFIT OF ANY PARTICULAR RELIG IOUS COMMUNITY OR CASTE. THEREFORE, IN CONSONANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAI NED U/S 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT AND THE DICTUM OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF DAWOODI BOHRA JAMAT (SUPRA), IT NEEDS TO BE EXAMINED WHETHER THE SOCIAL OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE INSTITUTION IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF A PARTIC ULAR COMMUNITY, CASTE OR CREED. SO FAR AS THE OTHER ALLEGATIONS OF THE CIT THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE AMOUNTS PAID OF RS.4 ,32,000/- TOWARDS FLOOD RELIEF, IT HAS RECEIVED AND REPAID ADVANCE TO THE P RESIDENT, AND IT HAS SPENT AMOUNT FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF VEHICLE OWNED BY THE PRESIDENT IS CONCERNED, IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. A.R. THAT THESE ASP ECTS ARE TO BE LOOKED INTO BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE CONSIDERING ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE AND CANNOT BE LO OKED INTO BY THE CIT AT THE TIME OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT. HOWEV ER, WE ARE NOT CONVINCED WITH THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. A.R., THOUGH IT IS TRU E THAT AT THE TIME OF GRANT OF REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE ACT, THE CIT CANNOT STEP INTO THE SHOES OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND EXAMINE THE ALLOWABILITY OF C LAIM U/S 11 OF THE ACT BUT AT THE SAME TIME AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1 2AA OF THE ACT, THE CIT HAS TO SATISFY HIMSELF NOT ONLY ABOUT THE OBJECTS O F THE SOCIETY/TRUST BUT ALSO IN RESPECT OF GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. THERE FORE, THE CIT CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO CLOSE HIS EYES WHILE EXAMINING THE GENU INENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES. IN THIS RESPECT, IF THE CIT HAS DOUBT WITH REGARD TO THE ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY THE TRUST/INSTITUTION, THEN IT IS THE DUTY OF TH E TRUST AND INSTITUTION TO REMOVE SUCH DOUBT BY PRODUCING ADEQUATE EVIDENCE BE FORE THE CIT. ITA NO.203/VIZAG/2012 TOUCHING HEARTS MINISTRIES, TUNI 7 THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AN D CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE INCLINED TO REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FIL E OF THE CIT FOR CONSIDERING THE ISSUE AFRESH KEEPING IN VIEW THE PRINCIPLES LAI D DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. DAWOODI BOHRA JAMA T (SUPRA). SO FAR AS THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS FLOOD RELIEF AND A DVANCES RECEIVED, REPAID TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY OR AMOUNTS SPENT TO WARDS MAINTENANCE OF CAR OF THE PRESIDENT, IT WOULD BE OPEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SAME BY PRODUCING ADEQUATE EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT. THE CI T MUST AFFORD A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE BEFORE DECIDING THE ISSUE. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03 RD JULY14 SD/- SD/- (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM, DATED 3 RD JULY, 2014 COPY TO 1 SHRI D.L.S.V. RAMANA BABU, CA, FLAT NO.G-1, KONET I ENCLAVE, DWARAKANAGAR, VISAKHAPATNAM 2 THE CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY 3 THE CIT(A), RAJAHMUNDRY 4 THE DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM. 5 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM