VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (NIZAMABAD), MUMBAI V. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX EXEM-(II)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2525/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8142 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-12-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K BEPARI
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Maximum Marginal Rate
• Section: 12A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2525 /MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (NIZAMABAD) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV5857A . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II) (2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2526/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (VADODARA) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAAAV0075B . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2524/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (SURAT) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV2861N . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT 2 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP ITA NO. 2523/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (JALGAON) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV0360J . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2522/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (BHARUCH) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV2882M . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2521/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (SOMNATH) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV 6161H . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2518/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (JUNAGADH) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV 0073H . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT 3 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP ITA NO. 2517/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (DHULE) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV28 60P . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2515/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (JAMNAGAR) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAATV2882M . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 2516/MUM./2018 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 11 12 ) VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN (RAJKOT) NIRMAL NIKETAN, 2, DR. BHAJEKAR STREET MUMBAI 400 004 PAN AAAAV0074A . APPELLANT V/S ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMP.) CIRCLE (II)(2), MUMBAI . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJESH P. SHAH REVENUE BY : SHRI S.K. BEPARI DATE OF HEARING 05 . 12 .2018 DATE OF ORDER 26.12.2018 4 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP O R D E R PER BENCH T HE AFORESAID APPEALS BY 10 DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS , ALL DATED 30 TH JANUARY 2018, PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) 1, MUMBAI, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 12. 2 . T HE FACTS AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THESE APPEALS BEING COMMON AND IDENTICAL, THEY HAVE BEEN CLUBBED TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OFF IN A CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3 . T HE GROUNDS RAISED , WHICH ARE COMMON IN ALL THESE APPEALS , READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ASSESSING OFFICER'S ACTION IN DENYING BENEFIT OF SECTION 11 OF IT ACT TO THE APPELLANT TRUST WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT PRIMARY OBJECT OF THE TRUST IS RELIEF TO THE POOR, EDUCATION AND MEDICAL RELIEF I.E ACTIVITY CARRIED OUT BY THE TRUST AND THE AMOUNT IS SPENT TOWARDS FULFILLMENT OF THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE GROUND I 2. ON THE FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DENYING EXEMPTION U/S 1 1 WITHOUT REJECTING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12A. 3. ON THE FACTS AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ASSESSING OFFICER'S ACTION IN TAXING THE INCOME DETERMINED BY HER, AT THE MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE OF TAX ENVISAGED IN THE PROVISO TO SECTION 164(2). 5 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP 4 . AS COULD BE SEEN FROM THE GROUNDS RAISED, THE MAJOR DISPUTE IS WITH REGARD TO DENIAL OF ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE INCOME TAX AC T, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ). SINCE , FACTS ARE ALMOST IDENTICAL IN ALL THESE APPEALS, AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE, WE PROCEED TO TAKE UP ITA NO.2525/MUM./2018, AS THE LEAD APPEAL AND D ISCUSS THE FACTS INVOLVED THEREIN. 5 . BRIEF FACTS ARE, THE ASSESSEE IS STATED TO BE A CHARITABLE TRUST AND IS REGISTERED WITH CHARITY COMMISSIONER, MUMBAI, AS WELL AS UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 16 TH SEPTEMBER 2011, DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF R S. 91,530. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED , THOUG H, THE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE TRUST DEED IS TO CARRY OUT FARMING ACTIVITY ON THE AGRICULTURAL LAND HELD BY IT BY ENGAGING PEOPLE FROM VARIOUS STRATA OF LIFE, HOWEVE R, HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS GETTING AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY DONE THROUGH PEOPLE WITHOUT PAYING ANY LABOUR CHARGE TO THEM. THUS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS EXPLOITING THE LABOURERS IN THE NAME OF GOD. FURTHER, HE OBSERVED , THE INCOME DERIVED FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY IS ALSO NOT APPLIED TOWARDS THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST. THEREFORE, HE ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE EXACT NATURE OF AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY UNDERTAKEN BY IT AND ALSO TO EXPLAIN WHY THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT 6 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED AND WHY IT SHOULD NOT BE PROPOSED TO THE DIT (EXEMP.), MUMBAI, TO CANCEL THE REGISTRATION GRANTED UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT , SINCE , THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY EXPLOITING LABOUR AN D NOT CARRYING OUT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITY. IN RESPONSE TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE FILED DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS EXPLAINING THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST AND THE NATURE OF ACTIVITY CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE. IN NUT SHELL, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE IT IS CARRYING OUT A CHARITABLE ACTIVITY IN FURTHERANCE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AND THE INCOME / FUND IS ALSO APPLIED TOWARDS OBJECT OF THE TRUST , EXEMPTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT NEITHER THE ASSESSEE HAS EXP ENDED / APPLIED THE FUND / INCOME TOWARDS THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST NOR IT HAS GIVE N DONATION TO ANOTHER TRUST HAVING SIMILAR OBJECT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED , ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT COULD HAVE BEEN ALLOWED IF THE ASSESSEE HAD SPENT ITS INCOME EITHER FOR THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST OR IF IT HAS GIVEN DONATION TO ANOTHER TRUST AFTER KEEPING APART 15% OF ITS INCOME. FURTHER, WHILE DEALING WITH ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT OUT OF THE GROSS REVENUE OF RS. 5,89,387, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 4,98,130, IS AGRICULTURAL INCOME, HENCE, IS OTHERWISE EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10 O F THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT SUCH CLAIM CANNOT BE ACCEPTED SINCE 7 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP INCOME OF THE TRUST IS COMPUTED UNDER THE PROVISION S CONTAINED UNDER SECTION 11 TO 13 OF THE ACT , WHEREAS , AGRICULTURAL INCOME FALLS WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 10 OF THE ACT. THUS , HE REJECTED ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10 (1) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. HAVI N G HELD SO, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ULTIMATELY DETERMINED THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS. 7, 02,382, WHICH INCLUDED NET AGRICULTURA L INCOME OF RS. 2,91,333. NOTABLY, WHILE SO DETERMINING THE TAXABLE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER INCLUDED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 3,19,522, ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CREDIT ENTRIES IN THE BANK PASSBOOK AND IN THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOU NT. BEING AGGRIEVED OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SO PASSED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 6 . AFTER CONSIDERING VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE CONTESTING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE LEARNED COMMI SSIONER (APPEALS) CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT AND ALSO UPHELD THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN SUBJECTING THE INCOME DETERMINED TO TAX AT THE MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE. HOWEVER, HE ALLOWED ASSES SEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 10(1) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF AGRICULTURAL INCOME. 7 . THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO 8 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP OBJECTS OF THE TRUST DEED OF THE ASSESSEE , A COPY OF WHICH IS AT PAGE 1 OF THE PAPER BOOK , SUBMITTED THAT NATURE OF ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER OBJECT OF THE TRUST DEED IS TO HOLD AGRICULTURAL LAND AND HELP THE FARMER IN AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES ON THOSE LANDS. HE SUBMITTED , AS PER THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST DEED, THE INCOME DERIVED F ROM SUCH ACTIVITY IS TO BE SPENT FOR RELIEF OF POOR AND DISTRESS ED , ASSISTANCE TO GROUPS OF SMALL AND MARGINAL FARMER S, LANDLESS, HORTICULTURE, PISCI CULTURE AND TO DEVELOP RURAL LANDS BY CO OPERATING FARMING, IMPROVE AGRICULTURAL YIELD, GROWING TREES, CONVERTING WA STE AND AVAILABLE LAND INTO AGRICULTURAL LAND INCLUDING FARMING, ETC. HE SUBMITTED , THE TRUST DEED ALSO PROVIDED FOR UNDERTAKING VARIOUS OTHER CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES FOR THE BENEFIT OF PUBLIC IN GENERAL . HE SUBMITTED , LOOKING A T THE OBJECTS IN THE TRUST DEE D NOT ONLY THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER HAS GRANTED REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE BUT THE DIT (EXEMP.) HAS ALSO GRANTED REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT. THAT BEING THE CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT PRESUME THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT CARRYING OUT ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITY AS PER THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST DEED. HE SUBMITTED , ONCE REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST AND THE REGISTRATION GRANTED UNDER S ECTION 12A OF THE ACT HAS NOT BEEN CANCELLED, EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT CANNOT BE DENIED. FURTHER, HE SUBMITTED , ONCE THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY BEING 9 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP SATISFIED WITH THE CHARITABLE NATURE OF THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST HAS GRANTED REGISTRATION UNDE R SECTION 12A OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT THEREAFTER MAKE FURTHER PROBE INTO THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. IN SUPPORT OF THE AFORESAID CONTENTION S , THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: I ) SADRA S VENKATRAMA CHETTYS CHARITIES V/S DDIT, [2012] 52 SOT 105 (CHENNAI) (URO); AND II ) ACIT V/S SURAT CITY GY MKHANA, [2008] 300 ITR 214 (SC). 8 . THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED , AS PER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 11(7) OF THE ACT, AGRICULTURAL INCOME HAS BEEN PURPOSEFULLY KEPT AWAY FROM THE CONDITION OF APPLYING 85% OF THE INCOME FOR THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. HE SUBMITTED , THOUGH THE AFORESAID PROVISION HAS BEEN INSERTED TO THE STAT UTE BY FINANCE ACT, 2014, W.E.F. 1 ST APRIL 2015, HOWEVER, IT CLEARLY BRINGS FORWARD THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLAT URE NOT TO INCLUDE AGRICULTURAL INCOME WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF INCOME OUT OF WHICH 85% HAS TO BE APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. THE LEARNED AUTH ORISED REPRESENTATIVE DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 ST MARCH 2011, A COPY OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK , SUBMITTED , APART FROM THE AGRICULTURAL INCOME THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED ONLY INTEREST I NCOME OF RS. 91,527, WHICH HAS BEEN OFFERED AS INCOME. HE SUBMITTED , AFTER SETTING OFF THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR EARNING AGRICULTURAL INCOME, 10 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP THE ASSESSEE HAS CARRIED OVER THE SURPLUS OF INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE TO THE BALANCE SHEET AMOUNTING TO RS. 3,80,370. FURTHER, REFERRING TO THE DETAILS OF EXPENDITURE, HE SUBMITTED , SUCH EXPENDITURES WERE ACTUALLY INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY. THUS, HE SUBMITTED , WITHOUT VERIFYING THE DETAILS OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMP TION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN DISALLOWED. HE SUBMITTED , SINCE ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT ALL THE EXPENDITURES INCURRED WERE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACHIEVING THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES , ALL THE ISSUES MAY BE RESTORED BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND EXAMINING THE MATERIAL BROUGHT ON RECORD. 9 . THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING O FFICER AND LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS). 10 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED MATERIALS ON RECORD. IT IS EVIDENT, ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED COMMISSIONE R (APPEALS) PRIMARILY ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPLIED INCOME / FUND TOWARDS THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT MAJOR EXPENDITURE 11 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ASSOCIATED WITH AGRICULTURAL A CTIVITIES. HE HAS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO EXPLAIN HOW THE POOR FARMERS HAVE BENEFITED FROM THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRUST. THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES HAVE ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE EXPENSES TOWARDS VARIOUS ACTIVITIES CONSTITUTE LESS THAN 12% OF THE RECEIPT OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR, HENCE, THE PROVISION OF SECTION 11(2) OF THE ACT IS NOT COMPLIED. AS COULD BE SEEN FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN GRANTED REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT ON THE BASIS OF THE OBJE CTS MENTIONED IN THE TRUST DEED. THERE IS NO ALLEGATION EITHER BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OR BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) THAT THERE IS ANY VARIANCE IN THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST AS MENTIONED IN THE ORIGINAL TRUST DEED. THERE IS ALSO NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE REGISTRATION GRANTED UNDER SECTION 12A OF THE ACT TO THE ASSESSEE IS STILL IN VOGUE . THEREFORE, IF AS PER THE OBJECTS OF THE EXISTING TRUST DEED THE ASSESSEE IS REQUIRED TO UNDERTAKE CHARITABLE ACTIVITY BY WAY OF FARMING / AGRICULTURE IN THE AGRICULTURE LAND HELD BY IT THEN ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT CANNOT BE DENIED. THEREFORE, BEFORE DENYING ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF COGENT MATERIAL BROUGHT ON RECORD MUST DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPLIED ITS INCOME / FUND TOWARDS THE OBJECTS OF THE TRUST. BY MERELY ALLEGING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS EXPLOITING LABOUR IN THE NAME OF GOD WITHOUT 12 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP BRINGING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD, IS NOT ENOUGH TO DENY ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ACT. FURTHER, ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT WHILE APPLYING THE CONDITION S OF SECTION 11(2) OF THE ACT AGRICULTURAL INCOME SHOULD BE KEPT OUT HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE DEPARTMENTAL AUTHORITIES. THEREFORE , ON OVERALL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS AND MARTIAL ON RECORD, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT APPEAL HAVE TO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND EXA MINING THE MATERIALS BROU G HT ON RECORD AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS AS WELL AS RELEVANT CASE LAWS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO SO. NEEDLESS TO MENTION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MUST DECIDE THE ISSUES AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD T TO THE ASSESSEE AND MUST PASS A SPEAKING AND WELL REASONED ORDER DEALING WITH ALL THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. WITH THE AFORESAID OBSERVATIONS, GROUNDS RAISED ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 11 . FACTS AND ISSUES IN ALL OTHER APPEALS IN THIS B UNCH BEING IDENTICAL, OUR DECISION IN ITA NO.2525/MUM./2018, WILL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO ALL THE SE APPEALS AS WELL. 13 VAIJNATH BHAVDARSHAN GROUP 12 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SD/ - N.K. PRADHAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/ - SAKTIJIT DEY JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : ( 1 ) THE ASSESSEE; ( 2 ) THE REVENUE; ( 3 ) THE CIT(A); ( 4 ) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED; ( 5 ) THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI; ( 6 ) GUARD FILE . TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR/SR.P.S) ITAT, MUMBAI