Swasthya Bikash samiti, Cuttack V. CIT, Cuttack

ITA 466/CTK/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 46622114 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-04-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARAMITA TRIPATHY
• Assessee Lawyers: SANDEEP KUMAR JENA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Principle of natural justice; Earning of tax free income; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 12A; 12AA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE : SHRI K.K.GUPTA, AM, AND SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JM ITA NO. 466/CTK/2011 SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL COMPOUND, MANGLABAG,CUTTACK PAN: AAEAS 5600 H VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CUTTACK. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO S . 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 (AYS 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08) SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL COMPOUND, MANGLABAG,CUTTACK PAN : AAEAS 5600 H VERSUS ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CUTTACK. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO S . 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 ( AYS 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08) ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CUTTACK . VERSUS SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL COMPOUND, MANGLABAG,CUTTACK PAN: AAEAS 5600 H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE A SSESSEE: SHRI SANDEEP KUMAR JENA, AR FOR THE DEPARTMENT: SMT. PARAMITA TRIPATHY, CIT - DR DATE OF HEARING : 09.04.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.04.2012 ORDER SHRI K.S.S.PRASAD RAO, JM : ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IN REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF T HE I.T.ACT,1961 TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1. THAT WHILE DECIDING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE APPELLANT, THE LD. CIT HAS NOT DECIDED THE FUNDAMENTAL ISSUES LIKE OBJECTS AND GENUINENESS OF ACTIVITI ES OF THE APPELLANT. THE LD. CIT HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER UNDER APPEAL BY ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 2 REJECTING THE REGISTRATION, TAKING IRRELEVANT MATERIALS IN TO CONSIDERATION AND GIVEN A PREJUDICIAL FINDING AGAINST THE APPELLANT, WHICH WAS NOT AT ALL A SUBJECT MATTER BEFORE H IM, THEREFORE EXCEEDED HIS JURISDICTION. UNDER SUCH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE AND LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE ON THIS GROUND ONLY. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT SHOULD HAVE TO CONFINE HIMSELF TO THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS FOR GRANTING OR R EJECTING REGISTRATION TO THE APPELLANT AS PROVIDED UNDER STATUTE, BUT WITHOUT DOING SO, HE HAS DETERMINED THE STATUS OF THE APPELLANT AS ASSOCIATION OF PERSONS AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO INITIATE ASSESSMENT/RE - ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING FOR THE PRECE DING ASSESSMENT YEARS, WHICH IS NOT PROPER AND CONTRARY TO LAW. 2. ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ARE ALL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE AYS 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2005 - 0 6, 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08., RAISING THE FOLLOWING COMMON GROUNDS. A. FOR THAT THE LD AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT (A) ARE ERRED IN FACTS AS WELL AS IN LAW IN DETERMINING THE STATUS OF THE APPELLANT AS AOP BY COMPLETELY IGNORING THE MEMORANDUM AND GOVTS NOTIFICATI ONS OF THE APPELLANTS CREATION AND EXISTENCE, WHERE AS IT HAS BEEN CLEARLY STATED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN CREATED BY THE GOVT OF ODISHA TO PROVIDE HEALTH SERVICES TO THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE AS AN AGENT/ INTERMEDIATERY, THEREFORE IS A STATE UNDER THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION. THE LD. AO IS PARTICULARLY BY EXTREMELY BIAS IN MIND IN DETERMINING THE STATUS OF THE APPELLANT AND COMPLETELY GUIDED BY THE ORDER PASSED U/S I2AA OF THE L.T ACT, OF THE LD. CIT, CUTTACK, WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSM ENT. THEREFORE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE AUTHORITY BELOW IN TAXING A STATE ARE HIT BY ARTICLE 289 OF THE CONSTITUTION. THEREFORE THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS ARE LIABLE TO BE QUASHED. ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 3 B. FOR THAT THE USER FEES SO COLLECTED BY THE APPELLANT HAS BEEN DETERMINED/DEC IDED BY THE HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT OF GOVT. OF ODISHA AND THE APPELLANT AS DUTY BOUND TO OBEY THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE GOVT. AS AN AGENT TO COLLECT THE SAME ON ITS BEHALF FROM VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS OF SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE AND ISSUED THE MONEY REC EIPTS OF THE SAME ON BEHALF OF SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE THEREFORE THERE HAS NO DOMAIN OR CONTROL OVER THE USER FEES SO COLLECTED BY THE APPELLANT RATHER THE GOVT. HAS INSTRUCTED THE APPELLANT TO UTILIZE THE USER FEES FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE H OSPITALS FOR THE DAY TO DAY EXPENDITURE AND TO ENSURE QUALITATIVE HEALTH CARE SERVICES TO THE PUBLIC OF THE STATE. THEREFORE THE LD. AC IS ERRED IN TAX THE SAME IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT WITHOUT ALLOWING ANY EXPENDITURE. THE LD CIT (A) HOWEVER ALLOWED THE EXPENDITURE, BUT FAILED TO DETERMINE, WHETHER THE USER FEES AND OTHER INCIDENTAL RECEIPTS ARE SUBJECT TO TAX UNDER THE ACT AND COMING UNDER THE DEFINITION OF INCOME AS DEFINED U/S 2(24) OF THE I.T. ACT AND ALSO WHETHER THE APPELLANT IS AN ASSESSEE AS D EFINED U/S 2(7) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE THE ORDERS PASSED BY THE FORUM BELOW ARE NON APPLICATION OF MIND. 3. ITA NOS.14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) FOR THE AYS 2003 - 04, 2004 - 05, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 RAISING THE FOLLOWING COMMON GROUNDS EXCEPT FOR FIGURES IN DISPUTE. 4. BOTH THE PARTIES WERE HEARD REGARDING THE ISSUES RAISED IN THEIR RESPECTIVE APPEALS AND THEIR LEGAL IMPLICATIONS. 5. SINCE THE ITA NO.466/CTK /2011 PERTAINS TO REJECTION OF APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE SEEKING REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE I.T.ACT,1961 AND IT IS ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 4 RELEVANT FOR OTHER APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE REVENUE, FIRST WE TAKE UP THE SAID APPEAL FOR ADJUDICATION. 6. AS CAN BE SEEN F ROM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT REJECTING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA OF THE I.T.ACT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIETY REGISTRATION ACT FROM 1.7.1997. THE ASSESSEE HAS APPLIED FOR REGISTRATI ON U/S.12AA OF THE I.T.ACT TO THE CIT ON 31.3.2009. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS COLLECTING CERTAIN USER CHARGES FROM PATIENTS GETTING TREATMENT IN THE SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL AND UTILIZED THE SAME FOR VARIOUS OBJECTIVES AS ST ATED IN THE POWERS AND RIGHTS OF THE SOCIETY. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED AUDITED ACCOUNTS FOR THE THREE FINANCE YEARS 20805 - 06 TO 2007 - 08 WHICH ARE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEARS TO THE DATE OF FILING OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION. THEREFORE, THE LEARNE D CIT OPINED THAT T HE ABSENCE OF AUDITED STATEMENTS OF ACCOUNT OF TH E ASSESSEE FOR FINANCIAL YEARS 2 000 - 01 TO 2008 - 09 IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO CONSIDER THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE FURTHER OBSERVED IN THE IMPU GNED ORDER THAT IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION FROM THE CHARGE OF INCOME - TAX THE INCOME OF THE REGISTERED SOCIETY HAS TO BE APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE TO THE EXTENT OF NOT LESS THAN 85%. IF IT IS NOT ABLE TO UTILIZE AS SUCH, THEN AN APPLICATION HAS TO BE FILED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE SOCIETY IN FORM NO.10. THEREFORE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING NO MERIT AND HENCE, HE REJECTED THE SAME. APART FROM THAT HE HAS OBSERVED THAT THE SOCIETY IS LIABLE FOR CHARGE OF INCOME TAX IN RESPECT OF ALL ITS INCOME FOR FINANCIAL YEARS 1997 - 98 TO 2008 - 09 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT AND THE ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 5 STATUS OF THE SOCIETY SHALL BE AN ASSOCIATION OF PERSON. HE FUR THER OBSERVED AT THE END OF HIS ORDER AS HERE UNDER. THE SWASTHYA BIKAS SAMITI SHALL, HOWEVER, ENJOY THE RIGHT TO MAKE A FRESH APPLICATION AFTER GETTING ITS ACCOUNTS AUDITED FOR THE ALL THE PENDING FINANCIAL YEARS 2000 - 01 TO 2008 - 09 BEFORE THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES FOR REGISTRATION U/S 12A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND FOR EXEMPTION OF ITS INCOME FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2009 - 10 ONWARDS. THE FRESH FILING OF APPLICATION U/S 12A SHALL HOWEVER NOT AUTOMATICALLY EXEMPT INCOME OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE FINANCIAL YEA R 1997 - 98 TO 2008 - 09 FROM CHARGE OF INCOME TAX. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVING JURISDICTION EVER THE S WASTHYA BIKAS SAMITI MAY INITIATE ASSESSMENT/RE - ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE I. T. ACT, 196 1 AT THE SAME TIME, THE LEARNED CIT HAS MARKED THE COPIES THEREOF TO TO ADDL.CIT, RANGE 1 & 2, CUTTACK FOR INFORMATION AND NECESSARY ACTION AND ALSO THE DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1), CUTTACK FOR INFORMATION AND STATING TO START ASSESSMENT/REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR RELEVANT AYS IN AC CORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF I.T.ACT,1961. BASING ON THIS ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ISSUED NOTICES U/S.147 TO THE ASSESSEE REOPENING THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04 TO 2007 - 08. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT REJECTING THE REGISTRATION U/SD.12AA AND AT THE SAME TIME ALSO PARTICIPATED IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HAVING BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FILED THE PRESENT APPEALS. AT TH E SAME TIME, THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALSO FILED APPEALS HAVING BEEN AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) FOR THE AYS 2003 - 04 TO 2007 - 08. ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 6 7. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED CONTENDING INTER ALIA THAT THE LEARNED CIT HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITHOUT AFFORDING REASONABLE AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE HIM. THIS IS CLEAR FROM THE ORDER ITSELF WHEREIN THE LEARNED CIT IS NOT ABLE TO SHOW ANY SINGLE NOT ICE SEND TO THE ADDRESS OF THE ASSESSEE IS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. SO ALSO HE IS NOT ABLE TO POINT OUT A SINGLE DATE OF NOTICE TO HAVE BEEN SERVED ON THE AUDITOR OF THE ASSESSEE ALSO FOR PRODUCTION OF ACCOUNTS REQUIRED BY HIM. THIS ITSELF INDICATES THAT TH E LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT FOLLOWED THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WHICH THE AUTHORITIES UNDER THE I.T.ACT ARE EXPECTED TO FOLLOW. THEREFORE, PER SE THE CITS ORDER IS NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR LEGAL SCRUTINY. ADVERTING TO THE MERITS OF THE REJECTION, THE LEARN ED AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT NOWHERE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LEARNED CIT HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEES OBJECTIVES ARE NOT OF CHARITABLE IN NATURE NOR THEY ARE NOT GENUINE . AS PER THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE I.T.ACT WHILE EXAMINING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12AA THE CIT HAS TO LOOK INTO THE GENUINENESS OF THE OBJECTS AS WELL AS THE CHARITABLE NATURE OF THE OBJECTS. THE OTHER ASPECT IS NOT ENTITLED TO GO INTO. THEREFORE, THE OBSERVATION OF THE CIT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT HE REQUIRED THE ACCOUNTS STATEMENTS OF THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY A RULE TO PASS THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD WHICH IS AGAINST PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THEREFORE, HE ASSAILED THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT AND PRAYED FOR SETTING ASIDE THE SAME WITH A DIRECTION TO ALLOW REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE. 8. CONTRARY TO THIS , THE LEARNED CIT - DR HAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED SUPPORTING THE ORDER OF THE CIT CONTENDING INTER ALIA THAT THE CITS ORDER IS VER Y MUCH ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 7 RIGHT IN LAW INSOFAR AS THE CIT HAS NO INFORMATION WHATSOEVER WITH HIM TO CONSIDER THE ASPECTS NECESSARY FOR GRANT OF REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE AND INSPITE OF SEVERAL NOTICES NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ITS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUPPLIED THE COPIES OF ACCOUNTS SOUGHT FOR BY THE LEARNED CIT. THEREFORE , REJECTION OF REGISTRATION MADE BY THE CIT UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IS VERY MUCH RIGHT AND HENCE, SOUGHT FOR UPHOLDING THE SAME BY DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. ON CAREFUL ANALYSIS OF THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 12AA OF THE I.T.ACT AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER O THE LEARNED CIT, IT IS FOUND THAT WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12A , THE CIT MAY EXAMINE AS TO THE APPLICATION IS MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE I.T.ACT READ WITH RULES 17A OF THE I.T.RULES AND WHETHER FORM 10A HAS BEEN PROPERLY FILLED UP AND AT THE SAME TIME HE MAY ALSO SEE WHETHER THE OBJECTIVES OF THE TRUST IS CHARITABLE OR NOT BUT AT THAT STAGE IT IS N OT PROPER TO EXAMINE THE APPLICATION OF INCOME. THIS WAS SO HELD BY HON BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF FIFTH GENERATION EDUCATION SOCIETY V. CIT (185 ITR 634). ON ANALYSIS OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT IN THE LIGHT OF THIS DICTUM OF HONBLE ALL AHABAD HIGH COURT, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO WHISPER IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER ABOUT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE ASSESSEE WHETHER THEY ARE CHARITABLE IN NATURE WHICH ASPECT IS ONLY TO SEE BY THE LEARNED CIT WHILE CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION U/S.12A. THIS IS SO OBSERVED UNDER THE PROVISIONS ALSO U/S.12AA(1)(B) TO THE EFFECT THAT THE CIT HAS TO SATISFY HIMSELF ABOUT THE OBJECTIVES OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION AND GENUINENESS OF ITS ACTIVITIES. THEREFORE , ON ANALYSIS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED C IT IN THE LIGHT OF THE SCOPE OF SECTION 12AA, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LEARNED CIT HAS PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITHOUT FINDING THAT THE ACTIVITIES ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 8 OF THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT GENUINE. HENCE, IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR LEGAL SCRUTINY. AT THE SAME TIME IT IS ALSO FOUND FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT IN VIEW OF THE ABSENCE OF SATISFACTION TO THE AUDIT AND SERVICE OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE REQUIRING THE PRODUCTION OF ACCOUNTS OR RECORDS, AS THE CASE MAY BE, SHOWS THAT THE LEARNED CIT HAS NOT GIVEN PROPER AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WHILE DISPOSING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. ON THESE TWO COUNTS ALSO WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT IS NOT SUSTAINABLE FOR LEGAL SCRUTINY AND HENCE, THE SAME IS SET ASIDE. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED CIT HAS OBSERVED AT THE END IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER AS EXTRACTED SUPRA THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO MAKE FRESH APPLICATION AFTER GETTING IT S ACCOUNTS AUDITED FOR ALL THE FINANCIAL YEARS 2000 - 01 TO 2008 - 09 BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBERTY TO FILE A FRESH APPLICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS RELEVANT THERETO FOR REGISTRATION BEFORE THE CIT IF SO ADVISED. AC CORDINGLY, ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 IS ALLOWED. 10. NOW CONSIDERING THE MERITS OF THE OTHER APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT IN ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012, IT IS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSMENTS WERE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON RECEIPT OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT IN REJECTING THE REGISTRATION U/S.12AA TO THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WAS SET ASIDE BY THIS TRIBUNAL FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THIS ORDER ABOVE WHILE CONSIDERING ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS DENYING THE EXEMPTION TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE WAS REFUSED REGISTRATION OBY THE CIT. IN APPEAL ALSO THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE SAME. THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE REG ARDING THE QUANTUM OF ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 9 AMOUNT TO BE TAKEN FOR LEVYING THE TAX FOR THE RESPECTIVE AYS. SINCE THE IMPUGNED ORDERS IN ALL THESE APPEALS ARE MAINLY BASED ON THE CITS ORDER IN REJECTING REGISTRATION U/S.12AA AND THE SAID ORDER WAS SET ASIDE BY THIS TRIBUNAL AND IN THE ORDER ITSELF CIT HAS GIVEN THE LIBERTY TO THE ASSESSEE FOR APPLYING FRESH APPLICATION U/S.12AA BY COMPLYING RELEVANT PROVISIONS THERETO, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ALL THESE ASSESSMENTS ARE JUST TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DE NOVO ASSESSMENT AS NON - REGISTRATION TO THE ASSESSEE U/S.12AA IS THE ONLY BASIS FOR NOT ACCEPTING THE EXEMPTIONS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS RETURNS. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT ALL THESE ASSESSMENTS ARE JUST TO BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DE NOVO CONSIDERATION AFTER THE CIT HAS PASSED THE ORDER AFRESH ON THE ASSESSEE FILING FRESH APPLICATION U /S.12AA FOR REGISTRATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND AFTER THE SAID ORDER REACHING A FINALITY . WITH THIS DIRECTION, ALL THE ASSESS MENTS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ALLOWING THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 11. ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE DEPARTMENT ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/ - S D/ - (K.K.GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (K.S.S.PRASAD RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 11.04.2012 H.K.PADHEE, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY. ITA NO.466/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 467, 468, 469, 470 AND 471/CTK/2011 ITA NOS. 14, 15, 16, 17 AND 18/CTK/2012 10 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE : SWASTHYA BIKASH SAMITI, SCB MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL COMPOUND, MANGLABAG,CUTTACK 2. THE DEPARTMENT: ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), CUTTACK. 3. THE CIT, 4. THE CIT(A), 5. THE DR, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE (IN DUPLICATE) TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY.