Asst. Director of Income Tax (Exemptions)-II, Hyderabad V. Kamma Sangam, Hyderabad

ITA 582/HYD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 66310 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-10-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M H NAIK
• Assessee Lawyers: C P RAMASWAMI
• Keywords: Capital asset; Charitable institution; Revenue expenditure
• Section: 11

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 581 & 582/HYD//2012. ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04 & 2004-05. ADIT (EXEMP.)-II, HYDERABAD. APPELLANT PAN: AACCC 1396 C - V/S.- KAMMA SANGAM, HYDERABAD. RESPONDENT PAN/GIR: K-6/ADIT(E)-2 DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI M.H. NAIK ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.P. RAMASWAMI DATE OF HEARING 09-08-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 05-10-2012 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE COMMON ORDER DATED 29-4-2011 OF CIT (A), GUNTUR PASSE D IN ITA NOS. 0162 AND 0552/CIT(A)/GNT/06 AND THEY PERTAIN TO THE ASSESSME NT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2004-05. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN THESE TW O APPEALS, THESE ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 2 ARE TAKEN UP TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMBINED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THESE APPEALS BEING AGGRIE VED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLE D FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. FACTS IN BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE IDENTIC AL EXCEPTING THE FIGURES. FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY, WE DEAL WITH THE F ACTS AS MENTIONED IN ITA NO.581/HYD/2012 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-0 4. BRIEFLY THE FACTS ARE THE ASSESSEE IS A TRUST. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER DISPUTE BY DECLARING THE INCOME AT N IL AFTER CLAIMING EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. IN COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE EXAMINING THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE , NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT APPLYING ITS INCOME TOWARDS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES AS PER THE OBJECTS OF THE MEMORANDUM. EVERY YEAR, THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BY MAKING ADDITIONS TO THE COMMERCIA L COMPLEX. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THOUGH THE MAIN OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ESTABLISHING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION, PROVIDING BOARD ING AND LODGING AND WORKING YOUTH, RENDERING FINANCIAL HELP TO THE DESER VING STUDENTS, PROVIDING SCHOLARSHIPS AND TO ESTABLISH HOSPITALS AND LIBRARIES ETC., HOWEVER, OVER THE YEARS, THE ASSESSEE SPENT A MEAGER PORTION OF ITS INCOME ON ITS MAIN OBJECTS WHEREAS IT SPENT MAJOR PORTION OF ITS INCOME ON ADDITIO NS TO COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND EARNED INCOME BY LEASING OUT COMMERCIAL COMPL EX. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THROUGH OUT THE P REVIOUS YEAR, THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX WAS LEASED OUT TO CHANDANA BROS TO CARR Y ON CLOTH AND JEWELLERY BUSINESS, INSTEAD OF UTILIZING THE PREMISES FOR BOARDING AND LODGING FOR STUDENTS OR WORKING YOUTH OR ESTABLISHED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OR HOSPITALS OR APPLYING IT FOR ANY OF ITS OTHER OBJECTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PLOUGHED BACK THE HUGE INCOME GENERATED BY IT IN CREATING MORE INCOME GENERATING ASSETS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 3 NOTICED THAT THE SCHOLARSHIPS WERE GIVEN TO APPLICANTS BE LONGING TO KAMMA COMMUNITY ONLY WHICH IS IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 13(1)(5) OF THE ACT. ON THE AFORESAID CONCLUSION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSM ENT REJECTING ASSESSEES CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT AN D DETERMINED THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.57,86,520. 3. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BY FILING AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). BEFORE THE CIT (A) THE ASSESSEE CON TENDED THAT FUND IS NEEDED FOR CARRYING OUT CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. SINCE V OLUNTARY CONTRIBUTION RECEIVED FROM YEAR TO YEAR IS NOT ADEQUATE TO CARRY ON THE CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES THE ASSESSEE TOOK DECISION TO CONSTRUCT COMMERCIAL CO MPLEX AND COMMUNITY HALL WHICH WILL YIELD INCOME AND SUCH INCOME CA N BE APPLIED IN CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ME MORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION AUTHORIZED THE ASSESSEE TO CARRY ON COMMERCIAL ACT IVITIES FOR BUILDING UP THE CORPUS AND RENDERING CHARITABLE SERVICE TO THE SOCIETY AT LARGE. THEREFORE, SUCH COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY HAS TO BE TR EATED AS INCIDENTAL TO THE ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE TRUST. THE ASSE SSEE MAKING FURTHER ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS CONTENDED THAT IT HAS PUT UP A C OACHING CENTRE FOR GIVING FREE COMPUTER TECHNICAL EDUCATION IN COLLABORATIO N WITH HE INSTITUTE FOR ELECTRONIC GOVERNANCE, A NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION SET UP BY THE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & COMMUNICATION OF THE GOVERNM ENT OF A.P. AS PER THE MOU, FREE EDUCATION WILL BE GIVEN TO PEOPLE FROM RURAL AREAS AND COMING FROM BELOW POVERTY LINE. PREFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN T O FEMALE CANDIDATES. 4. THE CIT (A) HELD THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS PUT UP A COACHING CENTRE FOR GIVING FREE COMPUTER TECHNICAL EDUCAT ION IN COLLABORATION WITH THE INSTITUTE FOR ELECTRONIC GOVERNANCE, IT CAN BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PURSUING CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES IN THE FIELD OF EDUCATI ON. THE CIT (A) OBSERVED THAT CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT VOLUNTARY CONT RIBUTION MAY OR MAY ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 4 NOT BE ADEQUATE THE ASSESSEES DECISION TO GO AHEAD WITH CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND COMMUNITY HALL CANNOT BE FAULTED WITH. THE CIT (A) RELYING UPON A DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N ACIT V/S. THANTHI TRUST (247 ITR 785) HELD THAT THE CAPITAL EXPENDITU RE INCURRED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AND THEREAFTE R INCOME DERIVED THERE FROM ARE APPLICATIONS TO MEET THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE A ND THEREFORE ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFITS OF THE SEC.11 OF THE ACT. 5. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS APPLYING ITS INCOME IN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOR CREATI NG BUSINESS ASSETS ONLY AND HAS NOT APPLIED ITS INCOME IN ANY CHARITABLE A CTIVITIES AS PER ITS OBJECTS. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMI TTED THAT EVEN THE SCHOLARSHIP WAS GIVEN TO THE STUDENTS OF A PARTICULAR COMM UNITY IN VIOLATION OF SEC. 13(1)(B) OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVE URGED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAVING NOT APPLIED ITS INCOME FOR CHARIT ABLE PURPOSE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. 6. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE SCHOLARSHIPS WERE P AID IN CHEQUE AND POOR STUDENTS FROM ALL COMMUNITIES WERE GIVEN SCHOL ARSHIP. IN THIS REGARD , THE LEARNED AR REFERRED TO THE LIST OF STUD ENTS AT PAGE 7-14 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY DONATIONS THEREFORE FOR ACHIEVING ITS OBJECT THE A SSESSEE HAS UNDERTAKEN THE CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND COMMUNITY HALL FOR GENERATING INCOME WHICH CAN BE APPLIED TOWARDS CHARITABLE ACTIVITIE S. THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL COMP LEX AND COMMUNITY HALL CAN BE CONSIDERED TO BE IN THE NATURE OF BUSINESS, BUT SINCE IT IS FOR ATTAINMENT OF THE OBJECT OF THE TRUST ITS INCOME WOULD STILL BE EXEMPT IN VIEW OF SEC. 11(4A) OF THE ACT. THE LEARNED AR RELIED ON DECISIONS OF AP HIGH COURT IN CIT V/S. HYDERABAD RACE CLUB CHARITABLE TRUST (262 ITR 194). THE ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 5 LEARNED AR WAS FAIR ENOUGH TO BRING TO OUR NOTICE T HE ORDER OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2001-02 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO.477 /HYD/2011 DATED 22- 11-2011 HELD THAT INVESTMENTS IN COMMERCIAL COMPLEX WILL NOT AMOUNT TO INVESTMENT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. 7. WE HAVE HEARD SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED T HE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE OBJECTS OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE MEMORANDUM ARE:- I) TO ESTABLISH EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS; II) TO PROVIDE BOARDING AND LODGING FACILITIES FOR STUDENTS AND THE WORKING YOUTH. III) TO RENDER FINANCIALLY DESERVING STUDENTS BY GI VING LOANS, SCHOLARSHIPS, AWARDS, ETC., IN FURTHERANCE OF THEIR STUDIES IN IN DIA AND ABROAD. IV) TO ESTABLISH HOSPITALS AND PROVIDING MEDICAL FA CILITIES. V) TO ESTABLISH LIBRARIES, PUBLISH BOOKS, PAMPHLETS , JOURNAL, ETC. VI) TO HONOUR AND ENCOURAGE OUTSTANDING AND DESERVI NG PERSONS IN PUBLIC LIFE, SOCIAL SERVICE, MUSIC, LITERATURE AND ARTS, E TC. VII) TO ASSIST AND GUIDE THE EDUCATED UN-EMPLOYEES IN THE MATTER OF EMPLOYMENT. VIII) TO ABSORB, MERGE OR AMALGAMATE, AFFILIATE ANY OTHER BODY, INSTITUTION OR ORGANISATION WITH THIS SANGHAM HAVING OBJECTS SIMIL AR TO THOSE OF THIS SANG HAM. IX) TO DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY FOR THE ATTAINMENT OF THE ABOVE OBJECTS. X) TO PROMOTE BETTER UNDERSTANDING AMONG MEMBERS OF ALL COMMUNITIES. 8. FROM THE FACTS FOUND ON RECORD DURING THE RELEVANT FIN ANCIAL YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAS INVESTED MAJOR PORTION OF ITS INCOME IN CONSTRU CTION OF THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND COMMUNITY HALL. EXCEPTING A SMAL L AMOUNT SPENT TOWARDS SCHOLARSHIP NOTHING WAS SPENT TOWARDS CHARITABLE PU RPOSE AS PER THE OBJECTS. EVEN THE SCHOLARSHIPS WERE GIVEN TO STUDENTS BEL ONGING TO A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY. THOUGH THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT POOR STUDENTS BELONGING TO ALL COMMUNITIES WERE GRANTED SCHOLARSHIP H E FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE IT WITH EVIDENCE. THAT APART, IT IS A FACT THAT OVER THE YEARS, THE ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 6 ASSESSEE HAS NOT APPLIED ITS FUND TOWARDS ANY OF THE OBJECT S AS MENTIONED IN THE MEMORANDUM. ON THE CONTRARY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN I NVOLVED IN CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND COMMUNITY HALL WHICH WERE LET OUT/LEASED AND INCOME GENERATED THERE FROM IS AGAIN P LOUGHED BACK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF INCOME GENERATING ASSETS. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS BEEN COMPLETELY SWAYED AWAY BY THE ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT IT HA S PUT UP A COACHING CENTRE FOR GIVING FREE COMPUTER TECHNICAL EDUCATI ON IN COLLABORATION WITH THE INSTITUTE OF ELECTRONIC GOVERNANCE COMPLETELY OVERLOOKING THE FACT THAT THE MOU WAS SIGNED ON 15-9-2006 I.E. NOT DURING THE PERIODS UNDER APPEAL BUT SUBSEQUENT TO IT. FACT REMAINS THAT DURING THE RELEVANT YEAR, THERE IS NO APPLICATION OF FUND TOWARDS CHARITABLE ACTI VITIES. THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE AP HIGH COURT WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE TO T HE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE BECAUSE IN THAT CASE PROMOTION OF SPORTS AND GAMES WAS A LSO ONE OF THE CHARITABLE OBJECTS, WHEREAS IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE CONSTRUCTIO N OF COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND COMMUNITY HALL AND EARNING INCOME BY LEASING THEM OUT IS NOT WITHIN THE OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE TRUST. THE CO -ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL WHILE DEALING WITH IDENTICAL FACTS IN A SSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 IN ITA NO.477/HYD/2011 DATED 22- 11-2011 CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT SCHOLARSHIPS WERE GIVEN ONLY TO CHILDREN OF A PARTICULAR COMMUNITY HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS VIOLATED P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 13(1)(6) HENCE EXEMPTION U/S 11 CANNOT BE GRANTE D TO IT. THE TRIBUNAL FURTHER HELD THAT THE INVESTMENT MADE IN CO MMERCIAL COMPLEX CANNOT BE SAID TO HAVE BEEN MADE FOR ACHIEVING THE MAI N OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY. THE TRIBUNAL HELD IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER:- 7.THE EXPENDITURE IN CHARITIES NEED NOT BE IN THE NATURE OF REVENUE EXPENDITURE ONLY. IF A TRUST OR SOCIETY APPLIES ITS INCOME FOR CONSTRUCTING A HOSPITAL OR SCHOOL BUILDING OR PURCHASING APPARATUS OR FURNITURE THEREOF, IT WOULD BE APPLICATION OF THE INCOME TO CHARITABLE PU RPOSE. THIS, HOWEVER, DOES NOT MEAN THAT IF A TRUST SPENDS OR INVESTS ITS INCOME F OR ACQUIRING A CAPITAL ASSET FOR EARNING INCOME, IT WOULD STILL TANTAMOUNT TO THE AP PLICATION OF THE INCOME TO THE ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 7 CHARITABLE PURPOSES. IF THE ASSETS ACQUIRED HAVE DI RECT NEXUS WITH THE CHARITABLE PURPOSE, IT IS ONLY THEN THAT IT WILL AMOUNT TO THE APPLICATION OF THE INCOME WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 11. INVESTMENT IN AN INCOME EARNING ASSET WOULD NOT BE APPLICATION OF THE INCOME AS ENVISAGED BY THE SECTI ON. 18. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A WIDER OUTLOOK AND SHOULD TAKE A MORE LIBERAL VIEW OF THE MATTER BY HOLDING THAT THE INVESTMENT O F THE INCOME IN A VENTURE WHICH WOULD BRING A HIGHER INCOME WHICH COULD ULTIM ATELY BE APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES, SHOULD BE HELD TO BE APPLICATI ON OF THE INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. FOR THIS PROPOSITION, HE RELIED ON THE JU DGMENT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JANMABHUMI PRESS TRUST (242 ITR 457). IT APPEARS TO BE UNSAFE TO ACCEPT SUCH A PROPOSITION. IF THE P ROPOSITION IS ACCEPTED, A CHARITABLE TRUST CAN APPLY ITS ENTIRE INCOME ON COM MERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND CLAIM THE SAME TO BE APPLICATION OF THE INCOME FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES, MERELY BECAUSE THE INCOME ULTIMATELY OBTAINED FROM THE COMMERCIAL ACTI VITIES IS TO BE APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. SIMILARLY, A CHARITABLE INSTIT UTION CAN SPEND THE ENTIRE INCOME ON THE ACQUISITION OF THE CAPITAL ASSET WHIC H HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES ON THE PLEA THAT THE INCOME D ERIVED FROM THE CAPITAL ASSET IS GOING TO BE USED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. THE ESSEN TIAL REQUIREMENT OF SECTION 11 IS THAT THE INCOME FOR WHICH EXEMPTION IS SOUGHT MU ST BE ONE WHICH HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES DURING THE RELEVAN T PREVIOUS YEAR. IF WE VIEW THE MATTER IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND IN THE PRESENT CASE THE INCOME HAS NOT BEEN APPLIED FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSES. THE AMOUNT HEREIN WAS NOT SPENT FOR THE DOMINANT AND PRIMARY PURPOSE OF CHARITABLE ACTIVITI ES AND IT CANNOT BE CONSTRUED AS SPENDING MONEY ON CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES. 19. IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE SPENT A PALTRY AMOUNT OF RS. 1,52,100 FOR GIVING SCHOLARSHIPS OUT OF ITS INCOME AND INVESTED MONEY I N CONSTRUCTION OF THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX OR TRANSFERRED THE FUND TO 'BUIL DING FUND RESERVE ACCOUNT'. THIS PATTERN OF INVESTMENT CANNOT BE CONS IDERED AS APPLICATION OF FUND IN TERMS OF SECTION 11. THE INVESTMENT IN COMMERCIA L COMPLEX CANNOT BE SAID TO HAVE BEEN MADE TO HELP IN ACHIEVING THE MAIN OBJECT S. FURTHER ANY BENEFIT THAT IS TO ACCRUE TO A SPECIFIC PERSON FROM AMONGST THE PAR TICULAR COMMUNITY COULD NEVER BE PUBLIC UTILITY BECAUSE; IT ALWAYS IMPLIES A GENERAL APPLICATION WITHOUT ANY REFERENCE TO ANY PERSON OF PARTICULAR COMMUNITY . IN OUR OPINION, THE CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL COMPLEX WHICH IS CARRIED ON COMMERCIAL LEVEL DID NOT MAKE ASSESSEE SOCIETY EXISTING SOLELY FOR CHARITABL E PURPOSE. 9. IN THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL ALSO THE ASSESSEE APART FROM GIVING SOME AMOUNT TOWARDS SCHOLARSHIP TO THE CHILDREN FROM A PARTI CULAR COMMUNITY HAS NOT APPLIED THE INCOME FOR ANY CHARITABLE ACTIVITY AS PER THE MAIN OBJECTS. THE ENTIRE AMOUNT HAS BEEN SPENT TOWARDS ADDITIONAL CON STRUCTION OF THE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS SPENT THE INCOME I N ITA NOS. 581 AND 582 OF 2012 KAMMA SANGAM, HYD. 8 CONSTRUCTION OF COMMERCIAL COMPLEX AND TO THE BENEFICIARI ES OF THE SCHOLARSHIP BELONGS TO ONE PARTICULAR CASTE, WE FOLLOW TH E ORDER OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH (SUPRA) AND HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE ACT. WE THEREFORE WHILE SETTI NG ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT (A) RESTORE THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 10. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVE NUE STAND ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 05 -10-2012. SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED/- 5 TH OCTOBER, 2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. ADIT (EXEMPTIONS)-II, HYDERABAD. 2. 3. KAMMA SANGAM, 8-3-949/1B, AMEERPET, HYDERABAD. DIT (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD. 3. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. JMR *