IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NO.1505/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-2010 A.P. STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, HYDERABAD. PAN AAATA4858L VS. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)-I, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA.NO.1158/HYD/2014 & 917/HYD/2015 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-2011 & 2012-2013 A.P. STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, HYDERABAD. PAN AAATA4858L VS. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)-I, HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : MR. S. RAMA RAO FOR REVENUE : SMT. SUMAN MALIK DATE OF HEARING : 08.11.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.11.2016 ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. ALL THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ITA.NO.1505/HYD/2012 FOR THE A. Y. 2009- 2010 AND IN ITA.NO.1158/HYD/2014 FOR THE A.Y. 2010-2 011 AND ITA.NO.917/HYD/2015 FOR THE A.Y. 2012-2013 ARE AS FO LLOWS : GROUNDS IN ITA.NO.1505/HYD/2012 : A.Y. 2009-2010 : 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TA X (APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2 ITA.NOS.1158/H/14, 1505/HYD/2013 & 917/HYD/2015 A.P. STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, HYDERABAD. 2. THE LD. LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS ) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OR U/S 10(23C) OF THE I.T. ACT. 3. THE LEARNED LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT IS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION AND THE INCOME DERIVED IS EX EMPT U/S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT. 4. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. GROUNDS IN ITA.NO.1158/HYD/2014 A.Y. 2010-2011 : 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE APPELLAN T IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT AND T HE MATTER OF CANCELLATION OF REGISTRATION U/S 12AA IS PENDING BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACT TH AT THE APPELLANT IS ELIGIBLE FOR EXEMPTION U/S 11 OF THE I .T. ACT AS IT IS A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE APPELLAN T FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT AGAINST THE ORDER CANCELLING THE REGISTRATION U/S 12AA OF THE I.T. AC T ; IN THE ALTERNATE THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDER ED THE FACT THAT THE INCOME IS TO BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANC E WITH THE PROVISIONS U/S 28 TO 44 OF THE I.T. ACT WHEN TH E PROVISIONS U/S. 11 OR 10(23C) ARE NOT APPLICABLE. 5. ANY OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. GROUNDS IN ITA.NO.917/HYD/2015 - A.Y. 2012-2013 : 1. THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TA X (APPEALS) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 3 ITA.NOS.1158/H/14, 1505/HYD/2013 & 917/HYD/2015 A.P. STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, HYDERABAD. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ER RED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR E XEMPTION U/ S 11 OR U/S 10(23C) OF THE I.T. ACT. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OU GHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT IS A CHARITABLE INS TITUTION AND THE INCOME DERIVED IS EXEMPT U/S 11 OF THE I.T. ACT. 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) OU GHT TO HAVE SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT FILED AN APPEAL BEF ORE THE HON'BLE ITAT AGAINST THE ORDER CANCELLING REGISTRAT ION U/ S 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT. IN THE ALTERNATIVE, THE LEARN ED CIT (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT TH E INCOME IS TO BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS U/ S 28 TO 44 OF THE I.T. ACT WHEN THE P ROVISIONS U/ S 11 OR U/S 10(23C) ARE NOT APPLICABLE. 5. ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. AS REGARDS GROUND NOS.1, 2 & 3 IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS, ADMITTEDLY THE HYDERABAD BENCH OF ITAT HAS D ISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, AGAINST THE ORDER OF CANCE LLING REGISTRATION GRANTED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE I.T. ACT VIDE ITA.NO.869/HYD/2012 DATED 30.09.2016. IN VIEW OF THIS ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH THESE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. HENCE GROUND NOS. 1, 2 AND 3 O F THE ASSESSEE IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, ITA.NO.1505/HYD/2013 OF THE ASSESSE E IS DISMISSED AS THIS APPEAL HAS THESE THREE GROUNDS ON LY. 4. NOW, WE TAKE-UP GROUND NO.4 IN APPEALS FOR THE A. YS. 2010-2011 AND 2012-2013. 4 ITA.NOS.1158/H/14, 1505/HYD/2013 & 917/HYD/2015 A.P. STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, HYDERABAD. 5. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SIMPLY BROU GHT TO TAX, THE SURPLUS INCOME OVER EXPENDITURE REFLECTED I N THE INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, WITHO UT EXAMINING THE NATURE OF ENTRIES AND COMPUTED THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS REQUIRED TO COMPUTE THE INCOME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INCOME TAX ACT. AS THIS WAS NOT DONE, WE SET ASIDE GROUND NO.4 IN BOTH THESE APPEALS TO THE FIL E OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDA NCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO TH E ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, ITA NO. 1505/HYD/2013 FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10 IS DISMISSED. ITA.NOS.1158/HYD/2014 FOR THE A.Y. 2010-11 AND ITA.NO.917/HYD/2015 FOR THE A.Y. 2012-13 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.11.2016. SD/- SD/- (SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 25 TH NOVEMBER, 2016. VBP/- COPY TO 1. A.P. STATE SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCY, HYDERABAD. C/O. SHRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, SHRIYA S ELEGANCE, DOOR NO.3-6-643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 500 029. 2. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS)-I, HY DERABAD. 3. CIT(A)-IV, HYDERABAD. 4. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), HYDERABAD. 5. ADDL. DIT (EXEMPTIONS)-I, HYDERABAD. 6. D.R. ITAT A BENCH, HYDERABAD. 7. GUARD FILE.