TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 735
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd also in not appreciating the complexity of the case which necessitated such disallowances. 2. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) ought to have implemented the direction contained in paras 18 to 20 of the order of Hon'ble ITAT dated 26.10.2007 to the extent AO failed to give certain findings. 3. To the extent AO failed to examine and give a finding on each and every project and activity as to the fulfillment of the conditions laid down u/s. 11 to 13 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the CIT(A) ought to have got the same verified or verified and given specific findings rather than giving relief based on the infirmities in the order of the AO . 4. The Ld. CIT(A) alternatively should have upheld a portion of income/disallowance of expenditure on estim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hence, not entitled for exemption u/s. 11 on income of such activity and expenditure on such activity is also not allowable. 10. The CIT(A) ought to have noticed that on revenue of Rs.21.31 crores Assessee is claiming Rs.18.34 crores (90% ) as expenditure which is unbelievable and accordingly on non-agricultural activities estimated disallowance is called for. 11. Without prejudice to the above, it is prayed that the matter may be remanded to the CIT(A) to fill the gaps and give specific findings following the direction of the Hon'ble ITAT in their order dated 26.10.2007. 12. The CIT(A) ought to have held that when there is no property at all held in Trust, application of section 11 with respect to income from property being applie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icate the appeal in respect of each of the additions made by the assessing officer, since all the additions so made by the assessing officer have been contested by the assessee, and giving relief in respect of various additions, partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved by the reliefs granted by the CIT(A), Revenue preferred the present appeal before us. 6. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issues involved in the present appeal of the Revenue, are covered in favour of the assessee, by the decision of the Tribunal dated 4.5.2012 in assessee's own case on the appeal of the Revenue being ITA No. 875/Hyd/2011 for assessment year 2005-06. 7. The Learned Departmental Representativ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing officer in the impugned assessment order for denying the claim of the assessee for exemption of its income under S.11 of the Act, and for exemption of its agricultural income under S.10(1) of the Act. As correctly observed by the CIT(A), Government is not a taxable entity, as it is the authority that levies taxes and is not itself subject to the tax statute enacted by the legislature. The founder and author of the assessee-corporation, the State Government, which is, therefore, not a 'person' in terms of S.2(31) of the Income-tax Act, and consequently it cannot be held to be an interested person. E ven otherwise, it is evident from the orders of the lower authorities that the State Government has not benefited either by way of pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ished that such agricultural activities are carried out by the assessee, assessee is entitled for exemption in respect of such agricultural income under S.10(1) of the Act, irrespective of any violation of the statutory provisions as alleged by the assessing officer in the present case. Such infraction of the statutory provisions may expose the assessee to the risks of being penalized or punished under the relevant statutes, but the same do not change nature of the agricultural income, and as such, cannot be fatal to the assessee's claim for exemption under S.10(1) of the Act. 22. It is pertinent to mention at this juncture that when the letter of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, A.P. dated 10.2.2010, clarifying various points....