ORDER :

SONIA GOKANI, J.

1. Being aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘ITAT’), Ahmedabad passed in ITA No. 308/Ahd/2019 for the assessment year 2015-16, the following are the substantial questions of law raised for determination of this Court by the Revenue.

[A] “Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in allowing the assessee’s appeal, negating the finding of the Assessing Officer denying the benefits of section 11 and 12 of the Act ?

[B] Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in giving the benefit of Section 11 and 12 which the Assessing Officer disallowed by invoking the provision of Section 2(15) r.w.s. 13(8) of the Act ?

[C] Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in setting aside the issue of addition of Rs.703,30,00,837 made on account of premium on land and shades back to the Assessing Officer in view of the applicability of Section 2(15) of the Act in place of upholding the decision of Assessing Officer on merits?

[D] Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in setting aside the issue of depreciation allowance and set-off of brought forward deficit for re-examination at the end of Assessing Officer in view of the applicability of Section 2(15) of the Act in place of upholding the decision of Assessing Officer on merits ?

[E] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in setting aside the issue of deemed rent amounting to Rs.8,02,879/- in view of the applicability of Section 2(15) of the Act in place of upholding the decision of Assessing Officer on merits ?

2. We have heard Ms. Maithili Mehta, learned Sr. Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue who has fairly submitted that the decision of Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017 rendered by the Apex Court in case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Vs. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority, would govern the case of assessee. In the instant case, though the various questions are raised essentially challenge is of giving benefit of Section 11 and 12, disallowed by the Assessing Officer by invoking of provision of Section 2(15) read with Section 13 (8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘ITAT’ )

3. Tribunal on the ground that the issue is covered in assessee’s own case by the order of the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal and affirmed by this Court in the case of CIT Vs. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation [(2017) 80 taxman.com 366 (Guj)] has chosen to address the issue. The Assessee -Corporation was constituted under the Gujarat Industrial Development Act, 1962 for the purpose of securing and assisting rapid and orderly establishment and organization of Industrial areas and Industrial estates in the State of Gujarat and for the purpose of establishing the commercial centers in connection with establishment and organization of such industries. It is also held that it could not be said that the activities carried out by the Assessee were either in nature of trade, commerce or business, for Cess or Fee or any other consideration so as to attract the proviso to Section 2(15) and the same could be said to be for charitable purpose and consequently, the exemption under Section 11 was permitted. The Tribunal allowed the exemption under Section 11 and 12. The revenue’s appeal on this ground had not been entertained.

4. When this issue was taken up before the Apex Court by way of Civil Appeal No. 21762 of 2017 in case of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) (Supra), The Apex Court summarily in relation to the statutory authority has held as under:-

190. In light of the above discussion, this court is of the opinion that:

(i) The fact that bodies which carry on statutory functions whose income was eligible to be considered for exemp