JUDGMENT OM PRAKASH, J. :
The Tribunal, Allahabad Bench drew up a statement of the case for the asst. yr. 1981-82 and referred the following questions at the instance of the assessee and of the Revenue :
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal having found the assessee eligible for exemption under s. 10(26B) was justified in not declaring the whole of its income totally exempt from tax, irrespective of its nature and sources ?" (at the instance of the assessee) "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct, in law, in holding that the income attributable to executing the housing schemes and the other connected schemes therewith for the benefit of Scheduled Castes is exempt under s. 10(26B) of the IT Act, 1961 when the Corporation was also formed for promoting interests of backward classes and other weaker sections of the Society ? " (at the instance of the Revenue)
2. These questions came up for our consideration in the assessees case relating to the asst. yr. 1979-80 which was decided by us by an order dt. 6th Dec., 1995 in IT Ref. No. 86 of 1986 [since reported as CIT vs. Harijan Avem Nirbal Varg Avas Nigam Ltd. (1996) 131 CTR (All) 169]. In the said order, we held that the assessee is entitled to exemption under s. 10(26B) of the IT Act, 1961 only in respect of the housing schemes executed pursuant to the main object No. 1 of the memorandum of association of the assessee for the promotion of the interest of the members of Scheduled Castes and that no exemption can be claimed under that provision in respect of the income which accrued from carrying on the activities under the main objects No. 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the memorandum of association of the assessee and from the house building activity, in so far as that relates to the people of backward classes and other categories.
3. Following our order dt. 6th Dec., 1995 pertaining to the asst. yr. 1979-80, the question referred to at the instance of the assessee is partly answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the question referred to at the instance of the Revenue is answered in the affirmative in terms of our order dt. 6th Dec., 1995.