1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against order dated 12/05/2017 passed by CIT(A)-Ghaziabad for assessment year 2011-12.
2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-
"1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the findings of the learned AO and has failed to appreciate that the income of the educational institution is not to be included in the total income of the assessee society.
2. That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in failing to appreciate that the only source of income of assessee society is receipt by imparting education and for such students it has to necessarily under law, maintain a hostel and provide such facilities and such an activity is not an independent activity and as such any excess of receipt over expenditure for providing hostel facility but is only an integral part of activity of providing education is also part of education and is not an independent source of an income.
3. That the learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that the assessee institution came into existence in the AY 1998-99 and till the AY 2009-10 such an income was not included in the total income of the assessee, it being integral part of the total income of the society running an educational institution.
4. That the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the AO has grossly erred in holding that the assessee had not produced the books of accounts despite the fact they were duly produced before him on 20.02.2014 and 04.03.2014, as is evident from the submissions made and is on record.
5. The learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that despite the remand made by him to the AO, the AO had failed to provide any opportunity (before submitting the report) and CIT(A) has also erred in not considering such books of accounts which were also produced before him on 20/08/2015.
5.1 That the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the assessee by way of abundant precaution and to comply with the requirement of section 11 of the Act had maintained separate books of accounts of the hostel activity despite the fact that such hostel activity was incidental to attain the object of the society i.e. to run educational institution.
6. That the learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that the excess of income over expenditure in respect of hostel activity aggregated to Rs. 1,64,884/- only and as such in the alternative the income computed by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) is entirely erroneous both on facts and in law.
7. The learned CIT(A) has further erred in failing to comprehend that excess of income over expenditure was of Rs. 1,64,884/- which was not only supported by the books of accounts but were also supported by the vouchers which were provided before the AO.
8. That the learned CIT(A) has further failed to appreciate that the assessee had not debited any depreciation in the income and expenditure account on account of depreciation of the hostel block.
9. That in any case and without prejudice the determination of income by the AO of the hostel at Rs. 93,00,088/- is based on no material and is highly arbitrary.
10. That the finding of the learned CIT(A) in para 7.2.1 in the order impugned "thus AO is directed to disallow depreciation after taking into account already disallowed Rs. 73,01,748/- while computing income of Rs. 93,00,088/- resulting in only balance amount of Rs. 2,53,09,707/- separately" is apparently erroneous.
11. That the learned CIT(A) has further erred in failing to appreciate that the assessee cannot be said to have claim double deduction and otherwise too the depreciation is allowable to it as provided u/s. 32(ii) of the Act as has been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of DIT Vs. Vishwa Jagriti Mission reported in MANU/DE/1487/2012 : 262 CTR ........