profit, still the society is entitled to exemption, if the funds were applied for other charitable purposes. We do not know how different institutions owned by the same assessee could be assessed separately. In fact, only a legal entity could be assessed and not an institution, business concern or establishment. In short, the claim of exemption or liability should have been considered at the hands of the person who owns and manages the hospital, which is a society. In our view, there is serious lapse on the part of the assessing officer in not having done this. Secondly, it is seen that assessee itself contended before the assessing officer that hospital is run by the society which is a charitable institution. Inspite of the claim made by the assessee, the assessing officer has not considered whether the institution, that is, the assessee, namely, society, runs the institution for the purposes for which it was granted exemption under Section 12A. On the other hand, even the return filed is not seen considered by the assessing officer in the assessment of the society. All what the Tribunal has held is that separate exemption need be claimed by the society for the hospital when it is assessable for all other income which does not arise here
