Shri Sanjay J.Virani, Surat V. The ACIT.,Cent.Circle-3, Surat

CO 119/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4201 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 09-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI, 354, NARAYANMUNI NAGAR SOCIETY, NANI VED, VED ROAD, SURAT PAN: AACPV3184C (APPELLANT /RESPONDENT ) VS THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRC LE - 1(3), SURAT (RESPONDENT /APPELLAN T/CROSS OBJECTOR ) THE ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 8 , SURAT ( APPELLANT) VS SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI, 354, NARAYANMUNI NAGAR SOCIETY, NANI VE D, VED ROAD, SURAT PAN: AACPV3184C (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI S.L. CHANDEL , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI S.N. SOPARKAR , A.R. I T A NO S. 678 &1063/ A HD/20 09 & CO NO.119/AHD/2009 (IN ITA NO. 1063/AHD/2009) A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 3 - 04 ITA NO . 1985 / AHD/20 11 ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 3 - 04 I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 2 DATE OF HEARING : 09 - 09 - 2 016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 - 09 - 2 016 / ORDER P ER : S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THIS SET OF FOUR CASES PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003 - 04. THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE HAVE FILED CROSS APPEAL S ITA NOS. 678 AND 1063/AHD/2009 FOLLOWED BY F ORMER S CROSS OBJECTION NO. 119/AHD/2009 AGAINST A COMMON ORDER OF THE CIT(A) - II, AHMEDABAD DATED 01 - 01 - 2009 IN APPEAL NO. CIT(A) - II/CC - 3/433/07 - 08 , IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153C R.W.S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT . THIS IS F OLLOWED BY REVENUE S APPEAL ITA 1985/AHD/2011 AGAINST ORDER DATED 18 - 04 - 2011 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) - V, SURAT DELETING SECTION 271(1)(C) PENALTY OF RS. 12,09,075/ - AS IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2 . WE COME TO THE THREE QUANTUM CASES FIRST. THE ASSES SE E S APPEAL HEREINABOVE RAISES TWO SUBSTANTIVE GROUNDS INTER ALIA CHALLENGING LEGALITY OF SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS FOLLOWED HIS CHALLENGE ON MERITS TO ADDITION OF RS. 20.25 LACS OUT OF RS. 39.25 LA CS ON THE ISSUE OF NON - GENUINE GIFTS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE REVENUE S CROSS APPEAL SEEKS TO REVIVE THE ENTIRE ADDITION OF RS. 39.25 LACS. THE ASSESSEE S CROSS OBJECTION THEREIN RAISES IDENTICAL GROUNDS AS IN THE ABO V E MAIN APPEALS. I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 3 3 . BOTH PARTIES ARE AD - IDEM THAT THE ASSESSEE S FIRST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN HIS APPEAL IT A 678/AHD/2009 ASSAILS LEGALITY OF SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS. THE SAME IS STATED TO BE GOING TO ROOT OF THE CASE. WE THUS PROCEED TO DECIDE THIS FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE FIRST. 4 . THIS ASSESSEE - INDIVIDUAL DERIVES INCOME FROM SHARE OF PRO FITS IN A FIRM M/S. DHARMANANDAN DIAMONDS AS WELL AS FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE DEPARTMENT CONDUCTED A SEARCH ON 21 - 10 - 2005 IN THE ABOVE FIRM S CASE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER ISSUED SECTION 153C NOTICE DATED 22 - 10 - 2007 TO THE ASSESSEE READING AS UND ER: - NOTICE UNDER SECTION 1SSC OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 PAN: ACCPV3184C OFFICE OF THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - T A X, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, ROOM NO . 507, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MAJURAGATE, SURAT, DATE: 22.10.2007. TO SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI 34, NARAYANMUNI NAG AR SOCIETY, NANI VED, VED ROAD, SURAT. DEAR SIR, A SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE I.T. ACT WAS CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF M/.S. DHARMANANDAN DIAMONDS ON 21 - 10 - 2005 WHEREAS, I AM SATISFIED THAT MONEY/BULLION/JEWELLERY/OTHER VALUABLES ARTICLES OR THING AN D/OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS/DOCUMENTS SEIZED BELONGS TO YOU. THEREFORE, YOUR INCOME OF SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELEVANT TO PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH THE SEARCH IS CONDUCTED I.E. FROM A.Y. 2000 - 01 TO A.Y. 2005 - 06 IS REQUIRED T O BE ASSESSED/ REASSESSED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 4 PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A R.W.S. 153C OF THE ACT. YOU ARE, THEREFORE, REQUIRED TO FURNISH YOUR RETURN OF INCOME U NDER SECTION 153C OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT 1961 FOR A.Y. 2003 - 04 BEING ONE OUT OF THE ABOVE SIX ASSESSMENT YEA RS IN RESPECT OF WHICH YOU ARE ASSESSABLE UNDER THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961. T HE RETURN SHOULD BE FILED IN TH E APPROPRIATE FORM AS PRESCRIBED I N RULE 12 OF THE INCOME - TAX RULE S, 1962. IT SHOULD BE DULY VERIFIED AND SIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 140 OF THE SAID ACT AND DELIVERED AT MY OFFICE AS MENTIONED ABOVE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS FROM THE SERVICE OF THE NOTICE. YOURS FAITHFULLY, SEAL SD/ - ( P.V. YADAV ) ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 3, SURAT. 5 . THE ASSES SEE FILED RETURN ON 31 - 10 - 2007 STATING NIL INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER TOOK UP SCRUTINY. HE NOTICED THE ASSESSE E TO HAVE RECEIVED TOTAL GIFTS OF RS. 39.25 LACS IN QUESTION FROM 24 DONORS. HE FILED PAN DETAILS, GIFT DEED, RETURNS OF THE RELEVANT FINANC IAL YEARS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ALONG WITH BANK STATEMENT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27 - 12 - 2007 HELD THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE FAILED IN PROVING IDENTITY, GENUINE NESS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE ABOVE GIFTS IN QUESTION SO AS TO INVOKE SECTI ON 68 OF THE ACT FOR TREATING THE CORRESPONDING SUMS AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS. 6 . THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL INTER ALIA CHALLENGING VALI DI TY OF SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS FOLLOWED BY HIS CHALLENGE TO SECTION 68 ADDITION HEREINABOVE ON MERITS. THE CIT(A) REJECTS THE FORMER GROUND AND PARTLY ACCEPTS THE LATTER ONE THEREBY UPHOLDING THE I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 5 IMPUGNED ADDITION OF RS. 39.25 LACS TO RS. 20.25 LACS . THIS LEAVES BOTH THE PARTIES AGGRIEVED TO THE EXTENT INDICATED HEREINABOVE . 7 . WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE S FIRST ARGUMENT IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOES NOT FULFILL THE TWIN ESSENTIAL CONDITIONS BEFORE INITIATING SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS IN QUESTION I.E. NEITHER THERE IS ANY SATISFACTION ON PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE PARTNERSHIP FIRMS SEARCHED (SUPRA) THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELRY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLES OR THINGS OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR DOCUMENTS SEIZED OR RELINQUISHED BELONGS OR BELONG TO HIM THAN THE SEARCHED PERSON AS FOLLOWED BY HANDING OVER THEREOF TO HIS ASSESSING OFFICER FOR INITIATION OF NECESSARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM. SHRI S OPARKAR CONTENDS THAT THESE TWO CONDITIONS ARE TO BE MET FIRST BEFORE SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS ARE SOUGHT TO BE INITIATED. HE TAKES US PAPER BOOK AS WELL CONTAINING ASSESSEE S APPLICATION DATED 16 - 04 - 2014 SEEKING COPY OF SEARCHED FIRMS ASSESSING OFFICER S SATISFACTION TO THE ABOVE EFFECT. HE STATES THAT NO SUCH SATISFACTION HAS BEEN RECORDED OR RECEIVED. IT IS ACCORDINGLY ARGUED THAT THE IMPUGNED PROCEEDINGS DO NOT CONFIRM TO THE RELEVANT LAW A S HELD BY A CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN IT(SS)A NO. 1/AHD/2011 (ALONG WITH BATCH OF CASES) HOLDING AS UNDER: - 12. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. CASE FILES STANDS PERUSED. IS NO DISPUTE THAT THIS ASSESSEE IS NOT THE ONE SEARCHED SINCE THE I MPUGNED PROCEEDINGS ARE UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT CONDUCTED ON 25.03.2008 IN CASE OF M/S. KUNVARJI COMMODITIES BROKERS PVT. LTD. THERE IS FURTHER NO ISSUE THAT THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1) IS THE COMMON ASSESSING AUTHORITY IN CASE OF BOTH THE ASSESSEE S. THE I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 6 LEGAL POSITION ENVISAGED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE SEARCHED ASSESSEE HAS TO SATISFY HIMSELF THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALUABLE ARTICLES ETC. BELONGS TO SOME OTHER PERSONS AND NOT THE SEARCHED ASSESSEE. THIS HAS TO BE FOLLOWED BY ANOTHER EXERCISE IN CASE OF SUCH OTHER ASSESSEE THAT THE SAME IS CAUSED ESCAPEMENT OF ANY INCOME. IT IS AT THIS STAGE THAT BOTH PARTIES HAVE CROPPED UP THE INSTANT ISSUE. THE ASSESSEE S CASE IS THAT THE RE IS NO SATISFACTION AT FIRST LEVEL IN CASE OF THE SEARCHED ENTITY OPPOSED BY THE REVENUE BY SAYING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS THE SAME WHO HAS EXPRESSED SATISFACTION IN ASSESSEE S CASE. THE LAW ABOUT ENTERING OF SUCH A SATISFACTION IS VERY WELL SETTL ED NOW. HON BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF MANISH MAHESHWARI VS. ACIT (2007) 289 ITR 341 (SC) HOLDS THAT SUCH A SATISFACTION IS INDEED MANDATORY. WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO OBSERVE THAT THIS CASE DEALT WITH BLOCK ASSESSMENT SCHEME UNDER SECTION 158BD OF TH E ACT AS IT EXISTED IN THE ERSTWHILE AVATAR UNDER CHAPTER XIV - B OF THE ACT. THE SAME STANDS REPEALED BY NEWLY INSERTED SECTIONS 153A TO 153C BY THE FINANCE ACT 2003. IT COMES TO OUR NOTICE THAT THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES HAS ISSUED ITS CIRCULAR NO .24 OF 2015 ALREADY ACCEPTING THAT RIGOR OF SECTION 153C VIS - A - VIS 158BD IS SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR/PARI MATERIA AS HELD BY VARIOUS HON BLE COURTS. IT FURTHER CLARIFIES THAT RECORDING OF SECTION 153C/158BD SATISFACTION IS A MUST IN CASE OF SEARCHED PERSON F OLLOWED BY TRANSMISSION OF THE CASE RECORDS TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE OTHER ASSESSEE. PARA NO.4 OF THIS CIRCULAR FURTHER ENVISAGES THAT THIS DUAL EXERCISE IS TO BE COMPLIED WITH EVEN IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAPPENS TO BE THE SAME IN BOTH CASES. WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO OBSERVE IN THIS FACTUAL AND LEGAL BACKDROP THAT AN ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO MANDATORILY FOLLOW THE ABOVE STATED DUAL SATISFACTION EXERCISE BEFORE INITIATING SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS. WE FIND THAT NEITHER THE JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUNAL S DECISION NOR THAT OF KOLKATA BENCH (SUPRA) DEVIATE FROM THIS PRINCIPLE. THE FORMER DEALS WITH A SITUATION WHEREIN THE DEPARTMENT CARRIED OUT A SEARCH IN CASE M/S. JAIRAJ GROUP, FOLLOWED BY ASSESSING OFFICER S ACTION RECORDING SATISFACTION FORMING BASIS FOR INITIATING SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS IN CASE OF A THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE FIRST HURDLE OF SATISFACTION THAT THE MONEY, BULLION OR JEWELLERY ETC. BELONGED TO SOME THIRD PERSON AND NOT THE SEARCHED PARTY. THE LATTER DECISION PRECEDES A STEP FU RTHER. IT HOLDS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN CASE OF SEARCHED AND THIRD PARTY IS THE SAME. AND IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO CREATE A DISTINCTION TO FIND OUT WHEN SUCH SATISFACTION WAS RECORDED SINCE BOTH FILES WERE LYING TOGETHER ON THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY S TABLE. IT IS THEREFORE CLEAR TO US THAT I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 7 THERE IS NO DISTINCTION ON LEGAL PRINCIPLE OF THE SATISFACTION PRECONDITION BEFORE INITIATION OF SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS IN BOTH THESE DECISIONS. THE LATTER DECISION IS OF THE VIEW THAT THE TIMING OF THIS SATISFA CTION BEING RECORDED IN CASE OF SEARCHED ASSESSEE AND THIRD PARTY IS PURELY A FACTUAL ISSUE. WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO OBSERVE THAT THERE IS NO MUTUAL CONTRADICTION SO FAR AS RATIO OF THESE TRIBUNAL S DECISIONS IS CONCERNED. 13. WE TAKE NOTE OF OUR DI SCUSSION HEREINABOVE AND REVERT BACK TO FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE. WE REITERATE THAT THE ASSESSEE S CASE IS THAT ONCE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DOES NOT SPECIFICALLY RECORD SATISFACTION IN SEARCHED ENTITY S CASE THAT THE MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY ETC. IN QUES TION BELONGS TO A THIRD PERSON, PLACES THE SAME IN IT S FILE FOLLOWED BY AN OPINION OF THE ABOVE STATED MATERIAL HAVING CAUSED ESCAPEMENT OF ANY INCOME. IT IS ACCORDINGLY ARGUED THAT THE IMPUGNED SATISFACTION DOES NOT ADHERE TO ABOVE STATED SETTLED LAW. THE REVENUE ON THE OTHER HAND MAKES OUT A CASE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER S SATISFACTION HAS COME ONLY AFTER CAREFUL EXAMINATION OF THE ABOVE STATED INCRIMINATING MATERIAL BEING EXAMINED TOGETHER IN THE CASES OF M/S. KUNVARJI AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEE. WE F IND NO REASON TO AGREE WITH THIS CONTENTION. AS OBSERVED BY THE LEARNED CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN LALIT KUMAR M. PATEL S CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE IMPUGNED SATISFACTION MENTIONS ONLY ASSESSEE S NAME ON TOP OF THE SATISFACTION NOTE AND NOT THAT OF THE SEARCHED ENTITY. THERE IS NO MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD BEFORE US THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD KEPT THE CASE FILES OF THE SEARCHED PARTY AND THAT OF THE ASSESSEE TOGETHER BEFORE DRAWING THE IMPUGNED SATISFACTION NOTE. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE REVENUE S CONTENTION BASED ON KOLKATA BENCH DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL PUTS A HEAVY ONUS ON THE DEPARTMENT TO POSITIVELY PROVE THAT THE SAME ASSESSING OFFICER IN CASE OF SEARCHED ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE THIRD PARTY HAD COLLECTIVELY EXAMINED THE CASE FILES BEFORE RECO RDING A SATISFACTION NOTE CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 153C OF THE ACT. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THIS BURDEN STANDS UN - DISCHARGED. WE HOLD IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT THE REVENUE S ARGUMENTS JUSTIFYING THE IMPUGNED SATISFACTION NOTE ARE DEVOID O F MERITS BEING NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE MUCH LESS IN THE NATURE OF SUBSTANTIVE MATERIAL. WE CONCLUDE IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE STATED LEGAL POSITION, BOARD S CIRCULAR AND OUR DISCUSSION HEREINABOVE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT RECORDED A VALID SATIS FACTION BEFORE INITIATING SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS IN QUESTION. THE IMPUGNED I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 8 ASSESSMENT IS ACCORDINGLY QUASHED. IT(SS)A NO.01/AHD/2011 IS ALLOWED. 8 . WE AFFORDED THE REVENUE SUFFICIENT CHANCE TO THE REVENUE TO REPEL ASSESSEE S SUBMISSIONS. IT SUBMITS THAT ENTIRE ASSESSMENT RECORDS ARE A VAILABLE FOR OUR PER U SAL. HOWEVER, THE SATISFACTION OF THE TWO ASSESSING OFFICERS AS ARGUED AT ASSESSEE S BEHEST DOES NOT EMANATE FROM THE CASE FILE. IT SEEKS MORE TIME TO GET COMPLETE RECORD. WE PUT UP A SPECIFIC QU ERY AS TO WHETHER THERE IS ANY FUR THER RECORD LEFT TO BE OBTAINED. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REPLIES IN NEGATIVE. 9 . WE H AVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDER A TIO N TO RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THERE IS HARDLY ANY DISPUTE LEFT BY NOW THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICE R OF THE SEARCHED FIRM HAS NOT RECORDED SATISFACTION THAT ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELRY OR OTHER SPECIFIC MATERIAL IN SECTION 153C BELONGS TO THE ASSESSEE FOLLOWED BY THE SAME BEING FORWARD TO ASSESSEE S ASSESSING OFFICER SO AS TO INITIATE THE RELEVANT PR OCEEDINGS. WE FOLLOW THE ABOVE STATED CO - ORDINATE BENCH REASONING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED SECTION 153C PROCEEDINGS ON THIS SCORE ALONE. THE ENTIRE ASSESSMENT IN QUESTION IS DECLARED INVALID IN THE EYES OF LAW. THIS RENDERS ALL OTHER SUBMISSIONS/GROUNDS ON MERITS IN ASSESSEE S APPEAL, REVENUE S CROSS APPEAL AND ASSESSEE S CROSS APPEAL TO HAVE BEEN INFRUCTUOUS. ITA 678/AHD/2009 SUCCEEDS. REVENUE S APPEAL ITA 1063/AHD/2009 AND ASSESSEE S CROSS OBJECTION 119/AHD/2009 ARE DISMISSED AS HAVE BECOME INFRUCTUOUS. I.T.A NOS. 678, 1063 & CO NO 119 /AHD /2009 & ITA NO. 1 985/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2003 - 04 SHRI SANJAY J. VIRANI VS. ACIT 9 10 . THE REVENUE S PENALTY APPEAL ITA 1985/AHD/2011 IS ACCORDINGLY HELD TO HAVE BEEN HAVING NO LEGS TO STAND SINCE THE QUANTUM ASSESSMENT ITSELF HAS BEEN QUASHED. THE SAME ALSO STANDS DISMISSED . 11 . THE ASSESSEE S APPEAL ITA 678/AHD/2009 IS ALLOWED. ALL OTHER THREE CASES I . E. REVENUE S APPEAL ITAS 1063/AHD/2009 & 1985/AHD/2011 AND ASSESSEE S CO 119/AHD/2009 ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 21 - 09 - 201 6 SD/ - SD/ - ( MANISH BORAD ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 21 /09 /2016 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,