Parkkot Maritima Agencies Private Limited., Vasco V. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Panaji., Panaji

CO 27/PAN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1274 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K M MAHESH LD
• Assessee Lawyers: V NARAYANASWAMY
• Keywords: Business expenditure; Onus to prove
• Section: 37(1); 194C; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 : (A.YS 2008 - 09, 2010 - 11 & 2011 - 12) DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), PANAJI, GOA. (APPELLANT) VS. M/S. PARKKOT MARITIMA AGENCIES (P) LTD., PARKOT HOUSE, SWATANTRA PATH, VASCO - DA - GAMA, GOA PAN : A ADCP1208P (RESPONDENT) CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 ) : (A.YS 2008 - 09, 2010 - 11 & 2011 - 12) M/S. PARKKOT MARITIMA AGENCIES (P) LTD., PARKOT HOUSE, SWATANTRA PATH, VASCO - DA - GAMA, GOA PAN : A ADCP1208P ( CROSS OBJECTOR ) VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), PANAJI, GOA. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : V. NARAYANASWAMY, CA REVENUE BY : K.M. MAHESH, LD. DR DATE OF HEARING : 12/08/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12/08/2015 O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN : 1. ITA NO. 198/PNJ/2015 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PANAJI - 1 IN ITA NO. 140/MRG/2010 - 11 DT. 12.2.2015 FOR THE 2 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 A.Y 2008 - 09 AND CO NO. 25/PNJ/2015 IS THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 198/PNJ/2015. ITA NO. 199/PNJ/2015 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AG AINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PANAJI - 1 IN ITA NO. 04/MRG/13 - 14 DT. 25.2.2015 FOR THE A.Y 2010 - 11 AND CO NO. 26/PNJ/2015 IS THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 199/PNJ/2015 . ITA NO. 200/PNJ/2015 IS AN APPEAL FILED B Y THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), PANAJI - 1 IN ITA NO. 242/MRG/13 - 14 DT. 25.2.2015 FOR THE A.Y 2011 - 12 AND CO NO. 27/PNJ/2015 IS THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE REVENUES APPEAL BEING ITA NO. 200/PNJ/2015. 2. AS ALL THESE APPEALS RELATE TO THE SAME ASSESSEE, THEY ARE DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. SHRI V. NARAYANASWAMY, CA REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI K.M. MAHESH, LD. DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. ITA NO. 198/PNJ/2015 & CO NO. 25/PNJ/2015 : 3. IN THE REVENUES APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WHETHER THE HONBLE CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN ALLOWING THE ASSESSEES APP E AL BY TREATING VASCO SPORTS CLUB AND CAUSE OF OUR JOY AS NOT ADVERTISEMENT AGENCIES AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE - COMPANY IS NOT LIABLE FOR DEDUCTION OF TDS U/S. 194C IN RESPECT OF PAYMENTS MADE TO THE ABOVE PARTIES TOW ARDS SPONSORSHIP AND PUBLICITY? 2. THE AP PELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OR ADD TO THE SAME, IF DEEMED NECESSARY. 4. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE PAYMENT OF RS. 13,66,838/ - TO VASCO SPORTS CLUB AND CAUSE OF OUR JOY. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE THE PAYMENT TOWARDS SPONSORSHIP AND 3 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 PUBLICITY IN THE FOOTBALL MATCHES CONDUCTED BY THE SAID TWO CLUBS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT DEDUCTED TDS U/S 194C OF THE ACT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE AO HAD INVOKE D THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT AND HAD DISALLOWED THE SAID AMOUNTS. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUBMISSION BY THE LD. DR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE PAYMENTS TO CLUBS FOR SPONSORSHIP OF THE FOOTBALL TOURNAMENTS WAS NOT IN THE NATURE OF ADVERTISEMENTS AND WAS ALSO NOT IN THE NATURE OF ANY CONTRACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 5. IN REPLY, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT VASCO SPORTS CLUB AND CAUSE OF OUR JOY HAVE SPECIFICALLY GIVEN LETTERS CONFIRMING THAT THE SAID PAYMENTS DID NOT INVOLVE ANY ADVERTISEMENT IN ANY SOUVENIR OR IN ANY OTHER MANNER. THE SAID SPONSORSHIP AMOUNT WAS SPENT EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE CAUSE OF DEVELOPMENT OF SPORTS IN THE CITY. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUBMISSION BY THE LD. AR THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 194C OF THE ACT HAD BEEN AMENDED W.E.F. 1.10.2009 RELEVANT FOR THE A.Y 2010 - 11 WHEREIN TDS WAS LIABLE TO BE MADE ON ADVERTISEMENTS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER A PPEAL WAS 2008 - 09 AND EVEN ON THIS GROUND THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 40(A)(IA) COULD NOT BE INVOKED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE UPHELD. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMITTEDLY, A PERUSAL OF THE PR OVISIONS OF SEC. 194C OF THE ACT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE SAID PROVISION HAS BEEN AMENDED W.E.F. 1.10.2009 WHEREBY TDS HAS BEEN MADE LIABLE IN RESPECT OF ADVERTISEMENTS AT 1%. AS THE SAID AMENDMENT HAS TAKEN PLACE ONLY W.E.F. 1.10.2009 RELEVANT TO THE A.Y 2 010 - 11 AND THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL IS A.Y 2008 - 09, THE SAID PROVISIONS OF SEC. 194C WOULD NOT ATTRACT TO THE SAID TWO PAYMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO VASCO SPORTS CLUB AND CAUSE OF OUR JOY. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE D ELETION AS MADE BY THE LD. 4 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 CIT(A) IS ON A RIGHT FOOTING AND DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 7. AS THE CROSS OBJECTION HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND AS WE HAVE ALREADY CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE SAME STANDS DISMISSED AS INFRUCTUOUS. ITA NOS. 199 & 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 26 & 27/PNJ/2015 : 8. IN THE REVENUES APPEALS, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE LD. CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE AND THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF M/S. A. P. L. (INDIA) LTD., WHICH IS RELIED BY HIM ARE DISTINGUISHABLE IN AS MUCH AS EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT OF SPEED MONEY WAS FOUND IN THE SEARCH ACTION U/ S. 132 OF THE I. T. ACT IN THE CASE OF M/S. APL (INDIA) LTD., AND HENCE IT WAS ALLOWED AS EXPENDITURE IN THAT CASE AND WHEREAS THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT OF SPEED MONEY BY THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRODUCED ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING PAYMENT OF SP EED MONEY DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS AND HENCE THE ABOVE DECISION IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON ASSESSEE TO IDENTIFY PARTIES ALONGWI TH EVIDENCE OF PAYMENT AS LABOUR CHARGES AS HELD BY THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. S. G. EXPORTS (P & H) 336 ITR 2. 3. THE CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IT IS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE PAYMENT WHEN THE ITO/AO DOUBTS THE GENUINENESS THEREOF AS HELD BY THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHANDRAVILAS HOTEL - 164 ITR 102 AND DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MODI STONE LTD., - 203 TAXMAN 123. 4. THE LD.CIT(A) HA S FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT IN ORDER TO CLAIM THAT AN EXPENDITURE FALLS U/S. 37(1), THE BURDEN OF PROVING NECESSARY FACTS IN THAT CONNECTION IS ON THE ASSESSEE AS HELD BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE FOLLOWING CASES. A. CIT VS. CALCUTTA AGENCY LTD. (SC) 19 ITR 191 AND B. LAKSH I MARATAN COTTON CO. LTD. VS. CIT(SC) 73 ITR 634. 5 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 THE GROUNDS ARE IDENTICAL FOR BOTH THE A.YS 2010 - 11 & 2011 - 12. 9. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD. DR THAT IN THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID SPEED MON EY TO THE WORKERS AT MURMOGAO PORT, MORE SO, THE LOADERS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE PORTS THE WAGES ARE FIXED AND PAYMENTS CANNOT BE MADE IN EXCESS OF THE PRESCRIBED WAGES. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE IN CASH AND NO EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED TO SHOW AS TO WHOM THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE AO HAD DISALLOWED THE SAID PAYMENTS OF THE SPEED MONEY ON TWO COUNTS; FIRST ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO IDENTIFY THE PERSONS TO WHOM THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE AND SAME WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY EVIDENCE AND THE SECOND, THE PAYMENT OF SPEED MONEY WAS AN ILLEGAL PAYMENT BARRED BY LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY, EXPLANATION U/S 37(1) OF THE ACT CAME INTO PLAY. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD DELE TED THE DISALLOWANCE BY HOLDING THAT THE SPEED MONEY IS A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE AND THAT SUCH PAYMENT IS NOT AN ILLEGAL PAYMENT OR A PAYMENT OPPOSED TO PUBLIC POLICY AS THE DOCK WORKERS WERE NOT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE LD. CI T(A) PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. APL(INDIA) LTD. REPORTED IN 97 TTJ 187 (BOM.). IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAVING NOT PROVED THE NATURE OF THE EXPENDITURE AND THE IDENTITY OF T HE PERSONS TO WHOM THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE, THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE REVERSED. 10. IN REPLY, THE LD. AR DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE LETTER DT. 8.11.2013 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES WHEREIN IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE PAYMENT OF RS. 68,71,190/ - FOR THE A.Y 2010 - 11 AND RS. 77,97,620/ - FOR THE A.Y 2011 - 12 WERE, IN FACT, PAYMENT OF INCENTIVE AT MURMOGAO PORT TRUST. IT 6 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE INCENTIVES ARE DISBURSED BY THE ASSESSEES STAFF AT THE PORT PREMISE S. THE AMOUNT IS SETTLED THROUGH A CLAIM BY THE STAFF WHICH REFERS TO THE SHIP IDENTITY AND THE QUANTITY LOADED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT AS THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE TO SEVERAL PEOPLE, IT MAY NOT BE POSSIBLE TO OBTAIN THE IDENTIFICATION OR SIGNATURE OF TH E RECIPIENTS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN ANY CASE THE SAID PAYMENTS CANNOT BE TREATED AS ILLEGAL PAYMENTS IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE BOMBAY BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. A.P.L (INDIA) PVT. LTD. WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SPEED MONEY TO THE DOCK WORKERS OF THE PORT TRUST FOR EXPEDITING THE PROCESS OF LOADING/UNLOADING OF SHIPS IS A LEGITIMATE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE AND IS NOT AN ILLEGAL PAYMENT OR OPPOSED TO PUBLIC POLICY AS THE DOCK WORKERS ARE NOT GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES. 11. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE PAPER BOOK. A PERUSAL OF THE EVIDENCE PRODUCED REPRESENTING THE PAYMENTS MADE SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MAKING PAYMENTS IN CASH. THE VOUCHERS WHICH ARE PRODUCED DO NOT CONTAIN DETAILS FOR WHICH THE SPECIFIC PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE. ALL IT MENTIONS IS THE ACCOUNT HEAD AS HD CARGO HANDLING EXPENSES PAID TOWARDS DISBURSEMENT FOR SPEEDING UP LOADING AND THE SHIPS NAME. NOW, TWO OF THE VOUCHERS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WHICH MENTIONS THE NAME AS M.V. GUODIAN 9. AS PER THE LIST, IT SHOWS THAT M.V. GUODIAN 9 HAS BEEN LOADED BETWEEN 19.10.2010 AND 31.10.2010. THE TONNAGE IS ABOUT 44817 AND THE AMOUNT CLAIMED AS PER THE LIST IS RS. 1,97,220/ - . THE CASH VOUCHER IS DT. 22.11.2010. HOW THIS CASH VOUC HER TALLIES WITH THE SAID SHIP WHICH HAS BEEN LOADED HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN. ONE OF THE VOUCHERS IS FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.13,460/ - AND THE OTHER IS FOR RS. 4,230/ - . AS PER THE LIST PROVIDED IN THE PAPER BOOK IN RESPECT OF THE SAID M.V. GUODIAN 9 THERE IS NO CL AIM FOR THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 13,460/ - OR RS. 4,230/ - . THUS, THOUGH THE CASH PAYMENT VOUCHER SPECIFIES THE PERSONS NAME BUT DOES NOT CONTAIN THE ADDRESS OR CONTACT NUMBER 7 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 OR ANY OTHER DETAILS. THE PAYMENT VOUCHERS SPECIFIES THAT THE PAYMENT IS TOWARDS DISBU RSEMENT FOR SPEEDING UP LOADING OF A PARTICULAR SHIP BUT THE DATES DO NOT TALLY NOR DOES THE AMOUNT IN THE CASH PAYMENT VOUCHER TALLY WITH THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN THE LIST PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. ANOTHER INTERESTING ASPECT IS THAT ANOTHER SHIP, M.V. FLA G ALEXANDROS M/D WAS LOADED BETWEEN 16.4.2010 AND 21.4.2010 FOR A TONNAGE OF 41700 ALLEGEDLY INCURRING AN EXPENDITURE OF RS.2,11,120/ - , ANOTHER BY THE NAME OF M.V. PACIFIC PRIMATE M/D BETWEEN 14.5.2010 AND 26.5.2010 LOADING A TONNAGE OF 43465 AT AN ALLEGED SPEED MONEY OF RS. 2,01,300/ - . M.V. GO TRADER M/D WAS LOADED BETWEEN 24.5.2010 AND 30.5.2010 HAVING A TONNAGE OF 29617 INCURRING SPEED MONEY OF RS. 1,38,080/ - AND M.V. AIFANOURIOS WAS LOADED BETWEEN 28.7.2010 AND 12.8.2010 HAVING A TONNAGE OF 48452 INCUR RING SPEED MONEY OF RS. 2,34,600/ - . THERE IS NO SPECIFIC RATE IN RESPECT OF THE SPEED MONEY ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN PAID WHEN COMPUTED PER TONNAGE NOR IS THERE ANY METHODOLOGY FOR COMPUTING THE SPEED MONEY IN RESPECT OF A PARTICULAR SHIP WHICH IS BEING LOADE D OR UNLOADED NOR IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE AS TO WHOM THESE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE. THESE ARE NOT SMALL AMOUNTS THAT HAVE BEEN DISBURSED. THE AMOUNTS ADMITTEDLY HAVE ALSO BEEN PAID WITHOUT DEDUCTING TDS. THE ASSESSEE THOUGH CLAIMS THE SAID EXPENDITURE TO BE SPEED MONEY PAID TO THE WORKERS AT THE PORT, HAS NO EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. IN SHORT, THE ASSESSEE IS UNABLE TO EVEN PROVE THAT THE SAID AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN DISBURSED IN THE COURSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND WAS INCURRED FOR THE PURP OSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. TRUE, THE PAYMENT OF SPEED MONEY TO THE WORKERS AT THE PORT CANNOT BE TREATED AS AN ILLEGAL PAYMENT AND CONSEQUENTLY, THE EXPLANATION TO SEC. 37(1) WOULD NOT APPLY. HOWEVER, IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT THE SA ID MONEY HAS BEEN PAID TO THE WORKERS OF THE PORT. JUST BY SAYING THAT THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE WORKERS IN THE PORT DOES NOT SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM. IT SHOULD BE SUPPORTED WITH SOME DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES. THE PORT AREA IS A SECURED AREA. 8 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 THE WORKERS THERE WOULD HAVE NAMES AND WOULD BE GIVEN IDENTIFICATION CARDS. ID NUMBERS WOULD ATLEAST BE AVAILABLE. EVEN THESE HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROVE THE BASIC FACT THAT THE EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE WERE DISBURSED TO THE PORT WORKERS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IS LIABLE TO BE RESTORED AND THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A) REVERSED. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND ALLOWED AND THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) STAND REVERSED AND THAT OF THE AO RESTORED. 12. IN THE CROSS OBJECTIONS THE ASSESSEE HAS SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A). AS WE HAVE REVERSED TH E ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) INSOFAR AS THE GENUINENESS OF THE PAYMENTS AND IDENTITY OF THE RECIPIENTS, AND THE NATURE OF THE PAYMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. 13. IN THE RESULT, ITA NO. 198/PNJ/2015 STANDS DISMISSED AND ITA NOS. 199 & 200/PNJ/2015 STAND ALLOWED AND CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 STAND DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 1 2 /08/2015. S D / - (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S D / - ( GEORGE MATHAN ) JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE : PANAJI / GOA DATED : 1 2 /08/ 201 5 *SSL* 9 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 COPY TO : (1) APPELLANT (2) RESPONDENT (3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R (6) GUARD FILE TRUE COPY, BY ORDER , 10 ITA NOS. 198 TO 200/PNJ/2015 & CO NOS. 25 TO 27/PNJ/2015 DATE INITIAL ORIGINAL DICTATION PAD & DRAFT ORDER ARE ENCLOSED IN THE FILE 1. DRAFT DICTATED ON 12/08/2015 SR.PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 13/08/2015 SR.PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER 1 3 /08/2015 JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER 1 3 /08/2015 JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS 1 3 /08/2015 SR.PS 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12/08/2015 SR.PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK 1 3 /08/2015 SR.PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER