ACIT, Circle -16(2), Hyderabaad, Hyderabad V. Markdata Power & Energy Ltd, Nagpur

CO 5/HYD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3462 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V SREEKAR
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 143(3); 11

Judgement Text

ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 1 OF 9 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD A BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1679/HYD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), HYDERABAD VS M/S. MARKDATA POWER & ENERGY LIMITED HYDERABAD PAN: AABCM 3690 C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.5/HYD/2015 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.1679/HYD/2014) (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) M/S. MARKDATA POWER & ENERGY LIMITED, HYDERABAD PAN: AABCM 3690 C VS ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), HYDERABAD (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) FOR REVENUE : SHRI V. SREEKAR, DR FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI A. SRINIVAS O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE, WHILE THE CROSS OBJECTION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE CIT (A)- V, HYDERABAD, DATED 5.8.2014. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY, WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF WIND POWER GENE RATION, FILED DATE OF HEARING : 19.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29.09.2017 ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 2 OF 9 ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y 2010-11 ON 13.10.20 10 ADMITTING GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF RS.57,67,791 UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AFTER SET OFF OF CURRENT YEARS DEPRECIATIO N OF RS.16,51,864 AND BROUGHT FORWARD DEPRECIATION OF EARLIER YEARS O F RS.42,34,870 AND THEREAFTER CLAIMED MAT CREDIT SET OFF OF U/S 11 5JAA OF RS.4,69,725. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED A REVIS ED RETURN FOR THE A.Y 2010-11 ON 29.9.2011 ADMITTING GROSS TOTAL INCOM E OF RS.57,67,791 UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE INC OME TAX ACT AND CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF RS.28,01,599 AFTE R SET OFF OF CURRENT YEARS DEPRECIATION AND ALSO BROUGHT FORWARD DEPRECIATION OF EARLIER YEARS AS DONE IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD ALSO CLAIMED MAT CREDIT SE T OFF U/S 115JAA OF RS.3,85,988. 3. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT, THE AO OBSERVED FROM THE DEPRECIATION SCHEDULE FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE OPENING WDV OF THE 80% BLOCK IS RS.20,15,200 WHICH CONSISTS OF WDV OF RS.15,200PERT AINS TO CIVIL CONSTRUCTION AND ELECTRICAL WORKS AND WDV OF RS.20, 00,000 PERTAINS TO WIND TURBINE GENERATOR (EQUIPMENT PORT ION) PURCHASED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON 1.7.2008 FROM M/S. SUZLON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. HE OBSERVED THAT M/S. SU ZLON DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED WHOSE NAME WAS LATER CHA NGED TO M/S. SUZLON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD AND AGAIN TO M/S. SYNEFRA LTD AND NOW AS M/S. ASPEN INFRASTRUCTURE LTD AND M/S. MARKDATA POWER & ENERGY LTD I.E. THE ASSESSEE HEREIN, HAD ENTERED IN TO A LEASE AGREEMENT ON 21.09.2004, PURSUANT TO WHICH, SUZLON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD HAD INSTALLED AND COMMISSIONED W IND TURBINE GENERATOR (WTG) VALUED AT RS.4,30,00,000 AS ON 21.0 8.2003. HE ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 3 OF 9 OBSERVED THAT THE SAID EQUIPMENT WAS ON OPERATING LEASE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR LEASE RENT OF RS.20.52 LACS PER QUARTE R, FOR A PERIOD OF SIX YEARS AND SOME OF THE CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEM ENT WAS THAT (I) THE BENEFITS OF THE DEPRECIATION ARE AVAILABLE TO T HE LESSOR; AND (II) THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT MAKE ANY CLAIM BY WAY OF ANY DEDUCTION/LOANS/GRANT AS THE OWNER OF THE WTG UNDER THE I.T. ACT. HE ALSO OBSERVED THAT BY VIRTUE OF THE ABOVE A GREEMENT, M/S. SUZLON INFRASTRUCTURE LTD BEING THE OWNER OF THE AS SET, HAD CLAIMED DEPRECIATION ON THE WTG IN ITS BOOKS OF ACC OUNT AND THE WDV OF THE SAID ASSET AS ON THE DATE OF ITS SALE TO THE ASSESSEE WAS RS.68,800 AND DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 I.E. ON 1.7.2008, THE ASSESSEE HAD PURCHASED THE WTG FOR A CONSIDERATION OF RS.1.00 CRORES AND FROM THE A.Y 200 9-10 ONWARDS HAS CLAIMED DEPRECIATION THEREON. HE OBSERV ED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE SECOND HAND MACHINERY FR OM SUZLON DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LTD AT AN ENHANCED VALUE AND WAS TAKING UNDUE BENEFIT OF DEPRECIATION AT ENHANCED COST. HE TOOK THE VALUE OF THE ASSET IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.68, 800 AND DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION OF RS.15,88,99 2. THEREAFTER, HE ALSO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IA ON THE GROUND THAT THE VALUE OF THE SECOND HAND MACHINERY PURCHAS ED BY THE ASSESSEE IS MORE THAN 20% OF THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE PLANT & MACHINERY USED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. AGGRIEVED B Y THE ABOVE DISALLOWANCES, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEF ORE THE CIT (A) WHO GRANTED PARTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT (A) DIRECTED THE AO TO ALLOW DEPRECIATION @ 10% OF THE CIVIL CONSTRUC TION AND @ 15% ON ELECTRICAL ITEMS AFTER OBTAINING THE EXACT BI FURCATION FROM THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO THE DEPRECIATION OF RS.15,88, 992 ON THE WIND TURBO GENERATOR. THE CIT (A) ALSO ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION U/S ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 4 OF 9 80IA OF THE ACT. AGAINST THE RELIEF GRANTED BY THE CIT (A), THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US, WHILE THE CROSS OBJ ECTION BY THE ASSESSEE IS IN SUPPORT OF THE CIT (A) IN GRANTING D EDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWI NG GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE TOWARDS THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXCESS DEPRECIATION CLAIMED ON WINDMILL. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THAT THE ASSET LEASED BY M/S. SUZLON DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LTD (LESSOR) HAD RIGHTS OF CLAIMING DEPRECIATION BEFORE THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BECAME THE SOLE OWNER OF THE SAID ASSET HENCE NOT ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S 80IA. 4. THE LEARNED DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE AO WHI LE THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). 5. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD, THE UNDISPUTED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS STARTED ITS BUSINESS OF WIND POWER GENERATION FROM THE A.Y 2 005-06 AND THAT WAS THE FIRST YEAR WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS TA KEN WIND TURBINE GENERATOR ON OPERATING LEASE FROM M/S. SUZL ON DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LTD. ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF TH E LEASE WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT CLAIM DEPRECIATION ON THE WI ND TURBO GENERATOR OR ANY DEDUCTION UNDER THE I.T. ACT, AS T HE LESSOR IS THE OWNER OF THE SAID TURBINE. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUT E THAT DURING THE ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 5 OF 9 RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10, THE ASSESSEE HAS P URCHASED WIND TURBINE GENERATOR FROM THE LESSOR AND HAS STARTED C LAIMING DEPRECIATION THEREON ONLY FROM A.Y 2010-11 ONWARDS. IT IS ALSO NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CLAIMING DEDUCT ION U/S 80IA ONLY FROM THE A.Y 2010-11 AND THIS IS THE 6 TH YEAR OF ITS COMMENCEMENT OF THE GENERATION OF POWER AND THEREFO RE, THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IA SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO A PERIOD OF ONLY 4 YEARS FROM THE RELEVANT A.Y BEFORE US. IT IS ALSO NOT IN D ISPUTE THAT THERE IS NO RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN M/S. SUZLON DEVELOPERS P VT LTD AND THE ASSESSEE HEREIN AND THEREFORE, THE PRICE AT WHI CH THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE WIND TURBINE GENERATOR CANNOT BE HELD TO BE EXCESSIVE OR UNREASONABLE. IT IS ALSO UNDISPUTED TH AT IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME, ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS A UDIT REPORT IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM, FORM NO.10CCB IN WHICH THE ASSESSE E EXERCISED THE OPTION U/S 80IA(2) OF CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80 IA EFFECTIVE FROM 6 TH YEAR I.E. A.Y 2010-11 AND THAT THE WIND TURBINE GENERATOR WAS NOT ACQUIRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE Y EAR OF ITS FORMATION, BUT IT IS ACQUIRED ONLY IN THE 6 TH YEAR OF ITS OPERATION. ONE OF THE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT FOR ALLOWING THE DE DUCTION U/S 80IA IS THAT THE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FORMED BY PURCHASE OF THE PLANT & MACHINERY WHICH H AS EARLIER BEEN USED BY ANOTHER UNDERTAKING AND THE VALUE OF S UCH MACHINERY IF PURCHASED SHOULD NOT EXCEED 20% OF THE TOTAL VALUE OF ITS PLANT & MACHINERY. IT IS ADMITTED FACT THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS FORMED AND STARTED GENERATION OF POWER, ITS PLANT & MACHINERY WAS NEW AND EVEN THE WTG, WHI CH WAS NEW WAS UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE ALONE, THOUGH ON LEASE , TILL IT WAS FINALLY PURCHASED DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009-10 . THEREFORE, THERE IS NO VIOLATION OF ANY OF THE CONDITIONS U/S 80IA(4) OF THE ACT ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 6 OF 9 AND THE CIT (A) HAS PROPERLY OPENLY APPRECIATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND READY REFERENCE, THE RELEVA NT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IA ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: 80-IA. (1) WHERE. (2) THE DEDUCTION SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (1) MAY, AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE, BE CLAIMED BY HIM FOR A NY TEN CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF FIFTEEN YEA RS BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE UNDERTAKING OR THE ENTERPRISE DEVELOPS AND BEGINS TO OPERATE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY OR STARTS PROVIDING TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICE OR DEVELOPS AN INDUSTRIAL PARK OR DEVELOPS A SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE REFERRED T O IN CLAUSE (III) OF SUB-SECTION (4) OR GENERATES POW ER OR COMMENCES TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION OF POWER OR UNDERTAKES SUBSTANTIAL RENOVATION AND MODERNISATION OF THE EXISTING TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION LINES : PROVIDED THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE DEVELOPS OR OPERATES AND MAINTAINS OR DEVELOPS, OPERATES AND MAINTAINS ANY INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY REFERRED TO I N CLAUSE (A) OR CLAUSE (B) OR CLAUSE (C) OF THE EXPLANATION TO CLAUSE (I) OF SUB-SECTION (4), T HE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL HAVE EFFECT AS IF FOR THE WORDS 'FIFTEEN YEARS', THE WORDS 'TWENTY YEARS' HAD BEEN SUBSTITUTED. (2A) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN SUB- SECTION (1) OR SUB-SECTION (2), THE DEDUCTION IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF AN UNDERTAKING PROVIDING TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES, SPECIFIED IN CLAUSE (II) OF SUB-SECTION (4), SHALL BE HUNDRED PE R CENT OF THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF THE ELIGIBLE BUSIN ESS FOR THE FIRST FIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS COMMENCING AT A NY TIME DURING THE PERIODS AS SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (2) AND THEREAFTER, THIRTY PER CENT OF SUCH PROFITS AND GAINS FOR FURTHER FIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 7 OF 9 (3) THIS SECTION APPLIES TO AN UNDERTAKING REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (II) OR CLAUSE (IV) OF SUB-SECTION (4) WH ICH FULFILS ALL THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, NAMELY : (I) IT IS NOT FORMED BY SPLITTING UP, OR THE RECONSTRUCTION, OF A BUSINESS ALREADY IN EXISTENCE : PROVIDED THAT THIS CONDITION SHALL NOT APPLY IN RESPECT OF AN UNDERTAKING WHICH IS FORMED AS A RESULT OF TH E RE-ESTABLISHMENT, RECONSTRUCTION OR REVIVAL BY THE ASSESSEE OF THE BUSINESS OF ANY SUCH UNDERTAKING AS IS REFERRED TO IN SECTION 33B , IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND WITHIN THE PERIOD SPECIFIED IN THAT SECTION; (II) IT IS NOT FORMED BY THE TRANSFER TO A NEW BUS INESS OF MACHINERY OR PLANT PREVIOUSLY USED FOR ANY PURPOSE: PROVIDED THAT NOTHING CONTAINED IN THIS SUB-SECTION SHALL APPLY IN THE CASE OF TRANSFER, EITHER IN WHOL E OR IN PART, OF MACHINERY OR PLANT PREVIOUSLY USED BY A STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (7) O F SECTION 2 OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 (36 OF 2003) , WHETHER OR NOT SUCH TRANSFER IS IN PURSUANCE OF THE SPLITTING UP OR RECONSTRUCTION OR REORGANISATION OF THE BOARD UNDER PART XIII OF THAT ACT. EXPLANATION 1.FOR THE PURPOSES OF CLAUSE (II), ANY MACHINERY OR PLANT WHICH WAS USED OUTSIDE INDIA BY ANY PERSON OTHER THAN THE ASSESSEE SHALL NOT BE REGARDED AS MACHINERY OR PLANT PREVIOUSLY USED FOR ANY PURPOSE, IF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE FULFIL LED, NAMELY : (A) SUCH MACHINERY OR PLANT WAS NOT, AT ANY TIME PREVIOUS TO THE DATE OF THE INSTALLATION BY THE ASSESSEE, USED IN INDIA; (B) SUCH MACHINERY OR PLANT IS IMPORTED INTO INDIA FROM ANY COUNTRY OUTSIDE INDIA; AND (C) NO DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION IN RESPECT OF SUCH MACHINERY OR PLANT HAS BEEN ALLOWED ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 8 OF 9 OR IS ALLOWABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF ANY PERSON FOR ANY PERIOD PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE INSTALLATION OF MACHINERY OR PLANT BY THE ASSESSEE. EXPLANATION 2.WHERE IN THE CASE OF AN UNDERTAKING, ANY MACHINERY OR PLANT OR ANY PART THEREOF PREVIOUS LY USED FOR ANY PURPOSE IS TRANSFERRED TO A NEW BUSINE SS AND THE TOTAL VALUE OF THE MACHINERY OR PLANT OR PA RT SO TRANSFERRED DOES NOT EXCEED TWENTY PER CENT OF T HE TOTAL VALUE OF THE MACHINERY OR PLANT USED IN THE BUSINESS, THEN, FOR THE PURPOSES OF CLAUSE (II) OF THIS SUB-SECTION, THE CONDITION SPECIFIED THEREIN SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. 6. THE CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED UNDER EXPLANATION 2 TO SUB- SECTION 3 APPLIES TO AN UNDERTAKING, TO WHOM ANY PL ANT & MACHINERY, WHICH IS PREVIOUSLY USED FOR ANY PURPOSE IS TRANSFERRED TO A NEW BUSINESS, THEN THE VALUE OF SU CH PLANT & MACHINERY SHOULD NOT EXCEED 20% OF THE TOTAL VALUE O F THE MACHINERY OR PLANT USED IN THE BUSINESS. IN THE CAS E BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS FORMED IN THE A.Y 2005-06 A ND HAS STARTED GENERATION OF POWER AND THE PLANT & MACHINE RY PREVIOUSLY USED FOR ANY PURPOSE WAS TRANSFERRED ONLY IN A.Y 200 9-10 WHICH NO LONGER CAN BE SAID TO BE A NEW BUSINESS. IN VIEW OF THE SAME, WE SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) AND THE REVENUES GROUND OF APPEAL NO.3 IS REJECTED. 7. AS REGARDS GROUND NO.2, WE FIND THAT THE AO HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEPRECIATION ON WTG ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED THE WTG AT AN ENHANCED C OST. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE AND M/S. SUZLON DE VELOPERS PVT. LTD ARE NOT RELATED PARTIES AND THE AO HAS NOT BROU GHT ON RECORD, ITA NO 1679 OF 2014 AND CO 5 OF 2015 MARK DATA POWER AND ENERGY LTD HYDERABAD. PAGE 9 OF 9 THE MARKET PRICE OF A SECOND HAND WTG TO BE THE SAM E AS ITS WDV IN THE HANDS OF M/S. SUZLON DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD . THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE CONSIDERATION OF RS.1.00 CROR E FOR THE SAID EQUIPMENT AND THE AO HAS NOT STATED HOW THE SAME IS UNREASONABLE. FURTHER, THE AO HAD ALLOWED THE DEPREC IATION ON WTG DURING THE A.Y 2009-10. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD TH E ORDER OF THE CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE. GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 OF THE REVENUE IS ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 8. THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ONL Y IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) AND THEREFORE, THE SAME IS ALSO REJECTED. 9. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE REVENUES APPEAL AS WELL AS ASSESSEES CROSS OBJECTION ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (S.RIFAUR RAHMAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (P. MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 29 TH SEPTEMBER, 2017. VINODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1 ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(2), 7 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD 2 M/S. MARKDATA POWER & ENERGY LTD, 678 HAZARE HOUS E, KANEWAR HOUSE, SITABULDI, NAGPUR 3 CIT (A)-V HYDERABAD 4 CIT IV HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER