Verizon Data Services India Private Limited, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

CO 69/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1167 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 23-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P B SEKARAN
• Section: 37; 10

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . , . !' , # $ BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NOS.1654,1703,1704/MDS./2014 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR S :2005-06,2006-07 & 2007-08) & C.O NOS.69,70,71/MDS./2014 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE III(4), CHENNAI 600 034. VS. M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., OLYMPIA TECHNOLOGY PARK, ALTIUS BLOCK, 9 TH FLOOR, NO.1,SIDCO, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, GUINDY, CHENNAI 600 032. PAN AABCV 1758 N ( %& / APPELLANT ) ( '(%& / RESPONDENT/ CROSS OBJECTOR ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.P.B.SEKARAN, CIT, D.R / RESPONDENT BY : MR.SRIRAM SESHADRI,ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 23.07.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09.2015 ) / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THESE THREE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE THREE CROSS OBJECTIONS BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF THE M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 2 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-III, CHENNAI DATED 2 0.03.2014 IN ITA NO.884, 978 & 1350/2013-14 PASSED UNDER SEC.143 (3) READ WITH SECTION SEC. 250 OF THE ACT. SINCE THE ISSUES IN ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AR E COMMON IN NATURE, THEY ARE CLUBBED & HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPO SED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2.1 THE GROUNDS RAISED BY REVENUE IN ALL THE THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE CONCISED HEREIN BELOW FOR ADJUDICATION. FOR A.Y 2005-06 2.1.1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN DELETING THE AD DITION MADE BY THE LD.A.O WHICH HAS RESULTED DUE TO THE EXCLUSION OF ` 47,46,818/- (BEING 50% OF EXPENSES INCURRED ON LEASED LINES COMMUNICAT ION WHICH IS TREATED AS EXPENSES INCURRED FOR DELIVERY OF COMPUT ER SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA) FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S.10A OF T HE ACT. 2.1.2 THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN DELETING THE DISA LLOWANCE OF THE CONTRIBUTION MADE TO UNAPPROVED GRATUITY FUND TO TH E TUNE ` 32,08,009/- BY HOLDING THAT THE FUND WAS EVENTUAL LY APPROVED. M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 3 FOR A.Y 2006-07 2.2.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN DELETING THE DIS ALLOWANCE OF THE CONTRIBUTION MADE TO UNAPPROVED GRATUITY FUND TO TH E TUNE ` 87,83,824/- BY HOLDING THAT THE FUND WAS EVENTUALL Y APPROVED. FOR A.Y 2007-08 2.3.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN DELETING THE ADD ITION MADE BY THE LD.A.O WHICH HAS RESULTED DUE TO THE EXCLUSION OF ` 6,75,61,477/- (BEING 50% OF EXPENSES INCURRED ON LEASED LINES COM MUNICATION WHICH IS TREATED AS EXPENSES INCURRED FOR DELIVERY OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA) FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S. 10A OF THE ACT. 2.3 CROSS OBJECTIONS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR ALL THE THREE ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE CONCISED HEREIN BELOW FOR ADJU DICATION. 2.3.1 IDENTICAL CROSS OBJECTIONS FOR ALL THE THREE ASSESS MENT YEARS THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN DISALLOWING THE 1/3 RD OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS MEDICLAIM FOR DEPENDENT FAMILY MEM BERS OF EMPLOYEES. M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 4 2.3.2 ADDITIONAL GROUND FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF TH E LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHO HAD EXCLUDED FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPENSES OF ` 7,12,303/- FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTI NG DEDUCTION U/S.10A OF THE ACT, THOUGHT THE SAME WAS NOT FORMIN G PART OF THE EXPORT INVOICE AND ALSO FAILED TO DEDUCT THE SAME F ROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING SERVICES RELATING TO DEVE LOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF TELECOM SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS AND INFOR MATION TECHNOLOGY ENABLE SERVICES, FILED ITS RETURN OF INC OME ON 29.10.2005, 06.10.2006 & 29.10.2007 ADMITTING ITS TOTAL INCOME AS ` 22,58,930/-, ` 27,81,140/- & ` 3,798,806/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS U/S.143(3) OF TH E ACT WERE PASSED ON 23.12.2008, 21.12.2009 & 30.12.2010. REVENUES APPEAL:- 4.1. GROUND NO.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ERRED IN DELE TING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD.A.O WHICH HAS RESULTED DUE TO THE EX CLUSION OF M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 5 ` 47,46,818/- FOR A.Y 2005-06 & ` 6,75,61,477/- FOR A.Y 2007-08 (BEING 50% OF EXPENSES INCURRED ON LEASED LINES COM MUNICATION WHICH IS TREATED AS EXPENSES INCURRED FOR DELIVERY OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA) FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S. 10A OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. A.O NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DEBITED CERTAIN AMOUN T AS TELECOM EXPENSES. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT OUT OF THE ABOVE AFORE-STATED EXPENSES 50% OF THE EXPENSES WAS INCURRED TOWARDS L EASED LINE COMMUNICATIONS FOR DELIVERY OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE OU TSIDE INDIA. WHEN THE LD. A.O POINTED OUT TO THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY THESE EXPENSES SHOULD NOT BE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXPORT TUR NOVER, THE ASSESSEES MAIN CONTENTION WAS THAT SUCH EXPENSES S HOULD BE EXCLUDED ONLY WHEN SUCH EXPENSES ARE CLAIMED IN THE EXPORT INVOICES. SINCE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE SUCH EX PENSES ARE NOT CLAIMED IN THE INVOICES, EXCLUSION OF THE SAME WAS NOT WARRANTED. VARIOUS OTHER SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER EXAMININ G THE ISSUES IN DETAIL ARRIVED AT THE FOLLOWING CONCLUSIONS:- M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 6 ANALYSIS OF THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE CASE AND THE PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES NARRATED ABOVE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT SECTION 1 0A DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR EXCLUDING THE EX PENSES INCURRED IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER. WHENEVER, A TERM IS NOT DEFINED IN THE SECTION, ONLY ITS PLAIN MEANING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED. A PLAIN MEANING OF TOTAL TURNOVER DOES NOT EXCLUD E THE EXPENSES IRRESPECTIVE OF WHETHER SUCH EXPENSES WERE INCURRED IN INDIAN CURRE NCY OR IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE. IF THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE WAS WHAT THE AS SESSES WANTS TO PLEAD, THEN, THERE WAS NECESSITY OF DEFINING EXPORT TURNOVER, BECAUSE BOTH WILL ALWAYS BE EQUAL EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT OF DOMESTIC RECEIPTS. IF THAT WAS SO THEN THE DEFINITION OF EXPORT TURNOVER HAVE BEEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS: EXPORT TURNOVER WILL MEAN TOTAL TURNOVER OF THE BUS INESS LESS THE DOMESTIC TURNOVER. NOTHING MORE. BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE OF EXPORT TURNOVER IS DIFFERENT FROM TOTAL TURNOVER. T HE LEGISLATURE INTENTIONALLY HAS NOT DEFINED THE TOTAL TURNOVER IN THE SECTION I0A O F THE INCOME TAX ACT. HENCE, THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION OF REDUCTION OF TELECOMMU NICATION EXPENSES FROM BOTH EXPORT TURNOVER AND TOTAL TURNOVER IS NOT ACCEPTED AND THE DEDUCTION U/S I OA WILL BE CALCULATED WILL BE CALCULATE AS PER ANNEXURE - I . BASED ON THE ABOVE FACTS RS.47,46,81 8/- IS BEING R EDUCED FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE FOR EXPENSES INCURRED FOR DELIVERY OF SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA AND ACCORDINGLY THE DEDUCTION U/S I0A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WILL BE CALCULATED AS PER ANNEXURE-I. M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 7 4.2 ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT (A) HELD THE ISSUE IN FA VOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 6.8 AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE CONTENTIONS OF THE AO AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR AND IN VIEW OF THE DECISIONS OF THE HONOURABLE ITAT IN THE CASE OF PATNI TELECOM (SUPRA ) WHICH WAS FOLLOWED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT IN COGNIZANT TEC HNOLOGY SOLUTIONS AND INAUTIX TECHNOLOGIES INDIA (P) LTD. REFERRED TO ABO VE, RESPECTFULLY RELYING ON THE SAME, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION . THE GROUND IS ALLOWED. 4.3 LD. D.R ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE AS THE LD. A.R. RELIED ON THE ORDER O F THE LD. CIT (A) AND THE DECISIONS CITED BY THE LD. CIT (A). 4.4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. EXPLANATION-2 (IV) OF SECTION-10A PROVIDES THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION (IV) 'EXPORT TURNOVER' MEANS THE CONSIDERATION IN RESPEC T OF EXPORT [BY THE UNDERTAKING] OF ARTICLES OR THINGS OR COMPUTER SOFT WARE RECEIVED IN, OR BROUGHT INTO INDIA BY THE ASSESSEE IN CONVERTIBLE FOREIGN EXCHAN GE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUB- SECTION (3), BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE FREIGHT, TELECOMM UNICATION CHARGES OR INSURANCE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE DELIVERY OF THE ARTICLES OR THI NGS OR COMPUTER SOFTWARE OUTSIDE M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 8 INDIA OR EXPENSES, IF ANY, INCURRED IN FOREIGN EXCH ANGE IN PROVIDING THE TECHNICAL SERVICES OUTSIDE INDIA; FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT FREIGHT, TELECOMM UNICATION CHARGES OR INSURANCE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE DELIVERY OF ARTICL ES OR THINGS OR COMPUTER SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA OR EXPENSES INCURRE D IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE IN PROVIDING THE TECHNICAL SERVICES OUTSID E INDIA HAS TO BE IRONED OUT FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER. IN THE CASE O F THE ASSESSEE, THOUGH THESE EXPENSES ARE NOT SEPARATELY STATED AND CLAIMED IN THE INVOICE, IT IS EMBEDDED IN THE EXPORT INVOICE RAISE D. IF THESE EXPENSES ARE NOT CONSIDERED WHILE RAISING THE INVOICE, THE A SSESSEE WOULD INCUR LOSS TO THAT EXTENT BECAUSE THESE EXPENSES AR E DIRECTLY RELATED AND ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EXPORT INVOICE RAISED. IT I S ONLY A METHOD OF RAISING THE INVOICE FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE I.E., EITHER TO INCLUDE SUCH EXPENSES IN THE INVOICE ON ADHOC BASIS OR BY S PECIFICALLY STATING IT SEPARATELY. BY THESE GIMMICKS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT CANNOT BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY IN BOTH THE SITUATIONS. THEREFORE, WE AGREE WITH THE VIEW OF THE LD. ASSESS ING OFFICER THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE TOWARDS DELI VERY OF COMPUTER M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 9 SOFTWARE OUTSIDE INDIA HAS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER, THOUGH IT IS NOT SEPARATELY STATED IN THE INVOICE. HOWEVER, WE ALSO HEREBY HOLD BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITO VS. SAK SOFT LTD., REPORTED IN 313 ITR (AT) 353 (CHENNAI)(SB) THAT WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER HAS TO BE ALSO DEDUCTED FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE COMP UTING DEDUCTION U/S.10A OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, WE AGREE WITH THE ALTERNATIVE PRAYER MADE BY THE LD. A.R. 5.1 GROUND NO.2 - DISALLOWANCE OF THE CONTRIBUTION MADE TO UNAPPROVED GRATUITY FUND (A.Y 2006-07) DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE L D. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PA ID ` 32,08,009/- TO LIC TOWARDS UNAPPROVED GRATUITY FUND. THE ASSES SEE EXPLAINED THAT APPLICATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE GRATUITY F UND WAS FILED BEFORE THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND THE SAME WAS IN THE PROCESS OF GETTING APPROVAL. SINCE THE APPROVAL WAS NOT GRANTED WHEN THE PAYMENT WAS MADE, THE LD. ASSE SSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE DEDUCTION OF THE SAME BY INVOKING TH E PROVISIONS OF M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 10 SECTION 36(1)(V) OF THE ACT AND ADDED THE SAME TO T HE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT (A) RELYING ON TH E DECISION OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF TEXTTOOL LTD (CIV IL APPEAL NO.447 OF 2003) DIRECTED THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLO W THE DEDUCTION FOR THE PAYMENT TO LIC ON ACCOUNT OF GRATUITY FUND U/S. 37 OF THE ACT. ON EXAMINING THE ISSUE, WE FIND THAT THE DECISION OF T HE LD. CIT (A) IS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE THE HONBLE APEX COURT HAS HELD IN THE CASE CITED HEREINABOVE THAT THE PAYMENT MADE TO THE GRAT UITY FUND MAINTAINED WITH LIC WHERE THE APPELLANT HAS NO CONT ROL OVER THE IRREVOCABLE TRUST CREATED EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BENEF IT OF THE EMPLOYEES DEDUCTION SHALL BE ALLOWED. THEREFORE, WE HEREBY CO NFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE. CROSS OBJECTIONS: 6.1. GROUND NO.1- DISALLOWING THE 1/3 RD OF EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS MEDICLAIM FOR DEPENDENT FAMILY MEMBERS OF E MPLOYEES. (A.YS: 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08) THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSES SEE HAD CLAIMED ` 37,02,636/- AS DEDUCTION U/S.37 OF THE ACT TOWARDS PAYMENT MADE TO GROUP MEDICLAIM. HOWEVER, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 11 OPINED THAT BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 36(1)(B) OF THE AC T DEDUCTION IS PERMISSIBLE ONLY FOR THE PREMIUM PAID BY THE EMPLO YER TO EFFECT OR TO KEEP IN FORCE THE INSURANCE ON THE HEALTH OF THE EM PLOYEES UNDER THE SCHEME FRAMED BY THE SPECIFIED AUTHORITIES. THE CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THIS EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE TO FACILITATE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE COMPANY, THEREFORE IT IS AN EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASS ESSEE. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT (A) CONCURRED WITH THE VIEW OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER. BOTH THE PARTIES ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THEIR CONTENT IONS BEFORE US. HOWEVER ON EXAMINING THE ISSUE, WE FIND THAT THE EN TIRE PAYMENT OF GROUP MEDICLAIM PAID BY THE ASSESSEE WAS TO KEEP TH E STAFF OF THE ASSESSEE IN GOOD SPIRITS AND SECURED, AND TO MOTIVA TE THEM TO PERFORM THEIR DUTIES IN THE ORGANIZATION WITH FULL VIGOR WHICH WILL ONLY SUPPLEMENT TO THE PRUDENT MANAGEMENT OF THE HUMAN R ESOURCES IN THE ORGANIZATION TO INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY AND PROFI T. HENCE, THESE EXPENSES ARE DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE INCOME EA RNED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THEREFORE WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS JUSTIFIED FOR GRANTING DEDUCTION FOR TH ESE EXPENSES M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 12 INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE. THUS THIS ISSUE IS DECIDE D IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 7.1. GROUND NO.2 - THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLD ING THE ORDER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHO HAD EXCLUDED FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPENSES OF ` 7,12,303/- FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER FOR THE PURPOS E OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S.10A OF THE ACT, THOUGHT THE SAME WAS NOT FORMING PART OF THE EXPORT INVOICE AND ALSO FAILED TO DEDUCT THE SAME FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER.(A.Y 2007-08) AT THE OUTSET, THIS ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN GROUND NO.1 ACC ORDINGLY AS HELD BY US WHILE ADDRESSING THAT GROUND, WE HEREBY HOLD THAT THE FOREIGN TRAVEL EXPENSES OF ` 7,12,303/- THOUGH THE SAME IS NOT SEPARATELY CLAIMED IN THE EXPORT INVOICE, SHALL BE DEDUCTED FR OM THE EXPORT TURNOVER AS WELL FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER AS HELD BY THE SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL M/S.SAK SOFT (SUPRA). M/S.VERIZON DATA SERVICES (I) P. LTD. 13 8. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08 ARE DISMISSED & TH E CROSS OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 & 2006-07 ARE ALLOWED AND FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 07-08 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . !' ) (V. DURGA RAO) ( . ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 4 TH SEPTEMBER, 2015. K S SUNDARAM. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE