M/s. Global Venture Corporation, Kolkata V. DCIT, Circle - 49, Kolkata, Kolkata

CO 83/KOL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7219 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Cross Objection
• Pronouncement Date: 13-04-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2010
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIRAJ KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: B K GHOSH; PIYUSH DEY
• Section: 194C

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEN CH A, KOLKATA () BEFORE , , , , , SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER. /AND . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , '# SHRI C.D.RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $%& $%& $%& $%& ' ' ' ' / ITA NO . .. . 1083 /KOL/2010 () *+/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 (-. / APPELLANT ) D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-49, KOLKATA. - ( - - VERSUS - . (01-./ RESPONDENT ) M/S.GLOBAL VENTURE CORPORATION., KOLKATA (PAN: AACFG 9172 F) 2 %& 2 %& 2 %& 2 %& /C.O. NO.83/KOL/2010 ' ' ' ' / A/O ITA NO.1083/KOL/2010 () *+/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 (-. / APPELLANT ) M/S.GLOBAL VENTURE CORPORATION, KOLKATA (PAN: AACFG 9172 F ) - ( - - VERSUS - . (01-./ RESPONDENT ) D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-49, KOLKATA. -. 3 4 '/ FOR THE DEPARTMENT: SHRI NIRAJ KUMAR 01-. 3 4 '/ FOR THE ASSESSEE : SHRI B.K.GHOSH & SHRI PIYUSH DEY 5(6 3 !# /DATE OF HEARING : 02.04.2012. 7* 3 !# /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.04.2012. '8 / ORDER ( (( ( . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . ) )) ), , , , '# PER SHRI C.D.RAO, AM THE ABOVE TWO APPEALS ONE FILED BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST ORDERS DATED 22.12.200 9 OF THE CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA PERTAINING TO A.YR. 2006-07. 2 2. IN THIS APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWI NG GROUNDS :- I) THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A), HAS ERRED IN SETTING ASIDE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,44,50,2 9/- U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961 IN RESPECT OF PAYMENTS MADE TO EXCEL INDIA (P) LTD. OF RS.23,43,238/-., AGARPARA KUTIR SILPA PRATISTHAN OF RS.4,86,333/- AS PROCESSI NG CHARGES AND RS.27,49,649/- AS CUTTING CHARGES RESPECTIVELY, PAUL ENTERPRISES OF R S.15,18,550/- AS CUTTING AND STITCHING CHARGES AND M/S.P.K.ENTERPRISE OF RS.26,0 -1,071/- AND REFERRING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF A.O. LD.CIT(A) HAS VIOLATED THE PROVISION OF SECTION 251, BY VIRTUE OF WHICH SETTING ASIDE IS NOT PERMISSIBLE W.E.F. 01 .06.2001. II) THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW. LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF RS.1,48 ,464/- ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF PRINTING CHARGES AND RS.1,02,350/- TO SAIKAT CREATI ON ON ACCOUNT OF MACHINERY HIRE CHARGES. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS IN CR OSS OBJECTION :- 1.THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL AS ON LA W, THE LEARNED CIT(A) XXXII, KOL HAS ERRED IN RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE L EARNED AO AND NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE RESPONDENT (CROSS-OBJECTOR ) REGARDING DEDUCTIBILITY OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE UNDER SECTION 194C FROM PAYMEN T OF FREIGHT RS.18,16,347 TO EXCEL INDIA PVT. LTD, AGENT OF NON-RESIDENT SHIPOWN ER/CHARTERER AND DISALLOWANCE OF THE SAID PAYMENT MADE TO THE PARTY UNDER SECTION 40 (A)(IA), ALTHOUGH ALL MATERIAL EVIDENCES WERE PLACED BEFORE THE LEARNED AO AND THE LEARNED CIT(A). 2. THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL AS ON LA W, THE LEARNED CIT(A)XXXII, KOL HAS ERRED IN RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE LEARN ED AO AND NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE RESPONDENT (CROSS-OBJECTOR) RE GARDING DEDUCTIBILITY OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE UNDER SECTION 194C FROM PAYMENT OF RS .5,26,890 MADE TO EXCEL INDIA PVT. LTD ON ACCOUNT OF REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES AN D DISALLOWANCE OF THE SAID PAYMENT MADE TO THE PARTY UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA), ALTHOUGH ALL MATERIAL EVIDENCES WERE PLACED BEFORE THE LEARNED AO AND THE LEARNED C IT(A). 3. THAT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL AS ON LA W, THE LEARNED CIT(A)XXXII, KOL HAS ERRED IN RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE LEARN ED AO AND NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE RESPONDENT (CROSS-OBJECTOR) RE GARDING DEDUCTIBILITY OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE UNDER SECTION 194C FROM PAYMENT OF PR OCESSING CHARGES RS. 41,86,333 AND CUTTING AND STITCHING CHARGES RS.27,49,649 TO A GARPARA KUTIR SHILPA PRATISTHAN AND DISALLOWANCE OF THE SAID PAYMENTS MADE TO THE P ARTY UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA), IN DISREGARD OF THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS OF HONBLE ITAT, KOLKATA. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL ARE THAT WHILE DOING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT THE AO HAS DISALLOWED AN AMOUNT OF 1,44, 50,290/-BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- ON SCRUTINY, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE-FIRM ALLOWED FOLLOWING EXPENSES WITHOUT MAKING TDS : NAME OF THE PARTIES NATURE OF EXPENSES AMOUNT TDS DEDUCTIBLE U/S M/S.EXCEL INDIA PVT. LTD. FREIGHT RS.2343238 194C DHL EXPRESS INDIA PVT. LTD. FREIGHT RS.147247 194C 3 AGARPARA KUTIR SHILPA PRATISTHAN PROCESSING CHARGE RS.4186333 194C UTTAM PAL PRINTING CHARGES RS.550000 194C CREATIVE EYES PRINTING CHARGES RS.148464 194C ANAND PRINTERS PVT. LTD. PRINTING CHARGES RS.303388 194C AGARPARA KUTIR SHILPA PRATISTHAN CUTTING AND STITCHING CHARGE RS.2749649 194C PAUL ENTERPRISES CUTTING AND STITCHING CHARGE RS.1518550 194C P.K.ENTERPRISES CUTTING AND STITCHING CHARGE RS.2401071 194C SAIKAT CREATION MACHINE HIRE CHARGES RS.102350 194C RS.1,44,50,290 194C SINCE THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAS FAILED TO MAKE TDS WHIL E ALLOWING ABOVE EXPENDITURE, SUCH EXPENDITURE CALLS FOR DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(I A) OF THE I.T.ACT, 1961. ON BEING CONFRONTED WITH THIS ISSUE, THE A/R OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM SUBMITTED A DETAILED WRITTEN EXPLANATION VIDE LETTERS DATED 28.8.2008 AND 18.11. 2008. IN THE EXPLANATION THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE PAYEES HAVE P AID THE TAX, DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) SHOULD NOT BE MADE MERELY BECAUSE OF NON- TDS ON THEIR PART. IN THIS RESPECT THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS : A) HINDUSTHAN COCOCOLA BEVERAGE PVT. LTD. CIT (293 ITR 226) S.C. B) CIT VS J.H.GOTLA (156 ITR 323)S.C. C) CIT VS. RISHIKESH APARTMENT CO-OP.SOCIETY LTD. 9 253 ITR 30) GUJ. D) CIT VS. JINDAL IRRIGAITON SYSTEM LTD. (56 ITD 16 4)HYD. THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION ALONG WITH VARIOUS JUDIC IAL PRONOUNCEMENTS HAVE BEEN GONE THROUGH. IT IS SEEN THAT THE RATIO OF THE JUDI CIAL PRONOUNCEMENT AS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE INSTANT CASE AS THE FACTS INVOLVED IN THE INSTANT CASE IS DISTINGUISHABLE TO THAT OF THE ABOVE REFERR ED CASES. THE FACT AND ISSUE IN THE INSTANT CASE IS IN RELATION TO DISALLOWANCE OF CERT AIN EXPENDITURE U/S 40(A)(IA) BUT THE FACT IN ALL THE ABOVE REFERRED CASES IS IN RELATION TO CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST U/S 201(1A), AND RECOVERABILITY OF TAX FOR NON DEDUCTIO N OF TDS. 3.1. ON APPEAL THE LD.CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE DISALL OWANCE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF PRINTING CHARGES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1,4 8,464/- AND RS.1,02,350/- ON ACCOUNT OF MACHINERY HIRE CHARGES. WHEREAS IN THE C ASE OF PAYMENTS MADE TO EXCEL INDIA (P) LTD OF RS.23,43,238/-, AGARPARA KUTIR SIL PA PRATISTHAN OF RS.41,86,333/- AS PROCESSING CHARGES AND RS.27,49,649/- AS CUTTING CH ARGES RESPECTIVELY, PAUL ENTERPRISES OF RS.15,18,550/- AS CUTTING AND STITCH ING CHARGES AND M/S. P.K.ENTERPRISES OF RS.26,01,071/- HE REFERRED THE M ATTER TO THE FILE OF AO TO VERIFY CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND THEN DISALLOWED THE SAME. 4 3.2. AGGRIEVED BY THIS NOW BOTH ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US THE LD. DR APPE ARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE CONTENDED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN R ESTORING THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO WHICH IN VIOLATION OF PROVISION OF SECTION 251 OF T HE IT ACT BY VIRTUE OF WHICH SETTING ASIDE IS NOT PERMISSIBLE W.E.F.01.06.2001. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD.COUNSEL APPEARING ON B EHALF OF ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE MATERIALS ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD BEFO RE THE LD. AO AS WELL AS CIT(A). THEREFORE NEITHER THE LD. AO HAS EXPRESSED HIS OPIN ION REGARDING THE DOCUMENTS FILED BY ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO AND LD. CIT(A) THOUGH THE DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE BEFORE HIM HAVING CO-TERMINUS POWER THAN THAT OF AO HE SHO ULD HAVE DECIDED THE ISSUE BASED ON MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FURTHER THE LD. CO UNSEL FOR ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS IGNORED THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEME NTS OF HONBLE HIGH COURTS IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. THEREFORE HE R EQUESTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUES BASED ON MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 6. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND ON CAREF UL PERUSAL OF MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE LD. CI T(A) WHILE DECIDING THE APPEAL HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- (A) PAYMENT TO EXCEL INDIA P.LTD. FURTHER IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF THE SHIPMENT OF GOODS HAS NOT. BEEN PAID DIRECTLY TO THE SHIPPING COMPANY BUT WERE MADE TO M/S. EXCEL INDIA PRIVATE LTD. IN THIS CONNECTION IT IS SEEN THAT IN PARA 5 O F ITS CIRCULAR NO.723 THE CBDT HAS CLARIFIED THAT WHERE THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE TO SHIPP ING AGENTS OF NON-RESIDENT SHIP- OWNERS OR CHARTERERS FOR CARRIAGE OF PASSENGERS, SU CH CASES ALSO WILL BE COVERED BY SECTION 172 AND NOT BY SECTION 194C OR SECTION 195 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, FROM THE BILLS PRODUCED BEFORE ME IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO ASCE RTAIN IF THE PAYMENTS MADE ARE IN RELATION TO NON-RESIDENT SHIPPING COMPANIES. THE A. O. HAS ALSO NOT GIVEN ANY FINDING IN THIS RESPECT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. I, THEREFORE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IN CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER FINDS THAT THE PAYMENT OF FREIGHT IS ON BEHALF OF NONRESIDENT SHIPPING COMPAN IES AND THAT M/S. EXCEL INDIA PVT. LTD. IS THE AGENT OF THOSE NON-RESIDENT SHIPPI NG COMPANIES THEN THE DISALLOWANCES U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1 961 TO THAT EXTENT SHALL STAND DELETED. IF HE FINDS THE FACTS OTHERWISE, THEN THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY HIM, TO 5 THAT EXTENT, SHALL STAND CONFIRMED. THE ASSESSING O FFICER SHALL GIVE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEEE. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FAILED TO GIV E A FINDING AS TO HOW THE SAID PAYMENT AMOUNTS TO WORK UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194 C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. I THEREFORE DIRECT TO ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY IF THE EXPENSES ARE IN THE NATURE COVERED BY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C OF THE IT ACT 1961. IF HE FINDS THAT THE EXPENSES ARE COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1 94C THEN THE ADDITION SHALL STAND CONFIRMED OR ELSE THE SAME SHALL BE DELETED. IF HE FINDS THE FACTS OTHERWISE, THEN THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY HIM, TO THAT EXTENT. SHALL STAND CONFIRMED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL GIVE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY O F HEARING TO THE ASSESSEEE . (C) PAYMENT TO AGARPARA KUTIR SHILPA PRATISTHAN, PA UL ENTERPRISES & P.K. ENTERPRISES ,PROCESSING CHARGES AND CUTTING AND STI TCHING CHARGES THEREFORE. I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY IF THE EXPENSES IN RESPECT OF PAYMENTS MADE TO AGARPARA KUTIR SHILPA PRATISTHAN, PAUL ENTERPRIESES AND P.K. ENTERPRISES WERE MADE UNDER A CONTRACT OR THAT THOS E PERSONS WERE CONTRACTORS OF THE ASSESSEE. IF ON SUCH VERIFICATION HE FINDS THAT THE PAYMENTS TO THOSE PERSONS WERE MADE UNDER A CONTRACT OR THAT THOSE PERSONS HAD A R ELATIONSHIP OF A CONTRACTOR WITH THE ASSESSEE. IN THAT CASE THE DISALLOWANCES MADE OF RS .41.86,333/-, RS.27,49,649/- OF AGARPARA KUTIR SHILPA PRATISTHAN AND OF RS.L5,18,55 0/- PAID TO M/S. PAUL ENTERPRISES AND OF RS.24,0L,071/- PAID TO M/S. P.K. ENTERPRISES SHALL STAND CONFIRMED. HOWEVER, IF ON SUCH VERIFICATION HE FINDS THAT THERE WAS NO CON TRACT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE ABOVE MENTIONED PERSONS OR THAT THOSE PERSONS DID N OT HAVE ANY RELATIONSHIP OF A CONTRACTOR WITH THE ASSESSEE, IN SUCH CASE THE DISA LLOWANCES, AS MENTIONED ABOVE, SHALL STAND DELETED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL GI VE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. 6.1. BASED ON THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS IT IS OBSERVED THAT AO HAS NOT ANALYSED THE FACTS AND APPLIED HIS MIND BEFORE DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT AND THE LD. CIT(A) IS ALSO NOT JUSTIFIED TO SET ASIDE THE MATTE R AS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE LD. DR THAT HE HAS NO POWER TO SET ASIDE THE MATTER. HOWEV ER, HE IS HAVING THE POWER TO REMAND THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO AND DECIDE THE ISSUE ON THE BASIS OF THE REMAND REPORT. BUT IN THIS CASE IT HAS NOT HAPPENED LIKE T HAT. 6.2. ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE MATERIAL WE AR E OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT SINCE THE AO HAS NOT ANALYSED THE FACTS AND APPLIED HIS MIND BEFORE DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT BASED ON THE OBSERVATIONS M ADE BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH ARE INCORPORATED IN THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPHS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS REQUIRES FRESH ADJUDICATION BY THE LD. AO TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRES H AS PER LAW AFTER TAKING INTO 6 CONSIDERATION OF ALL THE MATERIALS AND SUBMISSIONS BEFORE HIM BEFORE DISALLOWING ANYTHING U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT. 6.3. AS REGARDING THE OTHER ISSUE RAISED BY THE REV ENUE IN RESPECT OF DELETION OF ADDITION MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT ON ACCOUN T OF PAYMENT OF PRINTING CHARGES AMOUNTING TO RS.1,48,464/- THE LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSER VED AS UNDER :- SIMILARLY IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT I FIND THAT THE PARTY ANAND PRINTERS P LTD HAS CHARGED VAT ON ITS BILLS. AS THE PAYMENTS ARE TOWAR DS SUPPLY OF GOODS THESE PAYMENTS ARE NOT COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTI ON 194C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 AND CONSEQUENTIALLY NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)( IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT L96L CAN BE MADE THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS.1,48,464 T O CREATIVE EYE AND RS.3,03,388 TO ANAND PRINTERS ARE DELETED 6.4. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT ONCE THE VAT HAS BEEN CHARGED ON ITS BILLS WHICH CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE TOWARDS SUPPLY OF GOODS AND PROVISION OF SECTION 194C OF THE IT ACT IS NOT APPL ICABLE. THEREFORE WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) TO BE INTERFER ED WITH ON THIS ISSUE. WE CONFIRM THE SAME AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ON THIS ISSUE. 6.5. AS REGARDING THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE I N RESPECT OF DELETION OF ADDITION MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT ON ACCOUNT OF PAYM ENT OF MACHINERY HIRE CHARGES TO SAIKAT CREATION AMOUNTING TO RS.1,02,350/- THE LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER :- THE UNDISPUTED FACT ON RECORD IS THAT THE SAID PAY MENT IS TOWARDS MACHINE HIRE CHARGES. I FIND THAT TILL 13-7-2006 THE DEFINITION OF RENT IN SECTION 194 I OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 DID NOT INCLUDE THE RENT FOR MACHINE H IRE CHARGES. FURTHER THE HIRE OF MACHINE SIMPLICITOR CANNOT BE H ELD TO BE A WORK AND THEREFORE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194 C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1 961 DO NOT APPLY AND AS HELD EARLIER THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194 I OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ALSO DO NOT APPLY ARE NOT AND CONSEQUENTIALLY NO DISALLOWANCE U /S 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 CAN BE MADE THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS.1 ,02,350 MACHINE HIRE CHARGES TO SAIKAT CREATIONS IS DELETED. 6.6. ON CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY LD. CIT(A) WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) SINCE THE PROVISION OF SECTION 194C OF THE IT ACT WILL COME INTO PLAY ONLY FROM 13.07.2006 WHERE THE A.YR INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS 2006- 07. THEREFORE WE CONFIRM THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) A ND DISMISS THE REVENUES APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE. 7 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS PARTL Y ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND CROSS OBJECTION OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STAT ISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 13.04.2012. SD/- SD/- , , , , MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , ,, , '# '# '# '# , C.D.RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( (( (!# !# !# !#) )) ) DATE: .13.04.2012. '8 3 0% 9'%*:- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S.GLOBAL VENTURE CORPORATION, 28A, J.K.GHOSHAL RO AD, KOLKATA- 700057. 2 THE D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-49, KOLKATA. 3. THE CIT, 4. THE CIT(A)-XXXII, KOLKATA. 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA 1% 0/ TRUE COPY, '8(5/ BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES R.G.(.P.S.)