Shri Sumit Kotak, Midnapore V. DCIT, Circle-39, Medinipur, Paschim Medinipur

ITA 1010/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1656 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-02-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NICOLAS MURMU CITSR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Assessment record
• Section: 133(6)

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH C KOL KATA [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & SHRI M.B ALAGANESH, AM ] ITA NO.1010/KOL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK -VERSUS- D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-39, MIDNAPORE (W) PASCHIM MIDNAPORE. (PAN:AFJPK 5203 R) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI SUBASH AGARWAL, ADVOCAT E FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI NICOLAS MURMU, ADDL. CIT,S R.DR DATE OF HEARING : 30.01.2018. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.02.2018. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF C.I.T.(A)-11, KOLKATA DATED 12.04.2017 RELATING TO A.Y.2011-12. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. HE CARRIES ON B USINESS OF DISTRIBUTION OF VARIOUS PRODUCTS OF VODAFONE SOUTH LTD LIKE DISTRIBUTION OF HAND SETS, MODEM, SIM CARD ETC. HE CARRIES ON THE SAID BUSINESS IN THE NAME AND STY LE OF ANU TELELINKS. 3. IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF ANU TELELINKS THERE WAS A CREDIT OF RS.62,75,862/- COMPRISING OF INCENTIVE OF RS.59,15, 200/- AND DD COMMISSION OF RS.3,60,662/-. THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS.62,75,862/- WAS RECEIVED FROM VODAFONE SOUTH LTD. THE AO ADDRESSED A LETTER U/S 133(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (ACT) TO VODAFONE SOUTH LTD. AS PER THE RECORDS OF VODAFON E SOUTH LTD THEY HAD RECORDED THAT A SUM OF RS.1,07,33,206/- WAS THE INCENTIVE PA ID TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AO CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE BETWE EN THE FIGURE OF INCENTIVE RECEIVED FROM VODAFONE SOUTH LTD AS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND AS SHOWN BY VODAFONE SOUTH LTD IN THEIR BOOKS OF ACCOU NTS. 2 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 4. THE ASSESSEE FILED A RECONCILIATION WHICH WAS AS FOLLOWS :- 5. THE AO ACCEPTED THE RECONCILIATION OF DIFFERENCE AS BETWEEN THE INCENTIVE RECEIVED AS PER THE BOOKS OF VODAFONE SOUTH LTD AND AS PER THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO HOWEVER ADDED A SUM OF RS.30,6 7,267/- WHICH WAS SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS AMOUNT DIR ECTLY PAID TO RETAILERS OF RS.30,67,267/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THIS SUM WAS NOT CREDITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS A ND THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE CLAIMED AS DEDUCTION AGAINST THE TOTAL INCENTIVE RECEIVED FROM VODAFONE SOUTH LTD OF RS.62,75,862/-. THE FOLLOWING WERE THE RELEVANT OBS ERVATIONS OF THE AO :- IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE AMOUNT OF INCENTIVE RECE IVED BY ASSESSEE, BOTH AS PER BOOKS OF A/CS AND AS PER BOOKS OF A/CS OF VODAFONE SOUTH LTD, WAS RS 32,08,595/- AND, THEREFORE, THE DIFFERENCE STANDS R ECONCILED. THERE IS AN APPARENT FALLACY IN ABOVE-NOTE D ARGUMENT. THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT SHOWS INCENTIVE OF RS 70,56,937/-, WHICH IS STATED TO HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY CREDITED BY VODAFONE SOUTH LTD TO RETAILER S' A/CS. IT FURTHER TRANSPIRES FROM THE PROFIT & LOSS A/C OF ANU TELELINKS THAT TH E ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED A SUM OF RS 48,37,037/- UNDER THE HEAD 'INCENTIVE TO RETA ILERS & AD'. THE AR STATED 3 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 THAT THE DEBIT INCLUDES FOLLOWING AMOUNTS ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID SERVICE TAX :- SL.NO. DATE AMOUNT (RS.) 1 31/07/2010 1,60,350/- 2 25/10/2010 3,974/- 3 31/03/2011 29,02,943/- 30,67,267/- THE AR ALSO STATED THAT THE SUM OF RS 30,67,267/- I S INCLUDED IN INCENTIVE OF RS 70,56,937/- DIRECTLY CREDITED TO RETAILERS. HE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY IN VIEW OF THIS FACT INCENTIVE OF RS 30,67,267/- SHOUL D NOT BE CREDITED TO ASSESSEE'S A/CS AS THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED PAYMENT OF SERVICE TAX ON SUCH AMOUNT. THE AR ADMITTED THE DISCREPANCY AND STATED THAT THERE W AS NO OBJECTION TO ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INCENTIVE OF RS 30,67,267/- IN THE LIGHT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOVE, INCENTIV E OF RS.30,67,267/- IS TREATED AS ASSESSEES INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND ADDED BACK IN COMPUTATION. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ADDITION MADE BY THE AO THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). THERE WAS ANOTHER ADDITION OF RS.94,662/- MADE TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF DIFFERENCE BET WEEN STOCK STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE BANK AND THE VALUE OF STOCK AS REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THIS ADDITION WAS DELETED BY CIT(A) AND WE ARE CONC ERNED IN THIS APPEAL WITH THE AFORESAID ADDITION. 7. AS FAR AS THE ADDITION OF RS.30,67,267/- MADE BY THE AO TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED, THE CIT(A) IN THE COURS E OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS ADDRESSED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DT. 21.02.2017 TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ENHANCEMENT OF ASSESSMENT. THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE CIT (A)WAS THAT THE AO OUGHT TO HAVE ADDED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SUM OF RS.1,0 7,33,206/- WHICH IS INCENTIVE SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF VODAFONE SOUTH LT D AND A SUM OF RS.62,75,826/- WHICH WAS INCENTIVE RECEIVED SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE AS RECEIVED FROM VODAFONE SOUTH LTD. THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE READS AS FOLLOWS :- TO 4 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 SRI SUMIT KOTAK BELDA. DIST- MIDNAPORE (W) SUB: APPELLATE PROCEEDING IN THE CASE NO. 53/ CIT ( A)/14-15 IN THE CASE OF SRI SUMIT KOTAKASSESSEMENT YEAR-1L-12/AFJPK5203R - REG. PLEASE REFER TO THE ABOVE. DURING THE COURSE OF PRESENT PROCEEDINGS GROUND HAS BEEN RAISED BY YOU AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE A.O. TO ADD RS. 30,67,267/- ON AC COUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF INCENTIVE RECEIVED. 2. I HAVE PERUSED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY YOU IN TH E PRESENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY YOU DURING THE PROCEEDIN GS OF REGULAR ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSMENT RECORD WHICH INCLUDE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM M/S. VODAFONE. ONE OF THE STATEMENT CALLED FROM M/S. VOD AFONE IS THE LEDGER AMOUNT OF INCENTIVE PAID TO YOU BY M/S. VODAFONE. AS PER T HIS STATEMENT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 1,07,33,206/- HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN PAID TO YOU DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR AS INCENTIVE. 3. THE ENTIRE LEDGER HAS BEEN MAINTAINED BY VODAFON E IN YOUR NAME AND AS PER THIS LEDGER THE ENTIRE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO YOU . 4. HOWEVER FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORD AND THE W RITTEN STATEMENT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AND RESIGNED YOU HAVE CLAIMED THAT AN AM OUNT OF RS. 70,56,938/- HAS BEEN PAID BY M/S VODAFONE DIRECTLY TO THE DEALERS. HOWEVER, NO SUCH MENTION HAS BEEN MADE BY M/S. VODAFONE IN ITS LEDGER A/C. SUBMI TTED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. 5. IN THE PRESENT SITUATION YOU ARE ASKED TO EXPLAI N AS TO WHY THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,07,33,206/- SHOWN NOT BE ADDED AS INCENTIVE R ECEIVED BY YOU DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. 6. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 48,37,037 /- HAS BEEN SHOWN AS TO BE INCENTIVE PAID TO RETAILER AND AD IN YOUR P & P A/C . THE AMOUNT OF RS. 30,67,267/- WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED BY THE A. O. AS IN CENTIVE RECEIVED BY YOU HAS ALSO BEEN CLAIMED TO BE PART & PARCEL OF THE INCENT IVE PAID TO THE DEALERS. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT YOU HAVE NOT SUBMITTED ANY EVIDENCE WHICH SUGGEST THAT THIS AMOUNT WAS PAID TO RETAILERS. 7. THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS. 17,69,770/- HAVE ALS O BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN PAID IN CASH TO THE RETAILER. FROM THE ASSESSMENT R ECORD IT IS APPARENT THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT HAS BEEN SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN PAID IN C ASH. ADDITIONALLY THERE IS NO MENTION OF NAME OF ANY PARTY TO WHICH THE PAYMENT H AS BEEN MADE. 5 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 8. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, YOU ARE ASKED TO EXPLAIN A S TO (I) WHY THE RECEIPT FROM VODAFONE AS INCENTIVE SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AT RS. 1, 07,33,206/- INSTEAD OF AMOUNT OF RS. 62,75,861/- AS HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE INCENTIV E RECEIVED DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. (II) YOU ARE FURTHER ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF INCENTIVE SHOWN TO HAVE BEEN PAID BY YOU TO RETAILERS AND AD AMOUNTING TO RS. 48,37,037/- SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED FOR WANT OF SU FFICIENT PROOF THAT THESE EXPENDITURE AS ACTUALLY BEEN MADE. (III) YOU ARE FURTHER ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY PE NALTY U/S 271 (L)(C) SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED ON THE CONCEALMENT ARISING OUT OF THE PRO POSAL OF ADDITION/ENHANCEMENT MADE HEREIN ABOVE. ' 9. YOUR REPLY, IF ANY, T09 THIS LETTER SHOULD POSIT IVELY BY RECEIVED BY THE UNDERSIGNED BY 27 TH FEB. 2017. OTHERWISE THE CASE WILL BE DECIDED ON THE BASIS OF RECORD AVAILABLE WITH THE UNDERSIGNED. IF YOU WANT TO AVAIL THE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT EVIDENCES AGAINST THE PROPOSAL MADE HEREIN A BOVE ALONG WITH DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES YOUR PERSONAL PRESENCE IS ALS O REQUIRED. FOR REASON THAT YOU HAVE ADMITTED CONCEALMENT ON A/C. OF WRONG CLAI M OF INCENTIVE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE AFORESAID SHOW CAUSE NOT ICE THAT THE CASE WAS FIXED FOR HEARING FOR A REPLY BY THE ASSESSEE ON 27.02.2017. PARA 5.3.8 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER MENTIONS THE FACT THAT ON 27.02.2017 THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ALONG WITH THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AND ACCEPTED THAT ON THE BASIS OF THE ENTRIES IN THE LEDGER ACCOUNT INCENTIVES PAID TO THE ASSESSEE WAS RS.1,07,33,206/ -. IN THE NEXT SENTENCE IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS FOLLOWS :- HE SOUGHT ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO EXPLAIN HIS CASE BY FURNISHING RELEVANT DOCUMENT BY 15/04/2017.THIS ADMISSION BY THE' ASSES SEE IS PART OF THE ORDER SHEET ENTRY OF EVEN DATE. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT EVEN AFTER GIVING AN O PPORTUNITY OF MORE THAN 45 DAYS NO REBUTTAL OR EVIDENCE CONTRARY TO THE PROVISION M ADE IN THE SO CALLED NOTICE WAS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. NON-SUBMISSION OF ANY EVIDENCE OR DOCUMENT CONTRARY TO THE PROPOSITION . MADE IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NEEDS TO BE VIEWED ALONG W ITH THE ADMISSION MADE BY THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS. AS DISCUSSED IN PARAGRAPH 5.3.1 ABOVE, THE SOLE REASON FOR THE ADMI SSION AT THE TIME OF 6 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING AND AGITATING AGAIN THE ADMIT TED POINT IN THE PRESENT PROCEEDING APPEAR TO BE WITH THE SOLE MOTIVE OF FRU STRATING THE INVESTIGATION BEING CARRIED OUT BY THE AO. THE MOMENT CIT(A) INIT IATED INVESTIGATION AGAIN BY VIRTUE OF POWER CONFERRED UPON HIM U/S 250(4). THE ASSESSEE AGAIN FINDS ITSELF IN A SITUATION WHERE HE DOES NOT HAVE ANY FACT OR EVID ENCE TO PROVE HIS POINT. 9. THE CIT(A) THEREAFTER PROCEEDED TO ENHANCE THE A SSESSMENT BY A SUM OF RS.57,59,341/- BY ADDING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE AS SESSEE A SUM OF RS.39,89,671/- AS INCENTIVES RECEIVED WHICH WAS NOT DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE AND ANOTHER SUM OF RS.17,69,770/- WHICH WAS A SUM CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PAID BY THE ASSESSEE AS INCENTIVE TO ITS RETAILER OR AUTHORISED DEALER, WHI CH THE CIT(A) DISALLOWED. 10. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL RAISING THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION OF RS.30,67 ,267/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF INCENTIVE PAID BY 'VODAFONE SOUTH LTD. [FORMERLY VODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH LTD.] DIRECTLY TO THE RETAILER S. 2. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN MAKING AN ENHANCEMENT OF RS. 39,89,671/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF INCENTIVE TRANSFERRED BY VODAFONE SOUTH LTD. [FORMERLY VODAFONE ESSAR SOUTH LTD.] DIRECTLY TO RETAILERS OUT OF THE TOTAL SUCH AMOUNT OF RS.70,56,938/-. 3. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN MAKING ENHANCEMENT OF THE SUM OF RS. 17,69,770/- BY DISALLOWING THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF INCENTIVES TO THE RETAILERS. 4. FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING TOTAL ENHANCEMENT OF RS. 57 ,59,341/- (RS. 39,89,671/- + RS. 17,69,770/-) WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUN ITY OF HEARING. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER OR DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 7 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THAT IN PARAGRAPH 5.3.8 THE CIT(A) HAS MENTIONED TH E DATE OF HEARING AS 15.04.2017 WHEREAS THE CIT(A) HAS PASSED THE ORDER AS EARLY AS 12.04.2017. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT OF THE AUTHORIS ED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WHO APPEARED BEFORE CIT(A). IN THE AFORESAID AFFIDAVIT , THE AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAS STATED AS FOLLOWS :- 1.THAT SRI SUMIT KOTAK OF BELDA, DIST. MIDNAPORE ( W), WEST BENGAL HAD FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) BEING AGGRIEVED WITH TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 28.03.2014 FOR THE A.Y.: 2011 - 2012. 2. I WAS BRIEFED IN THE MATTER TO MAKE APPEARANCES BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 3. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) ISSUED A SHOW- CAUSE NOTICE FOR ENHANCEMENT AND ASKED THE APPELLAN T TO APPEAR BEFORE HIM ON 27.02.2017. 4. THAT ON THE SAID DATE I ALONGWITH THE APPELLANT APPEARED BEFORE HIM AND THE MATTER WAS FURTHER ADJOURNED TO 15.03.2017 BUT THE DATE IS WRONGLY MENTIONED BY HIM AS 15.04.2017 IN HIS ORDER DATED 12.04.2017. 5. THAT ON 15.03.2017 WHEN I REACHED FOR HEARING, I FOUND THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER WAS ABSENT. I AGAIN WENT ON THE NEXT D AY AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER WAS OUT OF STATION AND A FRESH NO TICE WOULD BE ISSUED. 6. THAT ON 27.04.2017 WHEN I WENT AGAIN TO ENQUIRE ABOUT FRESH DATE, IF ANY, I WAS TOLD THAT THE ORDER WAS ALREADY PASSED. 7. THAT THE FACTS STATED IN PARA 1 TO 6 ARE TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF. 12. THE LD.. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US SUB MITTED THAT THE ENTIRE RECONCILIATION WAS READY AND COULD HAVE BEEN EXPLAI NED TO THE CIT(A) BUT THE CIT(A) DID NOT AFFORD OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE A SSESSEE. IT IS ALSO SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THAT THE ONLY DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPE AL AS MENTIONED THEREIN WAS 27.02.2017 AND THEREAFTER THERE HAS BEEN NO HEARIN G. IT IS THUS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT HAVE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF PLEADIN G HIS CASE BEFORE CIT(A). WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND REMAND THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO THE 8 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12 ADDITION OF RS.30,67,267/- AS WELL AS THE PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT BY THE CIT(A) TO THE AO FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. THE AO WILL CONSIDER TH E ORIGINAL ADDITION AS WELL AS THE PROPOSED ENHANCEMENT BY CIT(A) AFRESH AFTER AFFORDI NG THE ASSESSEE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THE AO WILL DECIDE THE ISSUE UNINFLUEN CED BY THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER BOTH WITH REGARD TO TH E ADDITION OF RS.30,67,267/- AS WELL AS THE ENHANCEMENT OF RS.39,89,671/-. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 13. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TRE ATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. O RDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.02.2018. SD/- SD/- [M.BALAGANESH] [ N.V.VASUDEVAN ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 02.02.2018. [RG SR.PS] COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1.SHRI SUMIT KOTAK, BELDA, DIST. MIDNAPORE (W), PIN CODE 721424. 2. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-39, KOLKATA. 3. C.I.T.(A)-11, KOLKATA 4. C.I.T.-13, KOLKA TA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. TRUE COPY BY ORDER, SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY HEAD OF OFFICE/D.D.O., ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES 9 ITA NO.1010/KOL/20-17 SHRI SUMIT KOTAK A.Y.2011-12