Inno Estates Private Limited, CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1022/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4133 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-07-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 26-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S SURESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: R SIVARAMAN
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment; Non-deduction of tax
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER STAY PETITION NO.152/MDS/2017 ( ./ IN I.T.A.NO.1021/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2015-16) AND ./ I.T.A.NO.1021/MDS/2017 M/S. INNO REAL PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.5, GIRI ROAD, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017. V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION I(2), CHENNAI PAN: AACCI1726N ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) & STAY PETITION NO.153/MDS/2017 ( ./ IN I.T.A.NO.1022/MDS/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2015-16) AND ./ I.T.A.NO.1022/MDS/2017 M/S. INNO ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED, NO.4, GIRI ROAD, T.NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017. V. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION I(2), CHENNAI PAN: AACCI1592A (PETITIONER) ( /RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI R. SIVARAMAN, ADVOCATE /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S. SURESH KUMAR, ADDL. CIT /DATE OF HEARING : 02.05.2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.07.2017 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THESE STAY PETITIONS ARE FILED BY THE M/S. INNO REA L PVT. LTD. AND M/S. INNO ESTATES PVT. LTD., SEEKING STAY OF TH EIR OUTSTANDING 2 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 DEMAND OF RS.16,53,496/- & RS.2,05,32,747/- RESPECT IVELY. WHEN THE STAY PETITIONS CAME UP FOR HEARING, THE BENCH W AS RELUCTANT TO GRANT STAY AND THEREFORE THE LD.AR PLEADED ON BEHAL F OF BOTH THE ASSESSEES FOR INSTANT HEARING OF THE APPEALS. THER EFORE THE BENCH DECIDED TO HEAR THE APPEALS ON MERITS INSTEAD OF EN TERTAINING THE STAY PETITION. 2. THE ISSUES IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL AND BOTH THE PARTIES ARE INTERCONNECTED, THEREFORE BOTH THE APPE ALS ARE HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED SIX IDENTICAL GROUNDS IN BOTH THE APPEALS, HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANTS HAS NOT DEDUCT ION TAX AT SOURCE ON THE REMITTANCE MADE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES FROM THE COMPANY INCORPORATED IN CYPRUS AND THEREBY NOT COMPLIED WIT H THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 94A(5) OF THE ACT. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT BOTH THE CO MPANIES ARE FDI COMPLAINT DOMESTIC COMPANIES CARRYING OUT CONST RUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS. 3 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 5. FROM THE INFORMATION AVAILABLE WITH THE DEPARTME NT, THE FOLLOWING FACTS WERE REVEALED:- A. M/S. INNO REAL PVT. LTD : THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE FOREIGN REMITTANCE TO THE TUNE OF RS.53,51,120/-, THE DETAI LS OF WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS: DATE OF REMITTANCE NATURE OF REMITTANCE NAME OF THE REMITTER NAME OF THE RECIPIENT AMOUNT IN RS. TDS 08.01.2015 PURCHASE OF SHARES INNO REAL PRIVATE LTD. IIROF 4 ARTEMIS LIMITED 53,51,120 0 B. M/S. INNO ESTATES PVT. LTD. : THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD MADE FOREIGN REMITTANCE TO THE TUNE OF RS.64,49,020 /-, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS: DATE OF REMITTANCE NATURE OF REMITTANCE NAME OF THE REMITTER NAME OF THE RECIPIENT AMOUNT IN RS. TDS 08.01.2015 PURCHASE OF SHARES INNO ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED INNOVATIVE INDIA REALTY OPPORTUNITY FUND LIMITED 93,03,890/- 0 08.01.2015 PURCHASE OF SHARES INNO ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED IIROF 4 POSEIDON LIMITED 5,71,45,130/ - 0 6. THE LD.AO OPINED THAT BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 94A & 195 OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEES ARE LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOUR CE, BECAUSE THE 4 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 PAYMENT IS MADE TO NON-RESIDENTS. ON QUERY, THE ASS ESSEE HAD REPLIED AS FOLLOWS: IN THE TRANSACTION UNDER REFERENCE, THERE IS A LOS S. THE RECIPIENT COMPANIES HAD NOT EARNED ANY INCOME. WHA T WAS REMITTED WAS SHARE PURCHASE CONSIDERATION. AS AGAI NST THE INITIAL INVESTMENT MADE BY THE RECIPIENTS, THE CONS IDERATION PAID BY THE PURCHASER HAS RESULTED IN A LOSS TO THE RECI PIENTS DUE TO SUBSTANTIAL EROSION IN VALUE OF INDIA RUPEE AS AGAI NST THE USD, IN WHICH CURRENCY THE INITIAL INVESTMENT WAS BROUGH T IN. AS THERE IS NO INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN THE HANDS O F THE RECIPIENTS, I.E. IIROF 4 POSEIDON LIMITED AND INNOV ATIVE INDIA REALTY OPPORTUNITY FUND LIMITED, THE QUESTION OF DE DUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE DOES NOT ARISE IN THE HANDS OF THE RE MITTER. IN THIS REGARD, WE HAVE ALREADY PROVIDED THE WORKINGS TO YO U AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 195(6) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961. FURTHER UNDER SECTION 94A(5C) 30% RATE CAN BE APPLI ED ONLY ON INCOME ACCRUED OR ARISING IN INDIA WHEREAS, IN THIS CASE, IT IS ONLY LOSS AND HENCE SECTION 94A(5C) CANNOT BE INVOK ED. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED IN THE DECISION IN THE CAS ES OF GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY P. LTD VS. C.I.T AND TRANSMISSION CORPOR ATION OF A.P. LIMITED VS. CIT. 8. THE SALE OF SHARES ENDED UP IN LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS DUE TO FLUCTUATIONS IN THE FOREIGN CURRENCY AN D THE RESULTANT EROSION OF INDIAN RUPEES. AS THERE IS CAPITAL LOSS , CHAPTER XVII B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 READ WITH SECTION 195 IS NOT APPLICABLE AND HENCE THERE IS NO NEED TO DEDUCT ANY TAX AT SOURCE. AS THERE IS NO WITHHOLDING TAX LIABILITY, SECTION 94A(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT IS ALSO NOT APPLICABLE, 9. THE ASSESSEE ALSO STATED THAT DESPITE BEING A NO TIFIED JURISDICTIONAL READ U/S 94A FROM 01.11.2013, AS PER THE CBDT NOTIFICATION, THE DOUBLE TAXATION AGREEMENT ENTERED WITH THE GOVT OF CYPRUS IS STILL IN FORCE. IF ANY TAX LIABI LITY ARISES AS PER THE DTA PROVISIONS, THEN ONLY SECTION 195 AS WELL A S SECTION 5 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 94A(5) OF THE ACT CAN BE INVOKED. HOWEVER, IN OUR CASE AS PER THE DTA THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX FOR THE SALE OF SHARE S TO AN INDIAN COMPANY BY A CYPRUS COMPANY, CHAPTER XVIIB AND SECT ION 94A(5) IS NOT APPLICABLE. 6.1 HOWEVER, THE LD.AO OPINED AS FOLLOWS:- (I) SECTION 195 OF THE ACT MANDATES THAT THE PAYER HAS TO DEDUCT 'TAX AT SOURCE ON ANY SUM PAYABLE / PAID TO ANY NON- RESIDENT, IF THE TRANSACTION ATTRACTS TAX LIABILITY AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. (II) SECTION 94A OF THE ACT IS AN ANTI-TAX AVOIDANC E MEASURE WHICH HAS A SELF-CONTAINED CODE. (III) THE ASSESSEE CANNOT RELY IN THE DECISION OF T HE CASE GE INDIA TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD VS. CIT, WHEN IT HAS FAIL ED TO COMPLY WITH SECTION 94A(5) OF THE ACT. (IV) SECTION 94A(5) OF THE ACT OVERRIDES ANY OTHER SECTION IN THE ACT, INCLUDING THE CHARGEABILITY OF INCOME U/S.4 OF THE IT ACT. HENCE, ANY PAYMENT MADE BY THE INDIAN COMPANY IS SU BJECT TO TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE. (V) CYPRUS FALLS UNDER THE NOTIFIED JURISDICTIONAL AREA AND THEREFORE IT IS MANDATORY TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE F OR ANY PAYMENT MADE TO ANY ENTITY IN THAT COUNTRY. 6 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 (VI) RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED IN THE PRESS RELEASE OF THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE DATED 01.11.2013. 6.2 FOR THE ABOVE STATED REASONS, THE LD.AO CAME TO A CONCLUSION THAT, SINCE THE ASSESSEES HAS NOT DEDUCT ED TAX AT SOURCE AND IN VIEW OF THE NOTIFICATION; BOTH THE AS SESSEE COMPANIES ARE DEEMED TO BE ASSESSEES IN DEFAULT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT. 6.3 ACCORDINGLY THE LD.AO COMPUTED THE TAX PAYABLE IN CASE OF M/S. INNO REAL PVT LTD. RS.16,53,496/- AND IN THE C ASE OF M/S. INNO ESTATES PVT LTD. RS.2,05,32,747/-. 7. ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO BY OBSERVING AS UNDER IN THE CASE OF BOTH THE ASSES SEES:- THUS, IT BECOMES CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT IN VIEW OF NOT IFICATION NO. SO 3307(E) [NO.86/2013 (F.NO.504/05/2003-FTD-I) ], DATED 1- 11-2013, 'CYPRUS' AS SPECIFIED AS NOTIFIED JURISDIC TIONAL AREA FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 94A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE IS GOVERNED BY PROVISION OF SEC. 94A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIR ED TO DEDUCT TDS @ 30% IN VIEW OF SEC , 94A(5)(C). MOREOVER, SEC.94A B EING A SPECIFIC SECTION OVERRIDES OTHER GENERAL SECTIONS. NOW, DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT H AS PROVIDED COPY OF TWO NOTIFICATION RESCINDING THE NOTIFICATIO N NO. SO 3307(E) [NO.86/2013 (F.NO.504/05/2003-FTD-I)], DATED 1-11-2 013, 7 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 'CYPRUS' AS SPECIFIED AS NOTIFIED JURISDICTIONAL AR EA FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 94A OF THE ACT, 1961, THE SAME ARE REPRODUCED FOR READY REFERENCE AS NOTIFICATION NO. SO 4033(E) [NO.114/2016 (F.NO.500/ 02/2015- FT&TR-III)], DATED 14-12-2016 S.O.4033 (E). - IN EXERCISE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED BY SUBSECTION (1) OF SECTION 94A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (43 OF 1961 ), THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT HEREBY RESCINDS THE NOTIFICATION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, NUMBER 86 OF 2013 PUBLISHED IN THE GA ZETTE OF INDIA, PART IL, SECTION 3, SUB-SECTION (II) VIDE S.O. 3307(E) D ATED 1ST NOVEMBER 2013, EXCEPT AS RESPECTS THINGS DONE OR OMITTED TO BE DON E BEFORE SUCH RESCISSION, WITH EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF PUBLICATIO N OF THIS NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE. NOTIFICATION NO. SO 4082(E) [NO.119/2016 (F.NO.500/ 02/2015- FT&TR-III)], DATED 16-12-2016 NO.119/2016 SO 4082(E) - IN THE NOTIFICATION OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, IN T HE MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NO. 114/2016 DAT ED 14.12.2016 VIDE S.O. NO. 4033(E) AND PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF IN DIA, EXTRAORDINARY, PART IL, SECTION 3, SUB-SECTION (II), IN THE LAST L INE, FOR 'THIS', READ 'THE'. THUS, WITH THE CORRIGENDUM REFERRED ABOVE, THE APPE LLANT CONTENDS THAT THE NOTIFICATION NO. SO 3307(E) [NO.86/2013 (F.NO.S 04/05/2003- FTD-III, DATED 1-11-2013, 'CYPRUS' AS SPECIFIED AS NOTIFIED JURISDICTIONAL AREA FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 94A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 IS RESCINDED WITH RETROSPECTIV E EFFECT. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO WHERE MENTIONED IN THE NOTIFIC ATION DT.14.12.2016 OR DT.16.12.2016 THAT THE NOTIFICATION HAS A RETROS PECTIVE EFFECT. HAVING IT NOT MENTIONED THAT IT HAS A RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT TH E DAY ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TRANSACTED WITH THE ENTITY IN CYPR US WHICH IS A NOTIFIED 8 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 AREA, THEREFORE IT IS GOVERNED BY PROVISION OF SEC. 94A (S)(C) OF THE ACT. ASSESSEE WAS AS SUCH REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TDS ON PAYM ENT MADE. THE ASSESSEE HAS REMITTED AMOUNT OF RS.53,51,120/- / RS .6,64,49,020/- GIVEN IN DETAIL SUPRA TO THE ENTITY OF CYPRUS. THEREFORE, THIS SPECIFIC PROVISION OF SEC. 94A(5) OVERRIDES THE OTHER PROVISION OF THE ACT. THE NOTIFICATION CLEARLY MENTIONS THAT ANY PAYMENT MADE TO A PERSON LOCATED IN CYPRUS SHALL BE LIABLE FOR WITHHOLDING OF TAX @ 30% OR HIG HER. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION THAT THE T RANSACTION HAS RESULTED IN LOSS AND CHAPTER XVIIB R.W. SEC.195 IS NOT FOUND APPLICABLE AND HENCE NO TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE HAD TO BE MADE . THE ASSESSEE HAVING NOT COMPLIED WITH SEC.94A(5) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TDS UJS.195 ON SUCH REMITTANCES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO A ENTITY IN CYPRUS. HAVING ASSESSEE NOT DEDUCTED TDS ON SUCH REMITTANCES I UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO TO T REAT AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT U/S.201(1) AND LEVIED INTEREST U/S.201(1A) OF THE ACT. THE GROUND OF APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 8. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CENT RAL GOVT. VIDE ITS CIRCULAR NO.15 DATED 21.04.2017, HAD REMOV ED CYPRUS FROM THE LIST OF NOTIFIED JURISDICTIONAL AREA U/S. 94A OF THE ACT WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT. IT WAS THEREFORE PLEADED THA T THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE HELD AS DEEMED TO BE IN DEFAULT AS PER SE CTION 201(1) OF THE ACT. HENCE, IT WAS HUMBLY SUBMITTED THAT THE T AX LEVIED ON BOTH THE ASSESSEES MAY BE DELETED. THE LD.DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.AR. HOWEVER , HE PLEADED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.AO TO EXAMINE THE SCOPE OF THE APPLICABILITY OF THE CIRCU LAR NO.15 OF 2017 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL GOVT. DATED 21.04.2017 I N THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 9 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND CAREFULL Y PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. ON PERUSING THE ISSUE, WE FIND MERIT IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.AR. THE CIRCULAR NO.15 OF 2017 WAS PRODUCED BEFORE US BY THE LD.AR, WHICH IS REPRO DUCED HEREIN BELOW FOR REFERENCE: CIRCULAR NO. 15 OF 2017 F. NO. 500/002/2015-FT&TR-III(1) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NEW DELHI, DATED 21ST APRIL, 2017 SUBJECT: CLARIFICATION ON REMOVAL OF CYPRUS FROM TH E LIST OF NOTIFIED JURISDICTIONAL AREAS UNDER SECTION 94A OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT, 1961. CYPRUS WAS SPECIFIED AS A 'NOTIFIED JURISDICTIONAL AREA' (NJA) UNDER SECTION 94A OF THE LNCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 VIDE NOTIFI CATION N0.86/2013 DATED 01.11.2013. THE SAID NOTIFICATION NO. 86/2013 WAS S UBSEQUENTLY RESCINDED VIDE NOTIFICATION NO. 114 DATED 14.12.2016 AND NOTIFICAT ION NO. 1 19 DATED 16.12.2016 WITH EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF ISSUE OF TH E NOTIFICATION. 2. IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO NOTICE OF THE CENTRAL BOA RD OF DIRECT TAXES THAT IN SOME CASES A VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES THAT THE RESCISSION OF NOTIFICATION NO. 86/2013 WAS NOT WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01.11.2013, FOR REMOVAL OF DOUBTS, IT IS HEREBY CLA RIFIED THAT NOTIFICATION NO. 86/2013 HAS BEEN RESCINDED WITH EFFECT FROM THE DAT E OF ISSUE OF THE SAID NOTIFICATION, THEREBY, REMOVING CYPRUS AS A NOTIFIE D JURISDICTIONAL AREA WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 01.11.2013. (GAURAV SHARMA) UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA 10 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 COPY TO: 1. THE CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS AND OFFICERS OF CBDT OF TH E RANK UNDER SECRETARY AND ABOVE 2. PS TO THE REVENUE SECRETARY 3. ALL PR.CCSLT/ PR.DGSLT AND DGSIT(LNV.) 4. ADDL. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX (PR, PP & O L) 5. THE COMPTROLLER & AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA 6 HINDI CELL OF DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE FOR HINDI TRA NSLATION 7. THE WEB MANAGER OF WWW.INCOMETAXINDIA.GOV.IN 8. THE WEB MANAGER OF WWW.IRSOFFICERSONLINE.IN 9. GUARD FILE SINCE THE ABOVE CIRCULAR WAS NOT BEFORE THE LD.AO A T THE TIME OF PASSING THE ORDER, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE MATTER MUST BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD.AO F OR FRESH CONSIDERATION. ACCORDINGLY, WE HEREBY REMIT BOTH T HE CASES OF THE ASSESSEES TO THE FILE OF LD.AO, TO CONSIDER THE ISS UE AFRESH AND IN THE LIGHT OF CIRCULAR NO.15 OF 2017 DATED 21.04.201 7, F.NO.500/002/0215-FT&TR-III(1) ISSUED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPT. OF EXPENDITURE, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES. 10. SINCE WE HAVE REMITTED BACK BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF LD.AO FOR DE-NOVA CONSIDERA TION, BOTH THE STAY PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES HAVE BECOME I NFRUCTUOUS. 11 SP. NOS.152&153/MDS/2017 & ITA NOS.1021&1022/MDS/2017 11. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE S ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AS INDICATED HEREIN ABOVE AND BOTH THE STAY PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES ARE DISMISSED AS I NFRUCTUOUS. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 04 TH JULY, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, /DATED, THE 04 TH JULY, 2017. JR. /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( ) /CIT(A) 4. /CIT, 5. ! /DR 6. '#$ /GF.