Sri Guru Singh Sabha, New Delhi V. DCIT, CPC, Banaglore

ITA 1037/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4564 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AGAINST SEPARATE S PASSED
• Keywords: Maximum Marginal Rate; Capital receipt; Capital expenditure
• Section: 12A; 12AA; 12; 11

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 1037 & 1038/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2014-15 & 2015-16 SRI GURU SINGH SABHA, 158-B, DDA MIG FLATS, RAJOURI GARDEN, NEW DELHI 110 027 (PAN: AAABS3476J) VS. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ORDER THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-20, NEW DELHI RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2014-15 & 2015-16. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE SE APPEALS ARE COMMON AND IDENTICAL, EXCEPT THE DIFFERENCE IN FIGU RE, HENCE, THE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, BY DEALING WITH ITA NO. 10 37/DEL/2018 (AY 2014-15) WHEREIN, THE FOLLOWING COMMON GROUNDS HA VE BEEN RAISED:- 1. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRM ING VARIOUS DISALLOWANCES AND APPLICATION OF MAXIMUM MARGINAL R ATE WHILE PASSING THE ORDER U/S 143(1) OF THE ACT WHICH IS NO T PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE ACT. THUS THE ORDER SO PASSED SHOULD BE CANCELLED. ASSESSEE BY SH. V.K. BINDAL & MS. SWEETY KOTHARI, CAS DEPARTMENT BY SHRI B.S. ANANT, SR. DR. 2 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRM ING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN NOT ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IGNO RING THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 12A(2) OF THE ACT PROVIDIN G FOR DEEMED REGISTRATION OF THE SOCIETY U/S 12A AND THUS MAKING IT ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM THE SAID EXEMPTION FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONS IDERATION. THUS THE EXEMPTION CLAIMED U/S 11 AND 12 SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO THE SOCIETY. 3. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS CHARGEABLE AT MAX IMUM MARGINAL RATE INSTEAD OF SLAB RATES BY INCORRECTLY APPLYING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 167B(1) OF THE ACT THOUGH THE SAME ARE NOT APPLICABLE ON SOCIETIES REGISTERED UNDER THE SO CIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 . THUS NECESSARY DIRECTIONS SHOULD BE GIVEN TO COMPUTE TAX BY APPLYING SLAB RATES ON THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN INCLUDI NG THE AMOUNT OF RS. 94,323/- BEING INTEREST EARNED ON FDRS MADE OUT OF CORPUS FUND IN TAXABLE INCOME IGNORING THE FACT THA T INTEREST EARNED ON CORPUS FUND HAS TO BE TREATED AT PAR WITH THE CORPUS FUND. THUS THE SAID AMOUNT SHOULD BE EXCLUDE D FROM TAXABLE RECEIPTS. 5. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THE GROSS RECEIPTS AS TAXABLE INCOME WITHOUT ALLOWING THE EXP ENSES OF 3 RS. 3,22,837/- INCURRED TOWARDS THE SAID RECEIPTS A ND IGNORING THAT ONLY SURPLUS IS TAXABLE AS INCOME AND NOT THE GROSS RECEIPTS. THUS THE EXPENSES SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS DE DUCTION AGAINST THE GROSS RECEIPTS. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES THE LEAVE TO ADD, SUBSTITU TE, MODIFY, DELETE OR AMEND ALL OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL EITHER BEFORE OR AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE FI LED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2014-15 AT AN INCOME OF RS.2,39,3 50/- WHICH WAS INCREASED TO RS. 13,41,461/- U/S. 143(1)(A) WHILE P ROCESSING THE RETURN BY CPC, BANGALORE. AS PER THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE , THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR THE DEDUCTION OF RS. 5,69,100/- I.E. C ORPUS FUND OF BUILDING ACCOUNT RECEIVED FOR MEETING CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AS WELL AS DEDUCTION OF RS. 3,22,837/- I.E. EXPENSES INCURRED TOWARDS THE A CTIVITIES AS PER ITS OBJECTIVES. FURTHER, AS PER THE ASSESSEE THE INTE REST EARNED ON BUILDING FUND OF RS. 94,323/- CANNOT BE TAXED WHICH WAS APPR OPRIATED FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO C HALLENGED MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE TAKEN FOR TAXATION PURPOSE AND DISALL OWANCE OF THE EXEMPTION U/S. 11 & 12 OF THE ACT DISREGARDING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 12A(2) FIRST PROVISO FOR DEEMED REGISTRATION. HOWEV ER, LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THAT CPC, BANGALORE WHILE PROCESSING THE RETURN OF INCOME HAS COMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 13,41,461/- AG AINST THE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE OF RS. 2,39,350/- AND NOT ALL OWED ABOVE DEDUCTION 4 AND TAXED THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AT MAXIMUM MARGI NAL RATE. AGGRIEVED WITH THE LD. CIT(A) ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEA L BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING VARIOUS DISALLOWANCES AN D APPLICATION OF MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE WHILE PASSING THE ORDER U/S 1 43(1) OF THE ACT WHICH IS NOT PERMISSIBLE UNDER THE ACT. THUS THE OR DER SO PASSED SHOULD BE CANCELLED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) WRONGLY CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN NOT ALLOWING EXE MPTION U/S 11 AND 12 OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IGNORING T HE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 12A(2) OF THE ACT PROVIDING FOR DEEMED REGI STRATION OF THE SOCIETY U/S 12A AND THUS MAKING IT ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM THE SA ID EXEMPTION FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THUS THE EXEMPTION CLAIME D U/S 11 AND 12 SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO THE SOCIETY. IT WAS THE FURTHE R SUBMISSION THAT LD. CIT(A) WRONGLY HELD THAT THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY IS CHARGEABLE AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE INSTEAD OF SLAB RATES BY I NCORRECTLY APPLYING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 167B(1) OF THE ACT THOUGH THE SAME ARE NOT APPLICABLE ON SOCIETIES REGISTERED UNDER THE SOCIET IES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860. THUS NECESSARY DIRECTIONS SHOULD BE GIVEN TO COMPUTE TAX BY APPLYING SLAB RATES ON THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN INCLUDING THE AMOUN T OF RS. 94,323/- BEING INTEREST EARNED ON FDRS MADE OUT OF CORPUS FU ND IN TAXABLE INCOME IGNORING THE FACT THAT INTEREST EARNED ON CORPUS FU ND HAS TO BE TREATED AT PAR WITH THE CORPUS FUND. THUS THE SAID AMOUNT SHOU LD BE EXCLUDED FROM TAXABLE RECEIPTS. LASTLY HE SUBMITTED THAT LOWER A UTHORITIES HAVE WRONGLY 5 HELD THAT THE GROSS RECEIPTS AS TAXABLE INCOME WITH OUT ALLOWING THE EXPENSES OF RS. 3,22,837/- INCURRED TOWARDS THE SAI D RECEIPTS AND IGNORING THAT ONLY SURPLUS IS TAXABLE AS INCOME AND NOT THE GROSS RECEIPTS. THUS THE EXPENSES SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS DEDUCTION AG AINST THE GROSS RECEIPTS. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, HE REQUESTED THAT THE A PPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE MAY BE ALLOWED. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND STATED HE HAS PASSED A WELL REASONED ORDER, WHI CH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE ON OUR PART. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED AS SESSEES CLAIM IS NOT ACCEPTABLE DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AP PLIED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE ACT ON 27.11.2015 I.E. DU RING AY 2016-17 WHEREAS THE PRESENT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO AY 2014-15. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISO SECTION 12 A(2) WILL ALSO NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SH OWN ANY INCOME DERIVED FROM THE PROPERTY UNDER TRUST. BESIDE THIS, THE REGISTRATION GRANTED BY CIT DOES NOT GRANT EXEMPTION U/S 11,12 & 13 AUTOMATIC AND IT IS CONDITIONAL AFTER THE ASSESSING OFFICER SATISFIE S HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES CLAIMED. 5. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RE CORDS ESPECIALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER. I FIND THAT CPC, BANGALORE, WHI LE PROCESSING THE RETURN OF INCOME HAS COMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 13,41,461/- AGAINST THE INCOME SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE OF RS. 2,3 9,350/- AND NOT ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION AND TAXED THE CASE OF THE AS SESSEE AT MAXIMUM 6 MARGINAL RATE. IN THIS BEHALF, THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO PRODUCED THE EVIDENCE OF BUILDING FUND AND COPY O F 12AA REGISTRATION GRANTED BY CIT VIDE ORDER DATED 15.3.2016. THIS ORD ER OF REGISTRATION U/S. 12AA READ WITH SECTION 12 MENTIONED THE FOLLO WING FACTS: I) AN APPLICATION IN FORM NO. 10 A SEEKING REGISTRA TION US. 12AA WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 27.11.2015. II) THE TRUST / SOCIETY / NON PROFIT COMPANY WAS CO NSTITUTED BY DEED OF TRUST, MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION/ INSTRUMEN T DATED 10.2.1978 INDICATING ITS OBJET. III) AFTER CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RE CORD THE APPLICANT TRUST / SOCIETY / COMPANY IS GRANTED REGI STRATION AS GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITY. TRUST/SOCIETY/ COMPANY AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN THE CASE FROM AY 2016-17. THE TRUST / SOCIETY / NPO IS REGISTERED AS S.NO. DEL-SR24975-15032016 OF THE REGISTER MAINTAINED IN THIS OFFICE. THE REGISTRATION WAS GRANTED TO THE FOLLOWI NG CONDITIONS. CONDITIONS: 1. ORDER U/S. 12AA(1)(B) READ WITH SECTION 12A DOES NO T CONFIRM ANY RIGHT EXEMPTION UPON THE APPLICANT U/S. 11, 12, AND 13 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. SUCH EXEMPTION FROM TAXAT ION WILL BE AVAILABLE ONLY AFTER THE AO IS SATISFIED ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF 7 THE ACTIVITIES PROMISED OR CLAIMED TO BE CARRIED ON EACH FINANCIAL YEAR RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR AND ALL THE PROVIS ION OF LAW ACTED UPON. THIS WILL BE FURTHER SUBJECT TO PROVISI ONS OF SECTION 2(15) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 5.1 I FURTHER FIND THAT ON PERUSAL OF THE AFORESAID CONDITIONS AND AS PER THE PROVISION OF SECTION 12AA, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS R IGHTLY HELD THAT ASSESSEES CLAIM WAS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE DUE THE F ACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS APPLIED FOR REGISTRATION UNDER SETION 12AA OF T HE ACT ON 27.11.2015 I.E. DURING AY 2016-17 WHEREAS THE PRESENT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO AY 2014-15. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE REL EVANT CONDITIONS FOR APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 11 AND 12 ARE REPRODUCED A S UNDER:- CONDITIONS FOR APPLICABILITY OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12. 12A. (1) THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11 AND SECTION 1 2 SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO THE INCOME OF ANY TRUST OR INS TITUTION UNLESS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE FULFILLED, NAMELY: (AA) THE PERSON IN RECEIPT OF THE INCOME HAS MADE A N APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007 IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM26 AND MANNER T O THE27[PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OR] COMMISSIONER AND S UCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION IS REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA;] (B) WHERE THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUT ION AS COMPUTED UNDER THIS ACT WITHOUT GIVING EFFECT TO TH E PROVISIONS 8 OF SECTION 11 AND SECTION 12 EXCEEDS THE MAXIMUM AM OUNT WHICH IS NOT CHARGEABLE TO INCOME-TAX IN ANY PREVIO US YEAR], THE ACCOUNTS OF THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION FOR THAT YEAR HAVE BEEN AUDITED BY AN ACCOUNTANT AS DEFINED IN THE EXPLANAT ION BELOW SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 288 AND THE PERSON IN RE CEIPT OF THE INCOME FURNISHES ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME FO R THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR THE REPORT OF SUCH AUDIT IN THE PRE S-CRIBED FORM DULY SIGNED AND VERIFIED BY SUCH ACCOUNTANT AND SET TING FORTH SUCH PARTICULARS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED. (2) WHERE AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2007, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RELATION TO THE INCOME OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH SUCH APPLICATION IS MADE: PROVIDED THAT WHERE REGISTRATION HAS BEEN GRANTED T O THE TRUST OR INSTITUTION UNDER SECTION 12AA, THEN, THE PROVISION S OF SECTIONS 11 AND 12 SHALL APPLY IN RESPECT OF ANY INCOME DERI VED FROM PROPERTY HELD UNDER TRUST OF ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR PR ECEDING THE AFORESAID ASSESSMENT YEAR, FOR WHICH ASSESSMENT PRO CEEDINGS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS ON THE DATE OF SUCH REGISTRATION AND THE OBJECTS AND ACTIVITIES OF SUCH TRUST OR INSTITUTION REMAIN THE SAME FOR SUCH PRECEDING ASSE SSMENT YEAR: 5.2 ON PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE PROVISIONS, IT IS CLEA R THAT THE PROVISIONS AT 9 SECTION 12A(2) WILL APPLY FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH SUCH APPLICATION IS MAD E. IN THIS CASE, THE APPLICATION OF REGISTRATION IS MADE ON 27.11.2015, HENCE THE EXEMPTION UNDER SECTION 11 & 12 WILL BE APPLICABLE NOT BEFORE A.Y. 2016-17. FURTHER, THE PROVISO SECTION 12 A(2) WILL ALSO NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY INCOME DERIVED FR OM THE PROPERTY UNDER TRUST. BESIDE THIS, THE REGISTRATION GRANTED BY CIT DOES NOT GRANT EXEMPTION U/S 11,12 &13 AUTOMATIC AND IT IS CONDITI ONAL AFTER THE ASSESSING OFFICER SATISFIES HIMSELF ABOUT THE GENUI NENESS OF THE ACTIVITIES CLAIMED. 5.3 I FURTHER NOTE THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE TAXED AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE IS ALSO NOT TENABLE AS THE PAN OF THE ASSESSEE SUGGESTS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A BODY OF IN DIVIDUALS AND NOT 'TRUST' AS THE FIFTH CHARACTER OF PAN IS 'B' AND NO T 'T' WHICH SHOULD BE THE CASE OF TRUST. AS THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN CAPACITY OF BODY OF INDIVIDUALS AND AUTOMATICALLY T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 11, 12 &13 WILL NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF THE APPELL ANT UNLESS THE REGISTRATION IS GRANTED BY CIT WHICH WAS GRANTED LA TER. HENCE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 167B (1) OF THE ACT CLEARLY S UGGESTS THAT UNDER THIS SITUATION THE APPELLANT HAS TO BE TAXED AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATES. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 167B(1) IS AS UNDER: - 'CHARGE OF TAX WHERE SHARES OF MEMBERS IN ASSOCIATI ON OF PERSONS OR BODY OF INDIVIDUALS UNKNOWN, ETC. 10 167B. (1) WHERE THE INDIVIDUAL SHARES OF THE MEMBER S OF AN ASSOCIATION OF PERSONS OR BODY OF INDIVIDUALS OTHER THAN A COMPANY OR A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY OR A SOCIETY REGI STERED UNDER THE SOCIETIES REGISTRATION ACT, 1860 (21 OF I860] O R UNDER ANY LAW CORRESPONDING TO THAT ACT IN FORCE IN ANY PART OF INDIA IN THE WHOLE OR ANY PART QF THE INCOME OF SUCH ASSOCIATION OR BODY ARE INDETERMINATE OR UNKNOWN, TAX SHALL BE CHARGED ON T HE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSOCIATION OR BODY AT THE MAXIMUM MA RGINAL RATE 5.4 IN VIEW OF ABOVE, I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE CPC BANGALORE IN TAXING THE ASSESSEE AT MAXIMUM MARGINAL RATE. 5.5 FURTHER, I NOTE THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS RELIED UP ON THE ORDER DATED 16.5.2017 OF ITAT, DELHI BENCH IN THE CASE OF DIVIN E EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE & SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY VS. ITO PASSED IN ITA NO. 380/DEL/2017 WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT CORPUS FUND WHICH I S MEANT FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSE TO MEET OUT CAPITAL EXPENDITURE COULD NOT B E PART OF ANNUAL RECEIPTS, EVEN IF THE TRUST IS NOT REGISTERED UNDER SECTION 12AA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. HOWEVER, IN TH E PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE RECEIPT OF RS. 5,69,100/- T OWARDS CORPUS FUND OF BUILDING ACCOUNT WHICH IS A CAPITAL RECEIPT WHICH H AS BEEN INVESTED IN FDR. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) CORRECTLY FOLLOWED TH E AFORESAID DECISION OF ITAT AND HELD THAT THIS RECEIPT OF RS. 5,69,100/- AND TREATED AS CAPITAL RECEIPT TO MEET THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AND NOT CHA RGEABLE TO TAX. 11 HOWEVER, NO RELIEF CAN BE GIVEN ON ACCOUNT OF INTER EST ON FDR OF BUILDING FUND ALSO WHICH IS A REVENUE RECEIPT AND INCOME DUR ING THE YEAR. FURTHER, OTHER DEDUCTIONS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT ALLOWED U/S 11 & 12 OF THE ACT AND THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE INTIMAT ION U/S 143(1) OF CPC BANGALORE. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, I AM OF THE CONSIDERE D VIEW THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED WELL REASONED ORDER WHICH DOES NOT NEED ANY INTERFERENCE, ON MY PART, THEREFORE, I UPHOLD THE SAME AND REJECT TH E GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 30-10-2018. SD/- [H.S. SIDHU] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE:30/10/2018 SRBHATNAGAR COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. D R, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES 12