Weikfield Products Co (I) Pvt. Ltd., Pune V. Dy.CIT, Cir, 7, Pune, Pune

ITA 1319/PUN/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 89008 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R G NAHAR
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital asset; Fair market value
• Section: 143(3); 50C; 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05) WEIKFIELD PRODUCTS CO. (I) PVT. LTD., C/O SHAH KHANDELWAL JAIN & ASSOCIATES CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, 1 ST FLOOR, ALANKAR CINEMA BLDG., PUNE 411 001. PAN : AAACW1865A . APPELLANT VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 7, PUNE. . RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : MR. R. G. NAHAR DEPARTMENT BY : MR. RAJESH DAMOR DATE OF HEARING : 12-02-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25-02-2015 ORDER PER G. S. PANNU, AM THE CAPTIONED APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AG AINST AN ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-III, PUNE DATED 01.09.2009 WHICH, IN TURN, HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER DATED 28.11.2008 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED MULTIPLE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, BUT ESSENTIALLY THE GRIEVANCE IS AGAINST AN ADDITION OF RS.42,79,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF LONG TE RM CAPITAL GAIN. BRIEFLY PUT, THE FACTS ARE THAT THE APPELLANT IS A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 AND IT OWNED A PIECE OF LAND BEARING SURVEY NO.30/3, 31/1 & 2A ADMEASURING 52,527.04 SQ. MTS IN VILLAGE VADGAONSHERI, TAL. HAVELI, PUNE. THE APPELLANT COM PANY ENTERED INTO A SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 18.12.2003 WIT H M/S IT CITI INFOPARK PVT. ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 LTD. WITH A DESIRE OF DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY ON TH E TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONTAINED THEREIN. THE SAID AGREEMENT WAS REGISTER ED WITH THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY ON 19.12.2003. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE ALS O ENTERED INTO AN ADDENDUM TO THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT ON 1 0.05.2004. THE ADDENDUM PROVIDED THAT THE PARTIES TO THE JOINT VEN TURE AGREEMENT HAVE FORMED THEMSELVES INTO AN ASSOCIATION OF PERSONS (A OP) IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S WEIKFIELD IT-CITI INFOPARK AND THAT AD DENDUM WAS BEING ENTERED INTO FOR THE PURPOSES OF ELABORATING AND CLARIFYING THE METHOD OF OPERATIONS, MANAGEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SAID PROPERTY AND REDUCE THE SAME INTO WRITING. IN THE SAID ADDENDUM, THE TERMS AND CONDI TIONS INCLUDED, INTER- ALIA, CAPITAL OF THE AOP, TENURE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE A OP, ACTIVITY OF THE AOP ETC.. IN TERMS OF CLAUSE (7) THEREOF, IT WAS STATED THAT THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF THE LAND WAS VALUED AT RS.4,37,2 0,550/-, WHICH IS STATED TO HAVE BEEN THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS DE TERMINED BY THE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES FOR THE PURPOSES OF STAMP DU TY. 3. IN THIS BACKGROUND, THE ASSESSEE DECLARED LONG T ERM CAPITAL GAIN ON THE TRANSFER OF SUCH PROPERTY INTO AOP IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, I.E. THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. W HILE COMPUTING THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN, THE ASSESSEE ADOPTED THE CONSIDE RATION AT RS.4,37,21,000/-. INITIALLY THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTIO N 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 27.12.2006 WHEREIN, INTER ALIA, THE LONG TERM CAPIT AL GAIN AS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSMEN T WAS REOPENED U/S 148 OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ACTUAL SALE C ONSIDERATION OF THE PROPERTY WAS TO BE TAKEN AT RS.4,80,00,000/- AS AGAINST RS.4 ,37,21,000/- ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THE CONSEQUENT ASSESSMENT FINALIZ ED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT, THE CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN ADOPTED AT RS.4 ,80,00,000/- THEREBY LEADING TO AN ADDITION OF RS.42,79,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ENHANCED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 4. THE BASIS OF SUCH ADDITION IS THE MENTION OF RS. 4,80,00,000/- AS THE CONSIDERATION IN INDEX NO.II ANNEXED TO THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 18.12.2003 WHILE REGISTERING THE SAME ON 19.1 2.2003. IN THE INDEX NO.II, THE CONSIDERATION HAS BEEN STATED TO BE RS.4 ,80,00,000/- WHEREAS THE VALUE ASSESSED BY THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP VALUATION OF PROPERTY IS STATED AT RS.4,37,20,550/-. ON THIS BASIS, THE REVENUE CONTENDS THAT THE CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN IS TO BE RECKONED AT RS.4,80,00,000/- WHEREAS, AS PER THE ASSESSEE IT HAS TO CORRESPOND TO THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY, I.E . RS.4,37,20,550/- OR THE ROUND FIGURE RS.4,37,21,000/- AS MENTIONED IN THE A DDENDUM TO THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 10.05.2004. 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBM ITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFI CER IN ADOPTING THE CONSIDERATION AT RS.4,80,00,000/- AND THAT THERE WA S NO JUSTIFICATION FOR HAVING INVOKED SECTION 50C OF THE ACT IN THE PRESENT CASE SO AS TO COMPUTE THE CAPITAL GAIN WITH REFERENCE TO THE CONSIDERATION OF RS.4,80,00,000/-. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT AT NO STAGE THE CONSIDERATION BETW EEN THE PARTIES HAS BEEN AGREED TO BE RS.4,80,00,000/-, INASMUCH AS THE VALU E CREDITED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF THE AOP IS ONLY RS.4,27,20 ,550/- AS EVIDENCED BY THE BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE AOP M/S WEIKFIELD IT-CITI INFOPARK, COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THE P APER BOOK AT PAGES 21 TO 25. IT IS FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT WHEN THE ORIGIN AL JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 19.12.2003 WAS PUT UP FOR REGISTRATION WITH T HE REGISTERING AUTHORITY, THE AMOUNT OF RS.4,80,00,000/- WAS PUT IN THE INDEX-II ONLY ON THE ADVICE OF THE ADVOCATE OF THE OTHER PARTY AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ST AMP DUTY WAS PAID. SO HOWEVER, ON PRESENTATION OF THE DOCUMENT BEFORE THE REGISTERING AUTHORITY, THE SAME WAS VALUED AT RS.4,37,20,550/- BY THE REGISTER ING AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF STAMP DUTY VALUATION. IT WAS POINTED O UT THAT THOUGH IN-EFFECT THE ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 STAMP DUTY WAS PAID WITH RESPECT TO THE VALUE OF RS .4,80,00,000/-, SO HOWEVER, THE SAME WAS NOT THE CONSIDERATION STATED IN THE SAID AGREEMENT. IN-FACT, IT WAS ONLY IN THE ADDENDUM TO THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 10.5.2004 THAT THE CONSIDERATION HAD BEEN MEN TIONED WHICH IS WITH REFERENCE TO THE MARKET VALUE OF THE SAID PROPERTY, I.E. AT RS.4,37,20,550/- AS ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY. THE LD. COUNSEL ALSO EXPLAINED THAT SINCE STAMP DUTY WAS TO BE INCURRED BY OTHER C ONCERN, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT OBJECT TO THE PAYMENT OF HIGHER STAMP DUTY ON T HE BASIS OF VALUE OF RS.4,80,00,000/-, BUT THE SAME, IN NO WAY, CAN BE C ONSTRUED AS THE ACTUAL CONSIDERATION, INASMUCH AS THE ASSESSEE HAD TRANSFE RRED THE ASSET TO THE AOP AT RS.4,37,20,550/- AS STATED IN THE ADDENDUM T O THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 10.5.2004. THE LEARNED COUNSEL ASS ERTED THAT THE VALUE ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY FOR THE P URPOSES OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY CONTINUES TO BE RS.4,37,20,550/- AS MENT IONED IN INDEX NO. II ANNEXED TO THE AGREEMENT DATED 19.12.2003 AND THAT IT IS AT THE SAME VALUE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD TRANSFERRED THE SAME TO THE A OP AND THAT MERE PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY AT A HIGHER VALUE DOES NOT TR IGGER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE HAS DEFENDED THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES BY POINTING OUT THAT THE STAMP DUTY HAS BEEN PAID AFTER CONSIDERING THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT RS.4,80,00,000/- AND, THEREFORE, THE SAME IS LIA BLE TO BE TREATED AS VALUE OF SALE CONSIDERATION ADOPTED BY THE STAMP VALUATION A UTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY, SECTION 50C OF THE ACT HAS BEEN RIGHTLY INVOKED. 7. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. THE CONTROVERSY IN THIS APPEAL IS PRIMARILY DRIVEN BY INVOKING OF SECT ION 50C OF THE ACT WHICH PERMITS AN ASSESSING OFFICER TO DISREGARD THE CONSI DERATION ACTUALLY RECEIVED ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF TRANSFER BY AN ASSESSEE IN PREFERENCE TO THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSABLE BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH T RANSFER. SECTION 50C OF THE ACT PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF TRANSFER BY AN ASSESSEE OF A CAPITAL ASSET, BEING LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH, IS LESS THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSAB LE BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAM P DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER, THEN THE VALUE SO ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSABLE SHALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 48 OF THE ACT, BE DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF S UCH TRANSFER. QUITE CLEARLY, SHORN OFF OTHER DETAILS, SECTION 50C OF THE ACT IS TRIGGERED ONLY IN A SITUATION WHERE THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A R ESULT OF A TRANSFER OF A CAPITAL ASSET BEING LAND OR BUILDING OR BOTH IS LES S THAN THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSABLE BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHO RITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER. 8. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE ENTERED INTO A JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT WITH ANOTHER CONCERN AND FORMED AN AOP TO WHICH IT TRANSFERRED ITS PROPERTY BEING LAND AND GAIN ON SUCH TRANSFER IS EX IGIBLE TO TAX AS CAPITAL GAINS. IN TERMS OF THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEM ENT DATED 19.12.2003 READ WITH ADDENDUM TO THE SINGLE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DATED 10.5.2004 THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF THE LAND HAS BEEN VALUED AT RS.4,37,20,550/-, WHICH HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY THE ASS ESSEE AS CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING CAPITAL GAIN. THE SAI D CONSIDERATION IS ALSO THE VALUE WHICH HAS BEEN STATED TO BE THE MARKET VALUE IN INDEX-II BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY, AS IS EVIDENCED BY THE COPY OF SUCH INDEX-II TO THE AGREEMENT REGISTERED ON 19.12.2003 WHICH IS PLACED ON RECORD. IN THE SAME INDEX-II AGAINST THE COLUMN CONSIDERATION, IT IS STATED TO BE RS.4,80,00,000/-. ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 9. NOW, THE CONSIDERATION AS PER THE ASSESSEE CONTA INED IN ITS AGREEMENT IS RS.4,37,20,550/- AND THE SAME IS ALSO ASSESSABLE AS THE MARKET VALUE BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY. THEREFORE, IN THIS LIGHT THERE IS LITTLE JUSTIFICATION TO INVOKE SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. THE MOOT QUESTIO N TO BE DECIDED IS AS TO WHETHER THE CONSIDERATION IN TERMS OF THE IMPUGNED AGREEMENTS WHICH IS RECEIVED OR ACCRUING AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER TO THE ASSESSEE IS RS.4,37,20,550/- OR RS.4,80,00,000/-. TO OUR MIND, CONSIDERING THE CONTENTS OF THE AGREEMENTS AND ALSO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE AOP, COPIES OF WHICH HAVE BEEN PLACED ON RECORD, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE CONSIDERATION ACCRUING TO THE ASSESSEE AS A RESULT OF SUCH TRANSFER IS RS.4,37,20 ,550/- QUA ITS IMPUGNED CONTRIBUTION TO AOP BY WAY OF LAND. EVEN AT THIS S TAGE, THE REVENUE CONTENDS THAT INVOKING OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT IS JUSTIFIE D, INASMUCH AS STAMP DUTY FOR THE TRANSFER ENVISAGED IN THE AGREEMENT DATED 19.12 .2003 HAS BEEN PAID WITH RESPECT TO THE VALUE OF RS.4,80,00,000/- AS MENTION ED IN THE INDEX-II AND, THEREFORE THE AMOUNT OF RS.4,80,00,000/- IS DEEMED TO BE THE FULL VALUE OF CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. ON THIS ASPECT, WE FIND THAT SECTION 50C OF THE ACT TALKS OF THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSABLE BY ANY STATE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY FOR TH E PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSFER. IN THIS LI GHT, THOUGH STAMP DUTY HAS BEEN PAID WITH RESPECT TO THE VALUE OF RS.4,80,00,0 00/-, SO HOWEVER, IT IS ALSO EVIDENT IN TERMS OF THE INDEX-II THAT THE VALUE ASS ESSED OR ASSESSABLE BY THE AUTHORITY FOR THE PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY CONTINUES T O BE RS.4,37,20,550/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THE REASONS AS TO UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES THE STAMP DUTY WAS PAID WITH RESPECT TO VALUE OF RS.4,8 0,00,000/- AND OSTENSIBLY CONSIDERATION WAS NOT QUANTIFIED IN THE JOINT VENTU RE AGREEMENT DATED 18.12.2013 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES. THERE FORE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF ASCERTAINING THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSES SABLE BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF PAYMENT OF S TAMP DUTY AS REFERRED TO IN SECTION 50C OF THE ACT, IT IS ONLY THE SUM OF RS .4,37,20,550/- WHICH IS ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 RELEVANT. IT IS THIS AMOUNT WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE COMPARED WITH THE ACTUAL CONSIDERATION AND IF AT ALL IT IS FOUND THAT THE FO RMER AMOUNT IS HIGHER, ONLY THEN SECTION 50C OF THE ACT WOULD BE INVOCABLE. OSTENSI BLY, ON THIS COUNT BOTH THE AMOUNTS ARE SAME, NAMELY, RS.4,37,20,550/- I.E. TH E STATED CONSIDERATION IN THE TWO AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE PARTIES AS ALSO THE VALUE ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSES OF STAMP DUTY. 10. THE CONTROVERSY CAN ALSO BE LOOKED AT FROM OTHE R ANGLE. EVEN IF WE WERE TO GO ALONG WITH THE REVENUE TO SAY THAT SINCE THE STAMP DUTY HAS BEEN PAID WITH REFERENCE TO THE VALUE OF RS.4,80,00,000/ - AND THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT OF RS.4,80,00,000/- SHOULD BE TAKEN AS THE VALUE AD OPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSABLE BY ANY AUTHORITY OF A STATE GOVERNMENT F OR THE PURPOSE OF STAMP DUTY CONTAINED IN SECTION 50C OF THE ACT, EVEN THEN SECTION 50C IS NOT APPLICABLE. IN HIS CONNECTION, SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 50C PROVIDES THAT WHERE AN ASSESSEE CLAIMS BEFORE AN ASSESSING OFFICE R THAT THE VALUE ADOPTED OR ASSESSED OR ASSESSABLE BY STAMP VALUATION AUTHOR ITY EXCEEDS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AS ON THE DATE OF TRAN SFER, THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS BEEN MANDATED TO REFER THE VALUATION TO THE VALUATION OFFICER AND THEREAFTER PROCEED ON THAT BASIS. CONSIDERED IN TH IS LIGHT IN THE PRESENT SITUATION, INDEX-II OF THE REGISTERED AGREEMENT REF LECTS TWO VALUES, ONE WHICH IS THE VALUE ASSESSED BY THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY, AND THE VALUE ON WHICH THE S TAMP DUTY HAS BEEN ACTUALLY PAID, WITH THE LATTER BEING HIGHER. IN SU CH A SITUATION, IF THE LATTER VALUE IS TO BE ADOPTED AS THE DEEMED VALUE FOR SECTION 50 C OF THE ACT, IT TRIGGERS THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (2), INASMUCH AS THE SAID VALUE CLEARLY EXCEEDS THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY ADOPTED FOR THE P AYMENT OF STAMP DUTY, INASMUCH AS THE STAMP VALUATION AUTHORITY HIMSELF H AS STATED THE MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPERTY AT RS.4,37,20,550/- WHICH IS LOWER. THEREFORE, IN SUCH A SITUATION, IN OUR VIEW, IT WAS IN THE FITNESS OF TH INGS THAT IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY ITA NO.1319/PN/2009 INVOKING OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSING O FFICER WAS REQUIRED TO COMPARE THE CONSIDERATION STATED IN THE AGREEMENT A T RS.4,37,20,550/- WITH THE VALUE ASSESSED FOR THE PAYMENT OF STAMP DUTY, I .E. AT RS.4,37,20,550/- AS INDICATED IN INDEX-II AND NOT THE AMOUNT OF RS.4,80 ,00,000/-, ON WHICH STAMP DUTY HAS BEEN PAID. CONSIDERED IN THIS LIGHT, WE T HEREFORE FIND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS.42,79,000/- IS NOT JUSTIFIED ON THE STRENGTH OF INVOKING OF SECTION 50C OF THE ACT. WE ACCORDINGLY SET-ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO THE DELETE THE IMP UGNED ADDITION OF RS.42,79,000/-. THUS, THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS ON THI S GROUND. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2015. SD/- SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) (G.S. PANNU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 25 TH FEBRUARY, 2015. SUJEET COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE; 4) THE CIT-III, PUNE; 5) THE DR B BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PUNE