Kyungshin Industrial Motherson Ltd, New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 1396/DEL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 135 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6943 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAHUL K MITRA
• Keywords: Business income; Depreciation; Transfer pricing; International transaction; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(2); 32

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D DELHI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN AND SHRI K.G. BANSAL I.T.A NO. 1396(DEL)/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL MOTHERSON DEPUT Y COMMISSIONER OF INCOME LIMITED, F-7, BLOCK B-1, VS. T AX, CIRCLE 5(1), NEW DELHI. MOHAN COOPERATIVE INDL. ESTATE, MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI. ITA NO. 1464(DEL)/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME KYUNG SHIN INDUSTRIAL MOTHERSON TAX, CIRCLE 5(1), NEW DELHI. VS. LIMITED, F-7, BLOCK B-1, MOHAN COOPERATIVE INDL. ESTATE, MATHURA ROAD, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAHUL K. MITRA, C.A . DEPARTMENT BY : SMT. KAVITA BHATNAGAR, CIT (DR) ORDER PER K.G. BANSAL : AM THESE CROSS APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVE NUE EMANATE FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS)-XX, NEW DELHI, PASSED ON 27.1.2009 IN APPEAL NO. 151/2007-08, AND THEY PERTAIN TO ASSESSMENT YE AR 2003-04. ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 2 ITA NO. 1396(DEL)/2009 APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN UP 15 GROUNDS IN THE APPEAL. HOWEVER, BEFORE US GROUND NOS. 3, 14, 15 AND 15.1 HAVE BEE N PRESSED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. THESE GROUNDS READ AS UNDER:- 3. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) GROSS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING AN ADJUSTMENT OF RS. 4,62,43,567/- OUT OF THE TOTAL ADJUSTMENT OF RS. 5,77,33,054/- MADE BY THE LD. TPO IN RESPECT OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS ENTERED INTO BY THE APPELLANT WITH ITS OVERSEAS ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE S (AES). 14. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE & IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT DISPOSING THE GROUND NO. 3 AND 3.1 OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE APPELLANT IN APPEAL MEMO FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH RE LATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF A SUM OF RS. 17,70,000 ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF ROYALTY TO KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL CORPOR ATION, KOREA. 15. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO. 13 AND IN ALTERNATE, THE LD. AO ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DISALLOW ING A SUM OF RS. 17,70,000 OUT OF RS. 70,80,000 CLAIMED AS REVE NUE EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF ROYALTY TO K YUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, KOREA, BY TREATING THE SA ME AS CAPITAL IN NATURE. 15.1 THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, THE LD. AO ERRED IN LAW IN NOT ALLOWING DEPRECIATION UNDER SECTION 32 OF T HE ACT ON THE SUM OF RS. 17,70,000 DISALLOWED AS BEING CAPITAL IN NATURE. 2.1 THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE-COMPANY WAS INCORPORATED IN THE YEAR 1997 AS A JOINT VENTUR E COMPANY BETWEEN ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 3 MOTHERSON SUMI SYSTEMS LTD. AND KYUNGSHIN INDUSTR IAL CO. LTD. AS EQUAL PARTNERS. IT IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFA CTURING AND ASSEMBLING INTEGRATED WIRING HARNESS FOR HYUNDAI MOTORS LTD . WITH THE TECHNOLOGICAL ASSISTANCE FROM KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. TH E RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 27.11.2003 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 1,75,23,150/-. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED ON 11.3.2004. THEREAFTER, NOTICE U/S 143(2) WAS ISSUED ON 1.10.2004. IN THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD UNDERTAKEN INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIO NS WITH THE ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER:- S.NO. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTION METHOD USED FOR JUSTIFYING ALP VALUE (IN RS.) 1. PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIAL TNMM 22,66,11,267 2. PURCHASE OF SPARES TNMM 105,95,789 3. SALE OF FINISHED GOODS TNMM 6,30,387 4. PURCHASE OF FIXED ASSETS TNMM 93,69,458 5. ROYALTY PAYMENT 70,80,000 2.2 IN ORDER TO COMPUTE ARMS LENGTH PRICE (ALP) OF THE AFORESAID TRANSACTIONS, THE MATTER WAS REFERRED TO THE TR ANSFER PRICING OFFICER, WHO DETERMINED THE ALP IN HIS ORDER DATED 3.2.2006. BASED UPON THIS ORDER, AN ADDITION OF RS. 5,77,33,054/- WAS MADE TO THE TOT AL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO ALSO DISALLOWED 25% OF ROYALTY EXPENDITUR E HOLDING IT TO BE ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 4 CAPITAL IN NATURE, LEADING TO AN ADDITION OF RS. 17,70,000/-. THUS, THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COMPUTED AT RS. 7,70,26 ,200/-. 2.3 THE MATTER WAS AGITATED IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS)-XX, NEW DELHI, WHO DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL ON 27.1.20 09. THE SALIENT FEATURES OF HIS FINDING IN REGARD TO TRANSFER PR ICING ADJUSTMENT, IN SO FAR AS THOSE WERE ARGUED BEFORE US, ARE AS UNDER:- (I) THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBMITTED THAT PROF IT LEVEL INDICATOR (PLI) SHOULD BE TAKEN AS THE RATIO OF OPERATING PROFI T TO THE CAPITAL EMPLOYED. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) DID NOT ACCEPT THIS FINDING AND HELD THAT THE PLI WOULD BE THE RATIO OF OPERATING PROFIT TO SALE S. IN THIS CONNECTION, THE LD. CIT(A) REJECTED THE ARGUMENT THAT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02, THE TPO HAD ACCEPTED THE PLI AS SUGGESTED BY THE ASSESS EE BY MENTIONING THAT THE PRINCIPLE OF RES-JUDICATA DOES NOT APPLY TO TRA NSFER PRICING REGULATION; (II) THE DATA OF THE CURRENT YEAR ONLY I S RELEVANT FOR COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS AND THE DATA OF EARLIER YEARS MAY BE USED ONLY TO VALIDATE THE DATA OF THE CURRENT YEAR BUT NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRANSFER-PRICE DETERMINATION. ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 5 2.4 THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FINALLY SELECTED 9 COMPA RABLE CASES AND DETERMINED THE NET PROFIT AT 8.98% OF THE TOTAL SALES AGAINST 2.22% DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE, LEADING TO CONFIRMATI ON OF THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,62,43,567/- TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE. HIS FINDINGS ARE CONTAINED IN PARAGRAPH NOS. 14.1 AND 14.2, WHICH ARE REPRODUCED BELOW FOR READY REFERENCE:- 14.1 DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDING S, THE APPELLANT WAS ASKED TO SUBMIT THE CALCULATION OF OP/SALES OF THE COMPARABLE COMPANIES, WHICH IS AS UNDER:- OP/SALES OF COMPARABLES FOR F.Y. 2002-03 S N O COMPANY NAME OPERA -ING PROFIT SALES OP/SALES 1 AXLES INDIA LTD. 6.65 88.73 7.49% 2 DEEPAK INDUSTRIES LTD. 5.06 50.67 9.99% 3 INDIA FOREGE & DROP STAMPINGS LTD. 0.89 59.6 1.79% 4 JKM DAE RIM AUTOMOTIVE LTD. 1.96 41.89 4.68% 5 JAMNA AUTO INDS. LTD. -0.99 56.6 -1.75% 6 KALYANI FORGE LTD. 8.5 71.64 11.86% 7 MANDO INDIA LTD. 4.86 50.5 9.62% 8 PHOENIX LAMPS LTD. 18.18 130.6 13.92% 9 SHANTHI GEARS LTD. 13.1 56.54 23.17% AVERAGE 8.98% COMPANY 2.22% ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 6 14.2 THE APPELLANT IS ARMS LENGTH CIRCUMSTAN CES IS EXPECTED TO EARN NET PROFIT OF 8.98% ON THE TOTAL SALES OF RS. 68,68,58,014/- WHICH COMES TO RS. 6,16,79,849/-. WHEREAS THE APPELLANTS NET MARGIN AS SALES IS RS. 1,54,36,282/-. ACCORDINGLY, AN ADJUSTMENT OF RS. 4,62,43,567/- IS UPHELD AS AGAINST THE ADJUSTMENT OF RS. 5,77,3 3,054/-, MADE BY THE AO. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) APPLIED THE INDICATOR, BEING THE RATIO OF OPERATING PROFIT TO SALES AGAINST THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT S HOULD BE THE RATIO OF OPERATING PROFIT TO TOTAL COST. THE PLI AS SUG GESTED BY THE ASSESSEE HAD, IN FACT, BEEN APPLIED IN THE PROCEEDINGS OF ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2001-02. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE ADOPTED THE SAME INDICATOR IN THIS YEAR. FURTHER, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS OCIATED ENTERPRISE, WHICH SUPPLIED RAW-MATERIAL ETC. TO THE ASSESSEE, H AD DONE SO AT THE OPERATING PROFIT OF 2.1%. IN THIS CONNECTION, REFERENCE WAS MADE TO PAGE NO. 159 OF THE PAPER BOOK CONTAINING A CERT IFICATE TO THE EFFECT THAT KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD., KOREA, AND MOTHER SON SUMI SYSTEMS LTD., INDIA, HAD ESTABLISHED JOINT VENTURE CO MPANY NAMED KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL MOTHERSON LTD. IN 1997 WITH EQUAL CAPI TAL. THE INTERNAL AUDITOR CERTIFIES THAT THE SUPPLIER HAS BEEN PROVIDING THE COMPONENTS AND WIRE FOR WIRING HARNESS ACCORDING TO THE REQUEST OF TH E ASSESSEE IN FINANCIAL YEAR ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 7 2002-03 AND OPERATING PROFIT ON THESE COMPONENTS IS 2.1% (+ - .5%). THIS CERTIFICATE IS DATED 16.1.2006. THE CASE OF TH E LD. COUNSEL ON THE BASIS OF THIS CERTIFICATE IS THAT PROFIT MARGIN OF THE S UPPLIER IS AS LOW AS 2.1% AND, THEREFORE, ITS TRANSACTIONS WITH THE ASSES SEE SHOULD BE TAKEN AT ARMS LENGTH. 3.1 IN ORDER TO SUPPORT HIS CASE RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED ON THE DECISION OF DELHI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE C ASE OF IL JIN ELECTRONICS INDIA (P) LTD. VS. ACIT (2010) 36 SOT 227. THE ALTERNATIVE GROUND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE WAS THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL RAW-MATERIAL CONSUMED FOR MANUFACTURING PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD, ONLY 45.51% MATERIAL WAS IMPORTED THROUGH THE ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE AN D, THEREFORE, ADJUSTMENT CAN BE MADE ONLY IN RESPECT OF 45.51% OF THE T OTAL TURNOVER, AND NOT TO THE TOTAL TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS CONTENTI ON WAS ACCEPTED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE LIMITED CASE OF THE LD. COUNSEL ON THE BASIS OF THIS DECISION IS THAT OUT OF TOTAL RAW-MATERIAL CONSUMED, THE C OMPONENTS IMPORTED FROM ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE AMOUNT TO ABOUT 40% IN VAL UE TERMS AND, THUS, THE ADJUSTMENT CAN BE MADE ONLY IN RESPECT OF 40% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER. THEREFORE, IT HAS BEEN AGITATED THAT THE LD. CIT( A) ERRED IN MAKING THE ADJUSTMENT IN RESPECT OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER. ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 8 3.2 RELIANCE HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON THE DECISIO N IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. QUARK SYSTEMS (P) LTD., MOHALI 2010-TIOL-31- ITAT-CHD-SB. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE WAS A FULLY OWNED SUBS IDIARY OF A SWITZERLAND BASED COMPANY AND IT WAS A CAPTIVE UNIT OF THE PARENT COMPANY. IT ENTERED INTO CONTRACT WITH THE PARENT COMPANY TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL AND ADVISORY SERVICES AND ALSO SUPPLY OF SPECIALIZ ED SOFTWARE USED IN PAGE LAYOUT. IT CATERED TO THE TECHNICAL REQUIREMEN T OF THE PARENT COMPANYS CLIENTS IN INDIA. IN LIEU OF THE SERVICES, IT EAR NED PROFIT ON COST PLUS BASIS AND THE MARK UP WAS 13.5%. THE TPO REJECTED SOM E COMPARABLES ON THE GROUND THAT SUCH COMPANIES WERE MAKING LOSSES BUT INCLUDED ONE COMPANY WHICH SHOWED MUCH HIGHER PROFIT THAN THE PROFIT DECLARED BY OTHER COMPARABLE COMPANIES THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT FAR ANALYSIS SHOULD BE MADE WHILE DEALING WITH THE COMPARABLES. AT THE SAME TIME, IT ALSO REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE AO FOR FRESH ASSESSM ENT AFTER CONSIDERING WHETHER THE COMPANY WITH ABNORMAL PROFIT CONSTIT UTED A VALID COMPARABLE CASE. WE FIND THAT THE COMPARABLES FIN ALLY SELECTED BY THE LD. CIT(A) CONSTITUTE THE CASE OF JAMNA AUTO INDUSTR IES LTD. AND SHANTHI GEARS LTD., WHICH HAVE THE RATIO OF MINUS 1.7 5% AND PLUS 23.17% AGAINST THE AVERAGE RATIO OF 8.98%. ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 9 3.3 HE ALSO RELIED ON THE DECISION OF MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF UCB INDIA (P) LTD. VS. ASSISTANT CI T (2009) 317 ITR (AT) 292, IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT (I) THE ASSESS EE WAS IN ERROR IN COMPARING OPERATIONAL MARGIN AT ENTITY LEVEL AND TERMING IT AS TRANSACTION NET MARGIN METHOD, AND (II) THE CUP METHOD ADOPTED B Y THE REVENUE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD AS THE SAME SUFFERS FROM MANY DEFICIENCIES AND INFIRMITIES, LACK OF INFO RMATION AND THE DATA OF COMPARABLE CASES. IN VIEW THEREOF, THE MATTER W AS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH THE DIRECTION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHA LL BE ALLOWED TO FILE A FRESH TRANSFER PRICING STUDY AND ANY OTHER DOCUM ENT OR EVIDENCE, AND THE ASSESSEE WILL BE FREE TO ADOPT ANY METHOD AS P RESCRIBED BY LAW. 3.4 HE ALSO RELIED ON THE DECISION OF KOLKATA BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANTS (P) LTD. VS . DY. CIT (2008) 115 TTJ 577, IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THAT THE ALP SHOULD BE DETERMINED ON A TRANSACTION BY TRANSACTION BASIS AND NOT ON AN AGGREGATE BASIS AS DONE BY THE TPO, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAD FUR NISHED THE DETAILS OF COMPARABLES ON TRANSACTION BY TRANSACTION BASIS. ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 10 3.5 IN REPLY, THE LD. CIT, DR RELIED ON THE O RDER OF THE LD. CIT(APPEALS). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE US. THE MAIN CASE OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT THE PROFIT DECLARED BY THE SUPPLIER, AN ASSOCIATED ENT ERPRISE, IS ONLY 2.1% IN THIS YEAR AND, THEREFORE, ITS SALES TO THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE HELD TO BE AT ARMS LENGTH BECAUSE OF LOW PROFITABILITY. THE ALTE RNATIVE CASE OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS THAT RAW-MATERIAL SUPPLIED BY THE ASSOCI ATED ENTERPRISE CONSTITUTES ONLY 40% OF THE TOTAL RAW-MATERIAL CO NSUMED IN THIS YEAR AND, THEREFORE, ANY VARIATION ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSFER P RICING CAN BE MADE IN RESPECT OF 40% OF THE TURNOVER. BOTH THESE MATT ERS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. OF COURSE, THE LD. COUNSEL HAS NOT FILED DETAILED ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSOCIATED ENTE RPRISE IN ORDER TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER ITS TRANSACTIONS ARE AT ARMS LENGTH O R ITS TRANSACTIONS OR PART THEREOF CONTAIN CONTROLLED TRANSACTIONS. THE MATT ER REGARDING APPLICABILITY OF ADJUSTMENT TO 40% OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER IS B ASED UPON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF IL JIN ELECTR ONICS INDIA (P) LTD. (SUPRA), WHICH IS A PRECEDENT OF BINDING NATURE. HOWEVER, SINCE BOTH THE MATTERS REQUIRE FURTHER VERIFICATION OF FACTS ON THE PAR T OF THE AO, WE ACCEPT THE ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 11 SUGGESTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE MATTER MAY BE REMANDED TO THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN THE MATTER KEEPING IN VIEW BOTH THESE POINTS. 5. GROUND NOS. 14, 15 AND 15.1 ARISE ON ACCOUNT OF NON-ADJUDICATION OF GROUND NOS. 3 AND 3.1 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF THE FINDING OF THE AO THAT OUT OF ROY ALTY PAYMENT OF RS. 70,80,000/-, A SUM OF RS. 17,70,000/- REPRESENTS EXPENDITURE OF CAPITAL NATURE. IT IS ALSO MENTIONED THAT AFTER CAPITA LIZING THE EXPENDITURE AS ABOVE, THE AO DID NOT GRANT DEDUCTION OF DEPRECIA TION. SINCE WE ARE RESTORING THE MAIN ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO, T HESE MATTERS ARE ALSO RESTORED TO HIS FILE FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION BY T AKING INTO ACCOUNT VARIOUS CASE LAWS IN THE MATTER. ITA NO. 1464(DEL)/2009-APPEAL OF THE REVENUE 6. THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN TWO SUBSTANTIVE GROUN DS IN ITS APPEAL TO THE EFFECT THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN ADOPTING THE PLI AS THE RATIO OF OPERATING PROFIT TO SALES AS AGAINST THE RATIO OF OPERATING PROFIT TO TOTAL COST ADOPTED BY THE AO. IT IS ALSO MENTIONED T HAT HE ERRED IN REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF ADJUSTMENTS MADE BY THE AO TO RS. 4,62,43,567/-. AS THE MATTER REGARDING TRANSFER-PRICE ADJUSTMENT IS R EMANDED TO THE AO IN ITA NO. 1396(DEL)/2009 (SUPRA), THIS MATTER IS ALSO R EMANDED TO THE AO FOR ITA NOS. 1396 & 1464(DEL)/09 12 FRESH ADJUDICATION WITH THE FURTHER DIRECTION THAT BOTH THE PARTIES WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO AGITATE THE WHOLE MATTER AFRESH AND WILL BE ENTITLED TO BRING ON RECORD ANY FRESH EVIDENCE, AS THOUGHT FIT. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 OCTOBER, 2010. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (K.G.BANSAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE OF ORDER: 21ST OCTOBER, 2010. SP SATIA COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: KYUNGSHIN INDUSTRIAL MOTHERSON LTD., NEW DELHI. DCIT, CIRCLE 5(1), NEW DELHI. CIT(A) CIT THE DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR.