DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Paras Build Call Pvt. Ltd, Gurgaon

ITA 1449/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9040 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 year(s) 4 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-08-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV PUNDIR
• Section: 133A; 133(6); 43; 13; 22

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI F BEN CH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL M EMBER ITA NO. 1449/DEL/2014 [A.Y 2007-08] THE DY. C.I.T. VS. M/S PARAS BUILD CALL PVT LTD. CENTRAL CIRCLE 15 [NOW KNOWN AS PARAS BUILD NEW DELHI TECH PVT LTD, 11 TH FLOOR PARAS TWIN TOWERS, TOWER B SECTOR 54, GURGAON, HARYANA PAN: AACC 1752D [APPELLANT] [RESP ONDENT] ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SALIL AGGARWAL , SR. ADV, SHRI MADHUR AGGARWAL, ADV REVENUE BY : SHRI GAURAV PUNDIR, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 15.07.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.08.2021 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-2, FARIDABAD DATED 26.11.2013 PERTAINING TO A.Y 2007-08 . 2 2. THE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCES OF THE REVENUE READ AS U NDER: 1. THAT THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FAC TS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,25,00,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED ADVANCE. 2. THAT THE ID. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON F ACTS OF THE CASE IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 7,60,17,148/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED CASH RECEIPTS ON SALE OF PROPERTIES. 3. THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE SIDES WERE HEARD AT LENGTH, THE CASE RECORDS CAREFULLY PERUSED AND WITH THE ASSISTA NCE OF THE LD. COUNSEL, WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENC ES BROUGHT ON RECORD IN THE FORM OF PAPER BOOK IN LIGHT OF RULE 1 8(6) OF ITAT RULES. 4. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CALL CENTRE AND REAL EST ATE. FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, RETURN DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.91.28 LAKHS WAS FILED ON 07.11.2007. RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUT INY ASSESSMENT UNDER CASS AND ACCORDINGLY, STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. 3 5. DURING THE COURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIV EN AN ADVANCE OF RS.1.25 CRORES TO SHRI ANIL HOBLE. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF SUCH ADVANCE. VIDE REPLY DATED 24.12 .2009, THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ADVANCE WAS GIVEN TO SHRI ANIL HOBLE FOR A PROJECT AT GOA BUT THE SAME COULD NOT BE WORKED OUT AND FINALLY, THE AMOUNT WAS REFUNDED IN F.Y. 200910. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROV E THAT IT WAS AN ADVANCE GIVEN FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES AND, ACCORDINGL Y, ADDED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 1.25 CRORES TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSE SSEE. 6. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), IT WAS STRONGLY CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED ANY DEDUCTION FROM ITS INC OME, THE QUESTION OF ITS DISALLOWANCE DOES NOT ARISE. 7. THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE TO BE CORRECT AND DELETED THE ADDITION. 8. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, AN ADVANCE IS A DEBIT EN TRY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE SAME GOES WITH BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT CHARGED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. SINCE N OTHING HAS BEEN 4 CHARGED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, WE DO NOT F IND ANY LOGIC IN THE IMPUGNED ADDITION AND THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DE LETED IT, WHICH CALLS FOR NO INTERFERENCE. GROUND 1 IS, ACCORDINGLY, DISM ISSED. 9. FACTS RELATING TO THE SECOND GROUND SHOW THAT A SURVEY OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED AT THE PREMISES OF THE COLLABORATORS OF THE ASSESSEE, NAMELY, SHRI JASPAL SINGH AND SHRI KAMALJIT SINGH. REPORT WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE JCI T, RANGE 6, MOHALI. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, IT WAS NOTED THAT SHRI JASPAL SINGH AND SHRI KAMALJIT SINGH HAD RECEIVED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 2 0.30 CRORES FROM M/S PARAS BUILDTECH [P] LTD. AS PART OF THEIR REVEN UE SHARE AS PER THE COLLABORATION AGREEMENT. 10. IN THE SURVEY PROCEEDINGS, ONE PAPER WAS FOUND AND IMPOUNDED WHICH CONTAINED MONTH-WISE DETAILS OF CASH RECEIVED BY THE TWO BROTHERS FROM PARAS BUILDTECH INDIA [P] LTD. FINANC IAL YEAR WISE BREAK- UP OF THE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE TWO BROTHERS IS AS UNDER: 5 F.Y. SHRI JASPAL SINGH AMOUNT RECEIVED BY CHEQUES SHRI KAMALJIT SINGH AMOUNT RECEIVED BY CHEQUES AMOUNT RECEIVED IN CASH 2006 - 07 1.3 CRORE S 1.7 CRORE S 2 CRORE S 2007 - 08 3.7 CRORE S 3.3 CRORE S 9.75 CRORE S 2008 - 09 4.55 CRORE S 5.75 CRORES TOTAL 9.55 CRORES 10.75 CRORES 11.75 CRORES 11. AS PER THE COLLABORATION AGREEMENT, THE RATIO W AS 52: 48. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IMPLIED THAT RS.12.73 CRORES WOUL D BE TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHE R CARRIED OUT AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENT AS UNDER: LOCAL SITE NO. AREA OF SITE R CHEQUE RATE PER SQ FT TOTAL RATE TOTAL SALE AMOUNT. TOTAL SAL AMOUNT RECEIVED IN CASH & CHEQUE TILL DEC.08 (IN LACS) TOTAL REC BALANCE RECEIVABL E AS ON DEC.08 (IN LACS) SALE AMOUNT AS PER CHEQUE ( B*C) DIFFERENCE IN TOTAL SALE AMOUNT AND CHEQUE RECEIPT I.E CASH RECEIPT (E- H) A B C D E F G H I 4 1551 8850 U 450 17758950 169.72 7.80 13726350 4032600 6 1276 3000 7250 9251000 54 - 23 38.28 3828000 5423000 8 2095 7000 7500 15712500 106.53 50.60 * 14665000 1047500 9 2095 7000 7500 15712500 150.86 6.27 14665000 1047500 10 2095 8400 12000 25140000 37 - 00 214.40 175980 00 7542000 12 2091 - 6400 12820 26806620 261.30 6.69 13382400 13424220 6 15 980 5500 10500 10290000 98.20 4 - 70 5390000 4900000 17 1312 3000' 7250 9512000 55 - 76 39 - 36 3936000 5576000 18 1310 3770 10230 13401300 133 - 96 4938700 8462600 *19 0 0 0 20 1884 5500 7000 13188000 128.17 3 - 71 10362000 2826000 22A&B 936 3060 10200 9547200 92.24 3 - 23 2864160 6683040 *23 0 - 0 0 24 1116 5000 10O50 11215800 '110.18 1 - 9*4 558X1000 5635800 25 2059 4000 10000 20590000 205.90 O.OQ 8236000 12354000 26 1067 6170 10290 10979430 106.16 3 - 59 . 6583390 4396040 28 860 7840 9800 8428000 65.00 19.28 6742400 1685600 30 623 5500 11000 6853000 :: 29.25 38.2J) 3426500 3426500 *33 : 0 0 0 36 894 6000 10500 9387000 54 - 63 39 - 24 5364000 4023000 37 982 8960 10960 10762720 103.20 4.40 8798720 1964000 *38 0 0 0 40 934 7600 10860 10143240 98.89 2.51 7098400 3044840 42 734 5500 10500 7707000 75 - 12 1 - 95 4037000 3670000 F.F 0 0 0 : 6 922 6250 6250 5762500 57 - 63 0.00 5762500 0 7 - 7 977 7000 8280 8089560 77 - 55 3 - 37 6839000 125056C 9 1 IN 5000 6250 11106250 106.62 4 - 44 8885000 222125C 10' 1777 5000 6250 11106250 106.62 4 - 44 8885000 222125C 12 1777 5760 9600 17059200 164.01 6 - 59 10235520 682368C 15 1764 *778 0 9380 16546320 103.77 61.61 13723920 282240C 16 677 5600 8000 5416000 ' 52.26 1.90 3791200 162480C 17 714 5880 8000 5712000 57 - 12 0.00 4198320 151368C 18 1055 6250 6250 6593750 63 - 53 2.41 6593750 C 21 1516 6250 6250 9475000 94 - 75 0.00 9475000 C 22 2599 6360 85OO 22091500 220.92 0.00 16529640 556186C 24 1247 4500 7500 9352500 92.98 0.55 5611500 3741000 ,26&27 2109 8180 8180 17251620 163.83 8.62 17251620 0 28 1036 2500 6800 7044800 32.17 38.28 2590000 4454800 30 1054 5550 8770 9243580 92.44 0.00 5849700 3393880 *31 0 0 0 32 617 5200 9500 5861500 52.53 6.09 3208400 2653100 33 904 5420 9500 8588000 83 - 43 2.45 4899680 3688320 S.F 0 0 0 1 397 7500 7500 2977500 28.28 1.50 2977500 0 2 311 3000 7300 2270300 21 - 37 I - 33 933000 1337300 3 273 4280 8550 2334150 23.20 0.14 1168440 1165710 5 1260 6760 7950 10017000 97 - 38 2.79 8517600 1499400 8 910 5380 7700 7007000 68.17 1.90 4895800 2111200 9 234 6200 8BOB 1872000 17 - 95 0.77 1450800 421200 10 415 3200 7500 3112500 27.85 3-28 1328000 1784500 * \ B 0 0 AIICHOR 37262 1610 3350 124827700 709.92 537 - 99 59991820 64835880 PYPER 60000 1330 2370 142200000 944.80 476.60 79800000 6240O0O0 MOVIE 34090 2100 .3499 118974100 1116.60 . ' . , 74 - 57 71589000 47385100 HOTEL 64080 3190 3500 224280000 2000.00 242.80 20441520 0 19864800 * 0 0 0 TOTAL CASH RECEIPT 345939910 8 12. FROM AN ANALYSIS OF THE ABOVE DOCUMENT, THE ASS ESSING OFFICER FORMED A BELIEF THAT M/S PARAS BUILDTECH PVT LTD HA S BEEN RECEIVING ONLY A PART PAYMENT IN CHEQUE FROM THE BUYERS OF TH E SHOWROOM/ COMMERCIAL SITES AND REMAINING PART OF THE SALE CON SIDERATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED IN CASH. APPLYING THE RATIO OF COLLABORATI ON AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS 58:42, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAME TO THE CONCLU SION THAT M/S PARAS BUILDTECH PVT LTD HAS RECEIVED RS. 20,06,45,148/- I N CASH. SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS RECOGNISING REVENUE ON POCM BASIS AND 38% OF THE WORK HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE COMPLETED, THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ADDED 38% OF THE ALLEGED CASH RECEIPTS OF RS. 20,06,45,148/- AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 7,60,17,156/-. 13. THE ASSESSEE AGITATED THE ADDITION BEFORE THE L D. CIT(A) AND STRONGLY CONTENDED THAT THE ENTIRE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ON PRESUMPTIONS, SURMISES AND CONJECTUR ES, WITHOUT ANY CONCRETE EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ACT UALLY RECEIVED SOME CASH. 14. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND SUBMISSIONS, TH E LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT O RDER AND FOUND THAT THERE IS NO REFERENCE IN TERMS OF ANNEXURE OR PAGE NUMBER ON THIS 9 DOCUMENT. IT SEEMS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS D ERIVED IT FROM SOMEWHERE, AS THIS DOCUMENT, PER SE, IS NOT AVAILAB LE. 15. REFERRING TO THE STATEMENT OF SHRI KAMALJIT SIN GH, THE LD. CIT(A) FOUND THAT SHRI KAMALJI SINGH HAS SPECIFICALLY MENT IONED IN HIS REPLY THAT WHATEVER PAYMENT IS RECEIVED FROM M/S PARAS BU ILDTECH PVT LTD HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND NO PAYME NT EXCEPT WHATEVER IN THE BANK ACCOUNT HAS BEEN RECEIVED. 16. THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAS MADE THE ADDITION BY TAKING CODED DOCUMENT I.E., LO OSE SHEET IMPOUNDED AT PAGE 30 OF ANNEXURE A 1 AS BASIS. THE LD. CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED AS UNDER: 13.7 ONE OF THE PIECES OF EVIDENCE USED BY THE AO WAS THE STATEMENT OF I SHRI KAMALJEET SINGH RECORDED ON 12. 12.2009 U/S 133A OF THE IT ACT. IN THIS REGARD, I AGREE WITH TH E SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE AO RELIED ON AN ANSWER OF S HRI - KA.MALJEET. SINGH AS PER WHICH CASH OF NOT MORE THAN. RS. 1 CRO RE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE APPELLANT. HOWEVER, OTHER QUESTIONS/ ANSWE RS WERE IGNORED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER . ONE SUCH ANSWER OF SHRI JASPAL SINGH WAS THAT WHATEVER WAS RECEIVED FROM PARAS BUI LD TECH WAS DEPOSITED IN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT. ON A SCRUTINY OF B ANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI JASPAL SINGH, THE AO COULD FIND CASH DEPOSIT R S. 27,8.0- 10 ,000/- UNEXPLAINED, FOR WHICH A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE W AS GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT ON 29.12.2009. THE APPELLANT WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE REQUISITE INFORMATION/AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE AFORESAID CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, THE AO TOTALLY DISREGARDED T HE INFORMATION /EVIDENCES PROVIDED BY THE APPELLANT. I N ADDITION TO THE AFORESAID FACTS REGARDING THE EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF STATEMENTS OF 2 BROTHERS USED BY THE AO WHILE MAKING ASSESSMEN T, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PROMINENT JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS AS PER WHICH STATEMENT RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY OPER ATIONS U/S 133A OF THE IT ACT DOES NOT HAVE EVIDENTIARY VALUE .IN THE CASE OF CIT VS S. KHADER KHAN SONS (2008) 300 ITR 157(MAD) IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: 'SECTION 133A DOES NOT EMPOWER ANY ITO TO EXAMINE A NY PERSON ON OATH. IN CONTRADISTINCTION TO THE POWER U NDER SECTION 133A, SECTION 132(4) ENABLES THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER TO EXAMINE A PERSON ON OATH AND ANY STATEMENT MADE BY SUCH PERSON DURING SUCH EXAMINATION CAN ALSO BE USED IN EVIDENCE UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT. ON THE OTHER HAND, WHATEV ER STATEMENT IS RECORDED UNDER SECTION 133A IS NOT GIV EN AN EVIDENTIARY VALUE. THE STATEMENT OBTAINED UNDER SEC TION 133A WOULD NOT AUTOMATICALLY BIND UPON THE ASSESSEE .' THIS JUDGMENT WAS LATER ON AFFIRMED BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT (352 ITR 480) (SC) 2012 13.8 AS REGARDS, SCRUTINY OF BANK ACCOUNT OF SHRI JASPAL SINGH, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT RS. 2,56,08,650/- WAS DEPOSITED 11 IN CASH IN THE S.AID ACCOUNT. OUT OF THIS AMOUNT, T HE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE ORDER SHEET ENTRY DATED 29.12/2009 AC KNOWLEDGED THAT ONLY CASH DEPOSITS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 27,80,00 0/- REMAINED UNEXPLAINED, FOR WHICH A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS GIVE N TO THE APPELLANT. FURTHERMORE, THE SAME WAS EXPLAINED BY T HE APPELLANT BY FILING REQUISITE DOCUMENTS/AFFIDAVITS, AND THE AO D ID-NOT GIVE ANY REASONS FOR REJECTING THE SAME. HENCE, THIS EVIDENC E, COULD NOT HAVE BEEN USED BY THE AO. 17. ON THE ISSUE OF LOOSE SHEETS, OBSERVATIONS OF T HE LD. CIT(A) IS WORTH MENTIONING WHICH IS AS UNDER: 13.9 COMING TO THE LOOSESHEETS IMPOUNDED DURING TH E COURSE OF SURVEY OPERATIONS IN THE PREMISES OF SHRI JASPAL SINGH AND SHRI KAMALJEET SINGH, THE- AO USED LOOSE SHEET NO. 30 OF ANNEXURE A-L FOR MAKING THE ADDITION. AS POIN TED OUT BY THE APPELLANT, DOCUMENTS WITH SUCH FREQUENT AND LAR GE / EXTENSIVE MISTAKES OF FACTS AND FIGURES RELATING TO SOLD / UNSOLD UNITS, THE AREA SOLD, THE RATES AGREED TO BE CHARGED (AS PER BBAS) COULD NOT HAVE BEEN PREPARED BY IT. STATE MENTS WITH SO MANY MISTAKES COULD NOT HAVE SERVED ANY BODY'S P URPOSE. IT COULD NOT HAVE SERVED THE PURPOSE OF THE APPELLANT BECAUSE IT DID NOT GIVE CORRECT FACTUAL PICTURE. IT COULD NOT HAVE SATISFIED THE LAND OWNERS ALSO, IF THEY WERE ALSO ENTITLED FO R CASH ELEMENT OF SALE CONSIDERATION. THE MISTAKES WOULD H AVE APPEARED MORE CONVINCING, HAD THIS BEEN TO THE DETR IMENT OF 12 LAND OWNERS BUT IN THIS CASE, AS PER THE LOOSE SHEE TS, THE MISTAKES WERE TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE APPELLANT. ON THIS ISSUE, I TEND TO AGREE WITH THE APPELLANT THAT THE EVIDENC ES USED BY THE AO TO MAKE ADDITION WERE FACTUALLY INCORRECT/ U NRELIABLE, NOT IMPOUNDED FROM THE APPELLANT'S PREMISES, DISOWN ED BY THE APPELLANT AND THUS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON FOR THE PU RPOSE OF MAKING ANY ADDITION. 18. THE LD. CIT(A) FINALLY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION T HAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 7,60,17,148/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THIS ISSUE IS UNJUSTIFIED AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND HENCE STANDS DELETED. 19. BEFORE US, THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE FI NDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND READ THE RELEVANT OBSERVATION S MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 20. PER CONTRA THE LD. AR REITERATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 21. FACTS ON RECORD SHOW THAT FIELD ENQUIRIES WERE CONDUCTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ISSUING NOTICE U/S 133(6) TO V ARIOUS BUYERS. NONE OF THE BUYERS CONFIRMED THAT THEY HAVE PAID ANYTHIN G TO THE ASSESSEE 13 OVER AND ABOVE THE AMOUNT STATED IN THE BUILDER B UYER AGREEMENT. FIELD ENQUIRY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS CONC LUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT NO CASH WAS EXCHANGED BETWEEN THE BUYER AND THE SEL LER. THE ENTIRE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF ARITHMETICAL CALCULATION FOUND IN THE LOOSE SHEET OF PAPER. 22. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IN SUCH CASES, THE O NUS IS ALWAYS ON THE REVENUE TO BRING DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCES ON REC ORD TO SHOW THAT CASH HAS CHANGED HANDS FROM THE BUYER TO THE SELLER BECAUSE THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF THE SELLER IS COMING FROM PAYMENTS MADE BY THE BUYER AND IF THE BUYER CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT THEY HAV E NOT PAID ANYTHING IN CASH, WHICH ENQUIRY WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER HIMSELF, THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) CANNOT BE FAULTED WITH. WE, THEREFORE, DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. C IT(A). THIS GROUND IS ALSO DISMISSED. 14 23. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IN ITA NO. 1449/DEL/2014 IS DISMISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 03.0 8.2021. SD/- SD/- [MAHAVIR PRASAD] [ N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 03 RD AUGUST, 2021 VL/ COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, NEW DELHI 15 DATE OF DICTATION ATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P S/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WE BSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER