Vijay Jagdish Agrawal, Pune V. DCIT, Pune

ITA 1451/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 145124514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-04-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P L PATHADE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 37(1); 37

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A , PUNE BEFORE: SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1451 /PN/20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 8 - 09 VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, 201, SIDDHIVINAYAK KESAR, 431, SOMWAR PETH, PUNE VS. DCIT, CIR. 2, PUNE (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AARPA7034R APPELLANT BY: SMT. DEEPA KHARE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI P.L. PATHADE DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 - 0 4 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 - 0 4 - 201 4 ORDER P ER R.S. PADVEKAR , JM : - IN THIS APPEAL , THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENG ED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) - II , PUNE DATED 29 - 03 - 2012 F OR THE A.Y. 200 8 - 09. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUND S IN THE APPEAL: 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED I N LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.9,00,993/ - ON THE GROUND THAT NO BUSINESS WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE YEAR. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT NO BUSINESS WAS SET UP DURING THE RELEVANT YEAR. 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED PART OF THE EXPENSES AS A DEDUCTION AGAINST INCOME FROM SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS AFTER GIVING A FINDING THAT THE SAME IS RELATABLE TO THE INCOME FROM SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS. 2 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE 2. THE FACTS WHICH ARE REVEALED FROM THE RECORD AS UNDER. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL HAVING INCOME FROM THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON S HARES TRANSACTIONS AND SALE OF LAND AND INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. IT IS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING PROPRIETARY BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE OF M/S. V.V. REALTORS AND THE SAID PROPRIETARY CONCERN IS IN THE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2008 - 09 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.4 6,44,920/ - AND ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT. SO FAR AS THE ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCE OF THE BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.9,00,993/ - WHICH WAS CLAIMED AND SET OFF BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF M/S. V.V. REALTORS , THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE LOSS OF RS.9,00,993/ - BY DEBITING VARIOUS EXPENSES IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT WITHOUT HAVING CARRIED OUT ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE A.Y. 2008 - 09 AND THE SAME HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSEE ALSO. THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS FROM THE LAND DEALING. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, CONCLUDED THAT THERE IS NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HE DE CLINED TO ACCEPT THE LOSS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH WAS SET OFF AGAINST THE CAPITAL GAINS. 3. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). IT WAS PLEADED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS INCURRED VARIOUS EXPENSES ON THE SET UP OF OFFICE AT 448, MANGALWAR PETH, PUNE IN CONNECTION WITH HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN. IT WAS FURTHER PLEADED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNER IN MANY PARTNERSHIP FIRMS WHICH ARE ENGAGED IN CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOP MENT BUSINESS ES . T HE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMED THAT HE IS ALSO ENGAGED IN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY IN THE CASE OF WESTERN INDIA VEGETABLE PRODUCTS 26 ITR 151 AN D DECISION OF THE ITAT, PUNE IN 3 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE THE CASE OF STYLER INDIA PVT . LTD. VS. JT. CIT 113 ITD 55 (TM). THE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT IMPRESSED WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND HE CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DECLINING TO GIVE BENEFIT OF SET OFF O F THE LOSS OF M/S. V.V. REALTORS. THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) ARE AS UNDER: 5.2. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE APPELLANT AND PERUSED MATERIAL ON RECORD. ON PERUSAL OF THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME IT IS SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN EARN INGS AS 'NIL' INCOME FROM BUSINESS, RS. 47,57,347/ - AS INCOME FROM SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS AFTER SETTING OFF LOSS OF BUSINESS OF RS. 9,00,993/ - AND RS. 2,571/ - AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE EARNINGS OF SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN HAS BEEN ON ACCOUNT OF PU RCHASE AND SALE OF LAND AND SHARES DURING THE YEAR. ON PERUSAL OF THE P & L A/C IT IS FOUND THAT THE EXPENSES DEBITED INCLUDES EXPENSES OF RS. 2,97,200/ - ON ACCOUNT OF BROKERAGE AND COMMISSION, CORPORATION CHARGES OF RS. 2000/ - , DEPARTMENT EXPENSES OF RS. 3550/ - , LAND SURVEY CHARGES OF RS. 2,500/ - , LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL CHARGES OF RS. 37,500/ - . THESE EXPENSES PRIMA FACIE RELATE TO THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE APPELLANT IN LAND FOR WHICH THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS AMOUNTING TO RS. 56,58,340/ - HAS BEEN EAR NED BEFORE SETTING OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS. 9,00,993/ - . THE FINDING OF THE A.O. THAT NO BUSINESS ACTIVITY AS SUCH HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS, THEREFORE, FOUND TO BE CORRECT. THE NATURE OF PART OF THE EXPENS ES CLAIMED IN THE P & L A/C CLEARLY INDICATE TO BE RELATED TO THE EARNING OF CAPITAL GAINS ON PURCHASE AND SALE OF LAND WHICH HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT IN INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE OR PROOF TO IND ICATE THAT THE SAID EXPENSES CLAIMED IN THE P & L A/C HAD BEEN INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ANY BUSINESS CARRIED OUT. THERE ARE TWO BROAD REQUIREMENTS WHICH MUST BE SATISFIED BEFORE ANY DEDUCTION CAN BE ALLOWED U/S 37. THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE: 1) THE EXPE NDITURE MUST BE EXPENDED OR LAID OUT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE .OF BUSINESS; AND 2) THE EXPENDITURE MUST NOT BE OF A PERSONAL OR CAPITAL NATURE. 4 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE THE WORD 'BUSINESS' IS CAPABLE OF BOTH NARROW AS WELL AS WIDE INTERPRETATION. THE COURTS HOWEVER, HAVE ALWAYS BEEN INCLINED TO CONSTRUE THIS WORD NOT IN ITS NARROW SENSE. THE WORD 'BUSINESS' USED IN SECTION 37(1) IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE EXPRESSION 'FOR THE PURPOSE OF IS A WORD OF WIDE CONNOTATION. THE WORD 'BUSINESS; CONNOTES SOME REAL, SUBSTANTIAL AND SYSTEMATIC OR ORGANIZED COURSE OF ACTIVITY OR CONDUCT WITH A SET PURPOSE. IT WAS SO HELD IN NARAIN SWADESHI WEAVING MILLS (1954) 26 ITR 765 (SC). IN THE CONTEXT OF A TAXING STATUTE, THE WORD BUSINESS WOULD SIGNIFY AN ORGANIZED AND CONTINUO US COURSE OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY, WHICH IS CARRIED ON WITH THE END IN VIEW OF MAKING OR EARNING PROFITS. THUS IN ORDER TO THE DEDUCTIBLE U/S 37(1) THE EXPENDITURE MUST BE INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS WHICH WAS IN EXISTENCE IN THE ACCOUNTING YEAR AN D THE PROFITS OF WHICH ARE UNDER ASSESSMENT. IF DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD THERE WAS, IN FACT, NO BUSINESS EITHER BECAUSE IT WAS DISCONTINUED OR FOR SOME OTHER REASON IT HAD CEASED TO EXIST, THE QUESTION OF COMPUTATION OF ITS INCOME AFTER DEDUCTING THE EXP ENSES CANNOT ARISE. THE APPELLANT HAS CONTENDED THAT THE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN INCURRED ON SET UP OF OFFICE FOR THE PROPRIETARY CONCERN AND THAT THE APPELLANT IS ALSO ENGAGED IN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IN INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY. IT HAS THUS BEEN STATED THAT THE EX PENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED TOWARDS ESTABLISHMENT AND ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES FOR SETTING UP THE OFFICE AND ONCE THE BUSINESS IS SET UP OF CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF LAND, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR SUCH BUSINESS HAS TO BE ALLOWED. 5.3 . IN THE CASE OF WESTERN INDIA VEGETABLE PRODUCT (1954) 26 ITR 151 (BOM), THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HELD THAT AN ASSESSEE WHO WAS INCORPORATED AS A COMPANY AND IN THE PROCESS OF PURCHASING AND RUNNING AN OIL MILL CAN BE SAID TO HAVE SET UP THE INCOME THE MOMEN T THE PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIALS WERE MADE BY IT; AND ONLY THEN THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE AFTER SETTING UP OF BUSINESS AND PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF BUSINESS SHALL BE ALLOWED AS PERMISSIBLE DEDUCTION. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE APPELLANT HAS NOT DEM ONSTRATED OR BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT ANY RAW MATERIAL OR PURCHASES WERE MADE FOR THE BUSINESS CONTEMPLATED AND, THEREFORE, ON FACTS THE CASE IS DISTINGUISHABLE AND NOT APPLICABLE. 5 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE 5.3.1. IN THE OTHER CASE RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLA NT OF PUNE ITAT OF STYLER INDIA PVT. LTD. VS JCIT, 113 ITD 485 (TM) PUNE, IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY INCORPORATED FOR RENDERING ADVISORY AND CONSULTATIVE SERVICES IN THE FIELD OF AUTOMOBILES HAVING A PLACE OF BUSINESS, QUALIFIED PEOPLE TO RENDER ADVICE AND HAVING CONTACTED VARIOUS CLIENTS WHO ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSESSEE IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS AND PAID FEES FOR CONSULTATION, IT COULD BE SAID THAT ASSESSEE HAD SET UP ITS BUSINESS IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND IT WAS IN THIS CONTEXT THAT EXPENDITURE ON TAKING PART IN AUTO FAIR AIMED AT PROPAGATING ASSESSEE'S BUSINESS WAS HELD TO BE ALLOWABLE, HOWEVER, EXPENDITURE ON BUILDING, REPAIR AND RENOVATION WHICH WAS OF CAPITAL NATURE, WAS NOT ALLOWABLE. IN THE PRESENT CASE NOTHING HAS BEEN BRO UGHT ON RECORD BY THE APPELLANT WHICH COULD JUSTIFY THE RELIANCE MADE ON THE AFORESAID JUDICIAL CITATION. 5.4. THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE NECESSARY FACT IN CONNECTION WITH A CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION OF AN AMOUNT CONTENDED TO BE AN EXPENDITURE FALLING UNDER THE SECTION 37 OF THE ACT IS ON THE ASSESSEE. IT IS A WELL SETTLED PRINCIPLE THAT IF ANY DEDUCTION IS CLAIMED, IT IS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT THE DEDUCTION IS LEGALLY ALLOWABLE TO HIM AND THE APPELLANT IN THE PRESENT CASE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO JUSTIFY THE ALLOWABILITY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REGULAR AND SYSTEMATIC BUSINESS ACTIVITY. ON PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE BALANCE SHEET NO SUCH FACT AS CONTENDED BY THE APPELLANT IS REVEALED. ON A MERE FACT THAT THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE CONTAIN A DEBIT WILL NOT MAKE THE EXPENSES DEDUCTIBLE. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO NOT BROUGHT ANY PROOF THAT THE SUM SO EXPENDED HAS BEEN WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY LAID OUT FOR THE BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT. 5.5. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE APPELL ANT TO BRING ON RECORD PROOF TO PROVE THAT THE SUM SO EXPENDED WAS WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY UTILIZED FOR THE BUSINESS, THE DECISION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN MAKING THE ADDITION OF RS. 9,00,993/ - ON THIS ACCOUNT WAS ON A SOUND BASIS AND LIABLE TO BE UPHELD AND GROUND NO. 3 RAISED BY THE APPELLANT IS, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED THE SMALL COMPILATION HAVING 14 PAGES WHICH IS ALSO CONSIDERED. THE LD. COUNSEL REITERATED THE ARGUMENT MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). WE HAVE PERUSED THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT COPY OF WHICH PLACED AT PAGE NO. 10 WHICH IS IN RESPECT OF M/S. V.V. REALTORS FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 - 03 - 2008. THE A SSESSEE HAS BOOKED DIFFERENT EXPENDITURE AND DECLARED THE LOSS OF RS.9,00,993/ - . THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. COUNSEL IS THAT THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE IS IN RESPECT OF SALE OF PLOTS OF LAND AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ONLY CHANGED THE HEA D OF TAXABILITY OF THE BUSINESS ACTIVITY BUT OTHERWISE THE ASSESSEE HAS DONE THE BUSINESS. WE ARE UNABLE TO ACCEPT THE PLEA OF THE LD. COUNSEL. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 14 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT THE INCOME IS TO BE COMPUTED UNDER THE DIFFERENT HEADS AFTER ALLOWING THE RELEVANT EXPENDITURE . T HOUGH IT IS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN THE TRANSACTIONS OF THE LAND AS AN INVESTMENT AND DECLARED THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS. 5. SO FAR AS THE CLAIM OF THE BUSINESS IN THE REAL ESTATE IS CONCERNED THREE IS NOT EVEN A SINGLE TRANSACTION OF SALE OR PURCHASE OF LAND OR REAL ESTATE AND EVEN THERE IS NO OPENING OR CLOSING STOCK - IN - TRADE. WE, THEREFORE, CONCUR WITH THE FINDING OF TH E LD. CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED THAT THE EXPENSES DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF THE M/S. V.V. REALTORS ARE EXPENDED ONLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THE DECISIO N IN THE CASE OF WESTERN INDIA VEGETABLE PRODUCT (SUPRA) AND STYLER INDIA PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) HOW THE SAID DECISIONS ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. NOTHING HA S BEEN PLACED BEFORE US TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CARRIED OUT ANY REGUL AR SYSTEMATIC BUSINESS ACTIVITY. WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NOS. 1 & 2 ARE DISMISSED. 7 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE 6. NOW WE CONSIDER THE ALTERNATE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS GROUND NO. 3 THAT IS BAS ED ON THE CER TAIN OBSERVATIONS OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN PARA NO. 5.2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THE EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF BROKERAGE AND COMMISSION OF RS. 2,97,200/ - , CORPORATION CHARGES OF RS.2,000/ - , DEPARTMENTAL EXPENSES OF RS.3,550/ - , LAND SURVEY CHARGES OF R S.2,500/ - AND RS.37,500/ - TOWARDS LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL CHARGES ARE EXPENSES PRIMA FACIE RELATE TO THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN LAND FOR WHICH THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS OF RS.56,58,340/ - HAS BEEN DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL AR GUES THAT ONCE IT IS HELD THAT PART OF THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE PERTAINS TO CAPITAL GAINS THEN THE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE GIVEN THE DIRECTIONS BY ACCEPTING THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID EXPENDITURE SHOULD BE ALLOWED WHILE COMPUTING THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS FROM THE LAND DEALINGS DECLAR ED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS SOME FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. COUNSEL . E VEN IF THE BUSINESS LOSS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DECLINED TO BE SET OFF BUT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS EXAMI NED THE DIFFERENT EXPENSES DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND HAS HELD THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES PRIMA FACIE RELATE TO THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN LAND S ON WHICH THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN IS DECLARED. 7. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HA S CLAIMED THE EXPENDITURE IN DIFFERENT HEAD AND THE SAID ACT OF THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT DE PRIVE HIM FOR CLAIMING THE ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE IN COMPUTING THE INCOME UNDER ANY OF OTHER HEAD. WE, ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF OBSER VATIONS OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO ALLOW THE FOLLOWING EXPENDITURE AFTER VERIFICATION (I) BROKERAGE AND COMMISSION OF RS.2,97,200/ - , (II) CORPORATION CHARGES OF RS.2,000/ - , (III) DEPARTMENTAL EXPENSES OF RS.3,550/ - , (IV) LAND SURVEY CHARGES OF RS.2,500/ - AND ( V) LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL CHARGES OF RS.37,500/ - . NEEDLESS TO SAY THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD AS PER THE PRINCIPLES OF 8 ITA NO. 1451/PN/2012, VIJAY JAGDISHPRASAD AGARWAL, PUNE NATURAL JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO. 3 IS ALLOWED FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE A SSESSEES APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 - 0 4 - 201 4 SD/ - SD/ - ( R.K. PANDA ) ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RK /PS PUNE , DATED : 25 TH APRIL, 2014 COPY TO 1 ASSESSEE 2 DEPARTMENT 3 THE CIT(A) - II , PUNE 4 THE CIT - II , PUNE 5 THE DR, ITAT, A BENCH, PUNE . 6 GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUN E