ACIT, Aurangabad V. Laxmi Metal Pressing Works P.Ltd, Aurangabad

ITA 1496/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 84902 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P S NAIK
• Keywords: Business income; Depreciation
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE BEFORE: SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1 497 / P N/ 20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 200 7 - 08 & 20 08 - 09 THE ASSTT. COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1 , AURANGABAD VS. LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., E - 77, MIDC WALUJ, AURANGABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AAACL5640G APPELLANT BY: SHRI P.S. NAIK RESPONDENT BY: SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK DATE OF HEAR ING : 11 - 0 8 - 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26 - 0 8 - 2014 ORDER PER R.S . PADVEKAR , JM : - THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE REVENUE CHALLENGING THE RESPECTIVE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) , AURANGABAD DATED 0 3 - 0 5 - 2013 FOR THE A.YS. 200 7 - 08 & 20 08 - 09 . THE FACTS AS WELL AS ISSUES ARE COMMON AND IDENTICAL HENCE, BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE APPEALS ARE VERBATIM WHICH ARE AS UNDER: 1. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN INTERPRETING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 80IA(5) IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION IN THE CASE OF M/S HYDERABAD CHEMICALS SUPPLIES LTD., APIE, BALANAGAR HYDERABAD - 37 VS. THE ACIT, CIRCLE 1(4), HYDERABAD DATED 21 ST JANUARY, 2011. 2. WHET HER IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT IN INTERPRETING 'INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR'. 3. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE DEFINITION OF 'INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR' AS GIVEN IN SECTION 80IB(1 4) 2 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD OF THE ACT IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE PROVISION OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. 4. THE ORDER OF THE AO BE RESTORED AND THAT OF THE CIT(A) BE VACATED. 2. THE FACTS WHICH ARE REVEALED FROM THE RECORD AS UNDER. THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF AUTOMOBILE COMPONENTS AND ALSO ELECTRICITY GENERATION . THE ISSUE IN CONTROVERSY IN BOTH THE YEARS IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS WRONGLY CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA(4)(IV)(A) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT . IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 0 8 THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA(4)(IV)(A) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT IN RESPECT OF PROFIT DERIVED FROM ELECTRICITY GENERATION WHICH IS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1 8,48,573/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEC. 80IA IS A.Y. 2002 - 03 IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS RECORDED THE LOSS OF RS.87,50,000/ - WHICH HAS BEEN SET OFF U/S. 70 AND 72 AGAINST THE INCOME FROM OTHER HEADS/SOURCES OTHER THAN POWER GENERATION. IN THE OPINI ON OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN VIEW OF SEC. 80IA(5) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , THE PROFITS AND GAINS FROM ELIGIBLE BUSINESS I.E. POWER GENERATION IS TO BE COMPUTED AS SUCH SAID BUSINESS IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY DURING THE PREVIOUS Y EAR RELEVANT TO THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOWING HOW THERE WERE LOSSES FOR THE A.YS. 2002 - 03 AND 2003 - 04 FROM THE POWER GENERATION AND HOW THOSE LOSSES WERE ADJUSTED AGAINST PRO FITS OF OTHER BUSINESS : A .Y. INCOME FROM POWER GENERATION INCOME FROM BUSINESS OTHER THAN POWER GENERATION ADJUSTMENT OF LOSSES GROSS TOTAL INCOME RS. RS. RS. RS. 200 2 - 03 - 8750000 12657472 - 8750000 3907442 200 3 - 04 - 6172887 10277926 - 6172887 4105039 200 4 - 05 512532 10088730 00 10607262 3 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD 20 05 - 06 1544759 6880372 00 8425131 2006 - 07 1759350 9070380 00 10829730 2007 - 08 1848573 12398013 00 14246586 3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT EVEN IF THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION IN THE A.Y. 20 04 - 05 FOR THE FIRST TIME TREATING THE SAME AS INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR BUT HE HAS NOT BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES FROM THE POWER GENERATION BUSINESS A ND HAS WORKED OUT THE DEDUCTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PREPARED A CHART SHOWING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO PR OFITS IN THE A.YS. 2004 - 05, 2005 - 06, 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08 BUT CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION DISCARDING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY SET OFF THE LOSSES FROM THE POWER GENERATION AGAINST THE OTHER BUSINESS INCOME. THE SAID CHART PREPARED BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER IS AS UNDER: SR. NO. DESCRIPTION A.Y. 2004 - 05 RS. A.Y. 2005 - 06 RS. A.Y. 2006 - 07 RS. A.Y. 2007 - 08 RS. 1 PROFIT FROM ELIGIBLE BUSINESS IN POWER GENERATION. 512532 1544759 1759350 1848573 2 (B) PROFIT FROM BUSINESS OTHER THAN POWER GENERATION 100887 30 6880372 9070380 12398013 3 GROSS TOTAL INCOME 10607262 8425131 10829730 14246586 4 LESS: DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA IN RESPECT OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS FOR CURRENT YEAR 512532 1544759 1759350 1848573 5 LESS: NOTIONALLY BROUGHT FORWARD LOSS FROM EARLIER YEARS - 1 4922887 - 14410355 - 12865596 - 11106246 6 BALANCE - 14410355 - 12865596 - 11106246 - 9257673 7 DEDUCTION AVAILABLE U/S. 80IA @ 100% NIL NIL NIL NIL NET INCOME (SR. NO. 3 MINUS SR. NO. 7) 4 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FINALLY CONCLUDED THAT IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 AS THERE ARE NO PROFIT AFTER CONSIDERING THE BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES FROM A.YS. 2002 - 03 AND 2003 - 04. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR ANY DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA(4)(IV)(A) OF THE ACT. 5. SO FAR AS A.Y. 2008 - 09 IS CONCERNED THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE D EDUCTION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 13,37,863/ - U/S. 80IA(4)(IV)(A) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF PROFIT DERIVED FROM ELECTRICITY GENERATION. FOR THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE A.Y. 2007 - 08 THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THERE WAS STILL UNABSORBED LOSSES/DE PRECIATION AND HENCE, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR CLAIMING ANY DEDUCTION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ACCORDINGLY, DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA(4)(IV)(A) OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.13,37,863/ - . THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE ISSUE BEF ORE THE LD. CIT(A) IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND FOUND FAVOUR. 6. THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SERUM INTERNATIONAL LTD. VS. ADDL. CIT, RANGE - 6 ITA NOS. 290 TO 292/PN/2010 DATED 20 - 09 - 2011 AS WELL AS IN THE CASE OF M/S. LAXMI RIKSHAW BODY PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, AURANGABAD IN ITA NOS. 421, 422, 424 & 425/PN/2012 ORDER DATED 30 - 07 - 2013 HELD THAT THE LOSSES F OR INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR IF THOSE HAVE BEEN ALREADY SET OFF AGAINST THE INCOME OF OTHER BUSINESS OR U NDER THE OTHER HEADS THEN NO NOTIONAL BROUGHT FORWARD OF THOSE LOSSES ARE TO BE MADE FOR WORKING OUT OF THE DEDUCTION TO DETERMINE THE ELIGIBLE PROFIT. THE LD. CIT(A), ACCORDINGLY, ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. NOW, BEIN G AGGRIEVED THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF SERUM INTERNATIONAL LTD. (SUPRA) AND M/S. LAXMI RIKSHA W BODY PVT. LTD. (SUPRA). 5 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD 8 . IN THE CASE OF SERUM INTERNATIONAL LTD. (SUPRA) THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD AS UNDER: '13. HAVING BEEN CONSIDERED THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 1 AS TO WHAT WOULD BE THE INITIAL A.Y FOR THE PURPO SES OF SECTION 80IA(5) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF POONAWALLA STUD AND AGRO FARM PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA). IN THAT CASE AFTER DISCUSSING THE ISSUE IN DETAIL, THE TRIBUNAL HAS COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE INITIAL 'A. Y' FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA WAS THE FIRST YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA (1) AFTER EXERCISING HIS OPTION AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF 80IA (2) OF THE ACT. IT WAS HELD TH AT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE INITIAL A. Y FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 80IA(2) R.W.S. 80IA (5) WAS THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE STARTED GENERATING ELECTRICITY FROM THE WIND MILL ACTIVITY. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 2 REGARDING THE ELIGIBILITY OF THE ASSESSEE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA UNDIMINISHED BY UNABSORBED LOSSES AND DEPRECIATION ALSO SET OFF IN EARLIER YEARS AGAINST THE OTHER INCOME, IS FULLY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HON 'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD VS. ACIT (SUPRA) HOLDING THAT AS PER SUB - SECTION (5) OF SECTION 801 A, PROFITS ARE TO BE COMPUTED AS IF SUCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEN THE ASSESSEE EXERCISES THE OPTION, ON LY THE LOSSES OF THE YEARS BEGINNING FROM THE INITIAL A. Y. ARE TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD AND NOT THE LOSSES OF THE EARLIER YEARS WHICH HAVE BEEN ALREADY SET OFF AGAINST THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT HAS BEEN FURTHER PLEASED TO HOLD THAT REVENUE CANNOT NOTIONALLY BRING FORWARD ANY LOSS OF EARLIER YEARS WHICH HAD ALREADY BEEN SET OFF AGAINST THE OTHER INCOME OF ASSESSEE AND SET OFF AGAINST THE CORRECT INCOME OF THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. FICTION CREATED BY SUB - SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80IA DOES NOT CONTEMPLATE SUCH NOTIONAL SET OFF, HELD THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THAT DECISION HAS ALSO REFERRED THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA VS. CIT (SUPRA) AND THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH O F THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF GOLDMAN SHARES & FINANCE (P) LTD. (SUPRA). THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT EVEN A DECISION OF NON - JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IS 6 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD A BINDING PRECEDENT FOR THE TRIBUNAL UNTIL A CONTRARY DECISION IS GIVEN BY ANY OTHER COMPETENT HIGH COURT. IN THIS REGARD, WE FIND STRENGTH FROM THE RECENT DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. VALSON DYEING, BLEACHING AND PRINTING WORKS (SUPRA) WHEREIN THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS BEEN PLEA SED TO HOLD IN A CASE OF EXCISE MATTER THAT TRIBUNAL IS BOUND BY THE DECISION OF HIGH COURT, EVEN OF A DIFFERENT STATE, SO LONG AS THERE IS NO CONTRARY DECISION OF ANY OTHER HIGH COURT. THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS BEEN PLEASED TO HOLD FURTHER THAT TH E TRIBUNAL HAD NO OPTION BUT TO FOLLOW THE JUDGMENT OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT. AN AUTHORITY LIKE AN INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL ACTING ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY HAS TO RESPECT THE LAW LAID DOWN BY THE HIGH COURT, THOUGH OF A DIFFERENT STATE, SO LONG AS THERE IS NO CO NTRARY DECISION OF ANY OTHER HIGH COURT ON THAT QUESTION. WE THUS RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. VAKSON DYEING, BLEACHING AND PRINTING WORKS (SUPRA) HOLD THAT THE TRIBUNAL IS BOUND BY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT ON AN IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD VS. ACIT (SUPRA). WE THUS RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THAT CASE ON AN IDENTICAL ISSUE UNDER ALMOST SIMILAR FACTS, HOLD THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE EXERCISING THE OPTION, ONLY THE LOSSES OF THE YEAR BEGINNING FROM THE INITIAL A. Y. ARE TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD AND NOT THE LOSSES OF EARLIER YEAR WHICH HAVE BEEN ALREADY SET OFF AGAINST THE OTHER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE REVENUE CANNOT NOTIONALLY BRING FORWARD ANY LOSS OF EARLIER YEARS WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN SET OFF AGAINST ANY OTHER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND SET OFF THE SAME AGAINST THE CURRENT INCOME OF THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. WE THUS SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DIRECT THE A. O TO ALLOW THE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA WITHOUT BRINGING THE NOTIONALLY BROUGHT FORWARD ANY LOSS OR DEPRECIATION OF EARLIER YEARS WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN SET OFF AGAINST O THER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE DECISION OF PUNE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF PRIMA PAPER ENGINEERING P. LTD. VS. I TO (SUPRA) CITED BY THE LD. DR IS ALSO NOT HELPFUL TO THE REVENUE SINCE FIRSTLY THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD. VS. ACIT (SUPRA) ON THE ISSUE WAS NOT CITED BEFORE THE 7 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD BENCH AND SECONDLY THE ID. AR FAIRLY AGREED THAT THE ISSUE RAISED WAS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. GOLDMINE SHARES & FINANCE (P) LTD. (SUPRA) FOLLOWED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ID. AR THEREIN THUS CONTENDED THAT THOUGH THE ISSUE MAY BE DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE IN VIEW OF THE SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. GOLDMINE SHAR ES & FINANCIAL (P) LTD., BUT IT SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS ACQUIESCENCE FROM THE SIDE OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE LEGAL POSITION ON THE SUBJECT IS YET NOT SETTLED. THE GROUND NO. 2 IS THUS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSE'. THE ABOVE DECISION HAS BEEN FURTHER F OLLOWED BY OUR CO - ORDINATE BENCH IN A SUBSEQUENT DECISION IN THE CASE OF LAP FINANCE & CONSULTANCY P. LTD. (SUPRA). THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENTS, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) ON THIS GROUND. THE REVENUE FAILS ON THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. 9. IN THE CASE OF M/S. LAXMI RIKSHAW BODY PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) AGAIN THE ISSUE HAS COME BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL WHETHER THE EARLIER LOSSES FROM THE POWER GENERATION UNIT WHICH ARE OTHERWISE SET OFF OR ADJUSTED AGAINST THE OTHER INCOME FROM OTHER HEADS ARE TO BE NOTIONALLY BROUGHT FORWARD AND THEN TO DETERMINE THE ELIGIBLE PROFIT VIS - - VIS THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA(4)(IV)(A) OF THE ACT. THE TRIBUNAL FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, PUNE IN T HE CASE OF SERUM INTERNATIONAL LTD. (SUPRA) AND HELD THAT SEC. 80IA(5) DOES NOT CONTEMPLATE SUCH NOTIONAL BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES IF THE SAME HAD ALREADY SET OFF OR ADJUSTED IN THE PRECEDING YEARS. IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THERE WER E LOSSES IN THE A.YS. 2002 - 03 AND 2003 - 04 WHICH WERE SET OFF AND ADJUSTED AGAINST THE OTHER INCOME S OR HEADS. THE ASSESSEE EXERCISES HIS OPTION FOR THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR IN THE A.Y. 2004 - 05. IN OUR OPINION THE ASSESSEES CASE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, PUNE IN THE CASE OF SERUM INTERNATIONAL LTD. (SUPRA) AND HENCE, ON THIS REASONS WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. ACCORDINGLY, 8 ITA NO S. 1 496 & 1497 /PN/2013, LAXMI METAL PRESSING WORKS PVT. LTD., AURANGABAD GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE DISM ISSED. 10. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 26 - 0 8 - 201 4 SD/ - SD/ - ( G . S . PAN NU ) ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RK /PS PUNE , DATED : 26 TH AUGUST, 20 1 4 COPY TO 1 ASSESSEE 2 DEPARTMENT 3 THE CIT(A) , AURANGABAD 4 THE CIT, AURANGABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT, B BENCH, PUNE . 6 GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TR IBUNAL PUNE