The ACIT,A'bad, Circle-3, Ahmedabad V. Anagram Capital Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1531/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 153120514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 5 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 28-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY RANJAN
• Keywords: Depreciation; Transactions in derivatives; Earning of tax free income; Proportionate interest; Retrospective amendment; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 143(3); 14A; 32

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1531/AHD/2011 / A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT, AHMEDABAD CIRCLE-3, AHMEDABAD VS ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ANAGRAM SECURITIES LTD), ANAGRAM HOUSE, NR. H.L. COMM. COLLEGE SIX ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD PAN : AABCA 2916 K ./ ITA NO.1718/AHD/2011 / A.Y. 2008-09 EDELWEISS FINANCIAL ADVISORS LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD) ANAGRAM HOUSE, NR. H.L. COMM. COLLEGE SIX ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD PAN : AABCA 2916 K VS ACIT, AHMEDABAD CIRCLE-3, AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : SHRI R.K. GUPTA, SR. DR. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI VIJAY RANJAN, AR / DATE OF HEARING : 29/10/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06/11/2015 / O R D E R PER SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THESE CROSS APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND ASSES SEE FOR AY 2008- 09, ARISE FROM ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-XVI, AHMEDABAD, DATED 28.04.2011 PASSED IN CASE NO.CIT(A)-XVI/AC.CIR.3/710/10-11, IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, I N SHORT THE ACT. ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 2 - 2. WE COME TO REVENUES APPEAL ITA NO.1531/AHD/2014 . ITS FIRST GROUND CHALLENGES THE LOWER APPELLATE ORDER DELETIN G DISALLOWANCE / ADDITION OF NSE PENALTY OF RS.74,515/-. THE ASSESS EE IS A LIMITED COMPANY IN STOCK BROKING BUSINESS. IT PAID THE IMP UGNED SUM TO THE NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF ITS B YE-LAWS. THE ASSESSEES CASE WAS THAT THIS PENALTY SUM PERTAINED TO PROCEDURAL DELAY IN FILING COMPLIANCE REPORT TO THE EXCHANGE. AND T HE DELAY CAUSED WAS IN PAYMENT OF DUES AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THIS CLAIM AS A BUSINESS DEDUCTION BY FO LLOWING AN IDENTICAL FINDING IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE CIT(A) FOLLOWS CASE- LAW 88 TTJ 352 (KOL), ITO VS. GDB SHARE AND STOCK BR OKING SERVICES LTD., IN DECIDING THE VERY ISSUE IN ASSESSEES FAVO UR. THE REVENUE FAILS TO POINT OUT ANY DISTINCTION ON FACTS OR LAW BEFORE US. IT DOES NOT QUOTE ANY CASE LAW TO THE CONTRARY. THIS FIRST GROUND AC CORDINGLY FAILS. 2. THE SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GROUND SEEKS TO RESTORE S ECTION 36(1)(III) INTEREST DISALLOWANCE OF RS.4,61,573/-. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER NOTICED ASSESSEES INTEREST EXPENDITURE PAID OF RS.1,00,61, 155/- AND THAT OF RS.4,80,08,632/- IN CASE OF OTHER ENTITIES. HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAME HAD TO BE DISALLOWED U/S 36(1)(III) TO THE EXT ENT OF INTEREST FREE LOANS TO ASSOCIATE COMPANIES AND RELATING TO SHARE INVESTMENTS MADE IN CASE OF M/S. ARVIND MILLS WITHOUT ANY BUSINESS PURP OSE. HE CONSIDERED RELEVANT EXPLANATION RENDERED QUA THESE LOANS/ADVANCES TO M/S. ARVIND CLOTHING LTD., ARVIND MURJANI BRANDS LT D., ARVIND FASHION LTD., AND ARVIND BRANDS LTD THAT CERTAIN EX PENSES HAD BEEN MET ON BEHALF OF THESE ENTITIES TO BE LACKING ANY B USINESS PURPOSE IN ABSENCE OF DETAILS BEING FILED. THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER WAS FURTHER OF THE VIEW THAT SUCH REIMBURSEMENTS COULD NOT BE TAKEN AS LOANS/ADVANCES. HE CITED LACK OF DETAILS QUA THE ADVANCES IN QUESTI ON OF RS.32,03,147/-. ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 3 - AND OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAD PAID HUGE INTEREST S UMS ON THE ONE HAND AND ADVANCED ITS INTEREST BEARING FUNDS WITHOU T CHARGING INTEREST TO ABOVE STATED ENTITIES. THIS WOULD MAKE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER TO COMPUTE THE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST DISALLOWANCE IN QUESTION OF RS.4,61,573/- IN ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 30.12.2010. 3. WE COME TO THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS NOW. THE CIT(A) PREPARES A PARTY-WISE TABULATION QUA LOANS IN QUEST ION OF RS.32,03,147/- AS INCURRED IN REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES. HE FINDS THE SAME TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED IN BUSINESS PURPOSES AS PER CASE LAW OF S A BUILDERS VS. CIT, 288 ITR 01 (SC) AS HAVING BUSINESS EXPEDIENCY ELEMENT EMBEDDED THEREIN. THE REVENUES ARGUMENTS STRONGLY SUPPORT ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION. IT TRANSPIRES FROM THE CASE FILE THAT ASSE SSEES INTEREST FREE FUNDS AS ON 31.03.2008 READ A FIGURE OF RS. 1,25,83,17,83 5/- IN THE NATURE OF SHARE CAPITAL, RESERVES AND SURPLUS ETC. IT FILES T RIBUNALS ORDER IN ITS OWN CASE FOR AY 2004-05 IN ITA NO.1890/AHD/2007 DECIDED ON 19.12.2008 DECIDING THE VERY ISSUE IN ITS FAVOUR IN IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES. WE FOLLOW SUIT IN THESE FACTS AND REJECT THIS REVENUE S GROUND AS WELL. 4. THE REVENUES THIRD SUBSTANTIVE GROUND ASSAILS C ORRECTNESS OF THE CIT(A) ACTION IN DELETING BAD DEBT DISALLOWANCE OF RS.27,35,991/- COMPRISING OF DEBIT BALANCE WRITTEN OFF OF RS.25,60 ,148/- AND BAD DEBT OF RS.1,75,843/-. THESE ENTRIES ARE MAINLY IN THE NATURE OF VATAV KASAR. SOME OF THEM ARE LESS THAN OF RS.10,000/- EVEN. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON RECORD TO PR OVE THE SAME TO HAVE BEEN ACTUALLY BECOME BAD. AND ALSO THAT THE A SSESSEE HAD OFFERED ONLY BROKERAGE SUMS AS ITS INCOME U/S 36(2) OF THE ACT IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. HE ACCORDINGLY MADE THE IMPUGNED DISALLO WANCE OF THIS BAD DEBTS CLAIM. ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 4 - 5. THE CIT(A) DELETES THIS BAD DEBTS DISALLOWANCE A FTER QUOTING CASE LAW OF TRF LTD. VS. CIT, 323 ITR 397 (SC) TO THE FA CT THAT IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO PROVE THE SAME TO HAVE ACTUALLY BECOME BAD AS PER THE RELEVANT LAW AMENDED FROM 01.04.1989. THE CIT(A) C OMES TO LATTER ASPECT (SUPRA). THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED IN THE LOWE R APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THAT IT HAD ALREADY CREDITED ITS BROKER AGE INCOME IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT THEREBY OFFERING IT FOR TAXATION. IT CLARIFIED THAT SALE/PURCHASE PRICE OF SHARES HAD BEEN CREDITED IN THE RESPECTIVE ACCOUNTS. THE CIT(A) FOLLOWS SPECIAL BENCH DECISIO N OF THE TRIBUNAL (2010) 5 ITR (TRIB) 1 (BOM.) DCIT VS. SHREYAS S. MO RAKHIA AS UPHELD IN (2012) 342 ITR 285 (BOM.) CIT VS. SHREYAS S. MORAKH IA THAT VALUE OF THE SHARE TRANSACTED BY A BROKER-ASSESSEE ON BEHALF OF THE CONCERNED CLIENT IS VERY MUCH ALLOWABLE AS BAD DEBTS. THE REVENUE F AILS TO REBUT THIS LEGAL POSITION. WE REJECT THIS THIRD SUBSTANTIVE G ROUND ACCORDINGLY. 6. THIS LEAVES US WITH THE REVENUES FORTH AND LAST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND SEEKING TO RESTORE BROKERAGE REBATE DISALLOW ANCE OF RS.34,67,507/-. THIS SUM REPRESENTS ASSESSEES REB ATE TO ITS CLIENT ON THE GROUND THAT THE BROKERAGE RATE CHARGED WAS FOUND TO BE MORE THAN THAT AGREED, THE SAME WAS REDUCED IN ORDER TO RETAIN THE CLIENTELE AND IT IS A VOLUME-BASE PROMOTION SCHEME BY FOLLOWING COMMERCIA L EXPEDIENCY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER CITED LACK OF EVIDENCE OF THE SE SUMS BEING RETURNED TO CLIENTS. HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS NO MATERIAL FORTHCOMING WHICH COULD ESTABLISH REVISION OF THE O RIGINAL CONTRACT NOTES. HE REFERRED TO SEBI GUIDELINES NOT ALLOWING ANY KICKBACKS, REBATE RETURNS OR DIVISION OF BROKERAGE. THE SAME RESULTED IN THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE. ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 5 - 7. THE CIT(A) TREATS ASSESSEES EXPLANATION SUPPORT IVE OF THE IMPUGNED REBATE CLAIM AS GENUINE. AND HOLDS THAT T HE SAME WAS GIVEN IN THE RESPECTIVE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF THE CLIENTS. T HE ASSESSEES LEDGER BALANCE IN THIS REGARD WAS FOUND TO BE ACCORDINGLY REDUCED IN ALL CASES. ALL THIS RESULTS IN DELETION OF THE IMPUGNED DISALL OWANCE. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. IT TRANSPIRES F ROM PAGES 91 TO 102 OF THE PAPER-BOOK THAT ASSESSEES GROSS BROKERAGE I NCOME IS OF RS.59,23,26,790/-. THE CORRESPONDING BROKERAGE REF UND FIGURE IN QUESTION IS @ 0.59% OF THIS GROSS INCOME. THE RELE VANT SEGMENTS ARE CASH AND F&O OF RS.9,06,412.88 AND RS.25,61,094.25; RESPECTIVELY. PAGES 93 TO 102 CONTAIN LIST OF ASSESSEES CLIENTS ALONGW ITH CODES AND AMOUNTS REFUNDED IN ALL CASES. THE REVENUE IS UNABLE TO R EBUT CORRECTNESS THEREOF. WE HOLD IN THESE FACTS THAT ASSESSEES CL AIM OF BROKERAGE REBATE IN QUESTION DOES NOT LACK GENUINENESS ELEMENT. IT H AS COME ON RECORD THAT IT IS IN STOCK BROKING BUSINESS. IT HAS ACCORD INGLY OFFERED THE IMPUGNED REBATE OF RS.34,67,507/- IN BUSINESS EXPED IENCY. WE DO NOT FIND ANY GROUND TO INTERFERE WITH THE LOWER APPELLA TE FINDINGS UNDER CHALLENGE. THIS FORTH AND LAST GROUND IS ALSO REJE CTED. REVENUES APPEAL ITA NO.1531/AHD/2011 IS DISMISSED . 9. WE ADVERT TO ASSESSEES APPEAL ITA NO.1718/AHD/2 011. ITS FIRST GROUND CHALLENGES SECTION 14A DISALLOWANCE OF RS.15 ,50,074/-. ITS EXEMPT INCOME FROM DIVIDENDS READS A FIGURE OF RS.1 1,67,255/- ARISING FROM INVESTMENT OF RS.3,37,75,313/- IN SHARES OF M/ S. ARVIND MILLS LTD. WITH LONG TERM INVESTMENT IN SHARES OF ITS SUBSIDIA RY AMOUNTING TO RS.18,70,95,122/-. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ATTRIBUTE ANY EXPENDITURE CORRESPONDING TO ITS EXEMPT INCOME. IT PLEADED TO HAVE SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE FUNDS AT ITS DISPOSAL IN RELATION TO THE IMPUGNED ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 6 - INVESTMENTS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER QUOTED LACK OF ITS FUND FLOW STATEMENT FOR OVERRULING ASSESSEES PLEA OF NON-DIV ERSION OF INTEREST FREE FUNDS. HE ACCORDINGLY INVOKED SECTION 14A READ WIT H RULE 8D(2)(II) AND (III) FOR COMPUTING THE RESPECTIVE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.13,81,198/- AND RS.1,68,877/-. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMS ASSESSING O FFICERS ACTION. 10. THE ASSESSEE STATES IN THE COURSE OF HEARING TH AT ITS INTEREST FREE FUNDS AS ON 31.03.2008 ARE OF RS.1,25,83,17,836/- I N THE NATURE OF SHARE CAPITAL, RESERVES AND SURPLUS ETC. CORRESPONDING I NVESTMENTS GIVING RAISE TO THE IMPUGNED EXEMPT INCOME ARE OF RS. 3,37 ,75,313/-. MUCH LESS THAN THE INTEREST FREE FUNDS. IT IS EVIDENT T HAT ASSESSEES EXEMPT INCOME IN RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR IS OF RS.12.56 CRO RES (PAGE 27 OF THE PAPER-BOOK). INTEREST EXPENSES ARE FOUND TO BE OF RS.5.80 CRORES. THIS RESULTS IN NET INTEREST INCOME OF RS.6.75 CRORES. T HERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THIS FACTUAL POSITION. WE FOLLOW A CO-ORDINA TE BENCH DECISION IN ITA NO.1277/KOL/2011, DCIT VS. M/S TRADE APARTMENT LTD. DECIDED ON 30.03.2012 HOLDING THEREIN THAT WHEN THERE IS NO NET INTEREST EXPENDITURE UPON SETTING OFF INTEREST CREDITED TO P &L ACCOUNT, NO PART OF INTEREST DEBITED IS TO BE DISALLOWED AS ATTRIBUT ABLE TO EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME. THE REVENUE DOES NOT POINT OUT ANY EXCEPTION THERETO. WE ACCORDINGLY DELETE THE INTEREST DISALLOWANCE UND ER RULE 8D(2)(II) OF RS.13,81,198/- (SUPRA). COMING TO ADMINISTRATIVE E XPENSES DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,68,877/- UNDER RULE 8D(2)(III) , THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO DISPUTE CORRECTNESS THEREOF SINCE THE IMPUGNED ASSE SSMENT YEAR IS 2008- 09. THIS LATTER DISALLOWANCE FIGURE IS CONFIRMED. THIS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 11. THE SECOND SUBSTANTIVE GROUND CHALLENGES DISALL OWANCE OF PROVISION MADE FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT AMOUNTING TO RS .46,86,997/- ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 7 - MADE U/S 43B(F) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT P AID THE SAME TILL DATE OF FILING OF RETURN. IT QUOTED HONBLE CALCUTTA HI GH COURT DECISION IN EXIDE INDUSTRIES VS. UNION OF INDIA, 292 ITR 470, S TRIKING DOWN THE ABOVE STATED PROVISION ITSELF BEING ARBITRARY, UNCO NSTITUTIONAL AND DE HORS THE CASE LAW OF BHARAT EARTH MOVERS VS. CIT, 2 45 ITR 428 (SC). THE ASSESSING OFFICER REPRODUCED HONBLE APEX COURTS I NTERLOCUTORY ORDER IN SLP (CC) NO.12060/2008 DIRECTING THE SAID ASSESS EE TO PAY TAX AS IF THE ABOVE SAID STATUTORY PROVISION DULY STOOD IN TH E ACT AND ALSO HOLDING IT ENTITLED TO RAISE THE VERY CLAIM SIMULTA NEOUSLY. HE DISALLOWED THE IMPUGNED LEAVE ENCASHMENT CLAIM ACCO RDINGLY. THE CIT(A) UPHOLDS THE SAME. 12. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS TO HAVE PAID LEAVE ENCASHMENT OF RS.19,439/- AS ON 04.09.20 08 AND RS.19,661/- ON 24.09.2008. THERE IS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE ABOVE STATED FACTS AS WELL AS THE LEGAL BACKGROUND OF THE ISSUE. WE FOLLOW TH E HONBLE APEX COURT ORDER IN THESE FACTS AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING AUTHO RITY IN THE SAME TERMS AS INDICATED THEREIN. THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. 13. THE ASSESSEES NEXT GROUND RAISED IN THE INSTAN T APPEAL CHALLENGES DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON AHMEDABAD STOCK EXC HANGE CARD OF RS.141/- MADE IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT AND AFFIR MED IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HOLD THAT STOCK EXCHANGE MEMBERSHIP CARD IS NOT AN ELIGIBLE ASSET U /S 32 OF THE ACT AS HELD BY HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN M/S. TECHNOSHA RES AND STOCKS LTD. VS. CIT 193 TAXMAN 248. THE CIT(A) OBSERVES T HAT THE HONBLE APEX COURT HAS REVERSED THE ABOVE STATED DECISION A S REPORTED IN 327 ITR 323 WITH A RIDER THAT THE SAME RELATES TO BOMBA Y STOCK EXCHANGE CARD ONLY. HE REPRODUCES RELEVANT PORTION OF THIS JUDGMENT AS WELL. ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 8 - HOWEVER, THE REVENUE FAILS TO POINT OUT ANY DISTINC TION BETWEEN THE ASSESSEES AHMEDABAD STOCK EXCHANGE CARD AND RELEVA NT FEATURES OF BOMBAY STOCK EXCHANGE CARD. NOR SUCH A DISTINCTION IS FORTHCOMING FROM HONBLE APEX COURT DECISION. WE FIND THAT A C O-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ASSESSEES SISTER CONCERNS CASE M/S. EDELWEISS STOCK BROKING LTD. VS. CIT, ITA NO. 1168/AHD/2011 D ECIDED ON 11.07.2014 FOR AY 2006-07 GRANTS IDENTICAL DEPRECIA TION RELIEF. WE ALSO DRAW SUPPORT THEREFROM FOR ALLOWING THE IMPUGNED DE PRECIATION CLAIMED. THIS GROUND IS ACCEPTED. 14. THIS LEAVES US WITH ASSESSEES LAST SUBSTANTIVE GROUND CHALLENGING SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF RS.1,02,39,903/- ARISING FROM NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS QUA PAYMENTS MADE OF NSE LEASE LINE CHARGES, NSE VS AT CHARGES AND MTNL EXPENSES. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT DEDUCTED TDS ON THESE PAYMENTS. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFU L CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THE ASSESSEE INTER ALIA I NVITES OUR ATTENTION TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) SECOND PROVISO INTRODUCED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2012 W.E.F. 01.04.2013. IT REFERS TO CASE LAW OF RAJEEV KUMAR AGARWAL VS. ACIT, ITA NO.337/AGRA/2013 DECIDED ON 29.05.2013 (A UTHORED BY ONE OF US PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AS CONSIDERED BY A RECENT DECISION OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. ANS AL LANDMARK TOWNSHIPS PVT LTD, (377 ITR 635), UPHOLDING THE SAM E AFTER REPRODUCING THE OPERATIVE PART IN EXTEMPORE TO THE EFFECT THAT WHEN A DEDUCTOR-ASSESSEE IS NOT AN ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT U/S 201(1), IT IS DEEMED THAT IT HAS DEDUCTED AND PAID THE TAX ON SUCH SUMS ON THE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME BY THE CONCERNED PAYEE AS REFER RED IN THE ABOVE STATED PROVISO. THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH AS WELL AS H ONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT HAVE ACCORDINGLY APPLIED THE ABOVE STATED PRO VISO WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT BY HOLDING IT AS A CURATIVE ON E. THE REVENUE IS ITA NO. 1531 & 1718/AHD/2011 ACIT VS. ANAGRAM CAPITAL LTD A.Y. 2008-09 - 9 - UNABLE TO DISPUTE CORRECTNESS THEREOF. WE ACCORDIN GLY REMIT THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR CARRYING OUT NECE SSARY VERIFICATION REGARDING RELATED PAYMENTS HAVING BEEN TAKEN INTO A CCOUNT BY THE CONCERNED PAYEES IN COMPUTING THEIR INCOME. THE AS SESSEES OTHER ARGUMENTS DISPUTING APPLICABILITY OF TDS PROVISION SHALL BE RE- ADJUDICATED AS PER LAW. THIS GROUND IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL ITA NO.1718/AHD/2 011 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 15. THE REVENUES APPEAL ITA NO.1531/AHD/2011 IS DI SMISSED. ASSESSEES APPEAL ITA NO.1718/AHD/2011 IS PARTLY AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON THIS DAY, THE 6 TH NOVEMBER , 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) ( S.S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED 06/11/2015 *BT !'#'$ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. !' / THE RESPONDENT. 3. #$#% ' ' & / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ' & ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. )*+' % , ' ' % , $ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. +/ 0 / GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD