DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata, Kolkata V. Trisys On The Net Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1547/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4645 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K CHAKRABORTY J
• Assessee Lawyers: A K TULSIAN
• Keywords: Capital asset; Business income
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07 & 2007-08 DCIT, CIRCLE-10, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, 3 RD FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 069 / V/S . TRISYS ON THE NET PVT. LTD., 15, SARAT CHATTERJEE AVENUE, KOLKATA-700 029 [ PAN NO.AABCT 7690 M ] /APPELLANT .. /RESPONDENT /BY ASSESSEE SHRI A.K.TULSIAN, FCA /BY REVENUE SHRI P.K.CHAKRABORTY, JCIT-DR /DATE OF HEARING 06-06-2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24-06-2016 /O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- BOTH APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE AGAINST THE COMMON ORDERS OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-XII, KOLKATA D ATED 04.08.2011. ASSESSMENTS WERE FRAMED BY DCIT, CIRCLE-10, KOLKATA U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS T HE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDERS DATED 28.11.2008 & 26.10.2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 AND 2007-08 RESPECTIVELY. ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 2 SHRI A.K. TULSIAN, LD AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE AP PEARED ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE AND SHRI P.K.CHAKARABORTY, LD DEPARTMENTA L REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. 2. SINCE COMMON GROUNDS ARE INVOLVED IN BOTH THE AP PEALS EXCEPT FIGURE, THEREFORE WE HEARD THEM TOGETHER AND DEEM I T APPROPRIATE TO DISPOSE OF THEM BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER. THEREF ORE WE ARE TAKING THE FACTS OF THE CASE FOR AY 2006-07 AS A LEAD CASE FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE PASS A CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR BOTH THE APPEALS. SOLE GROUND RAISED BY REVENUE IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- 1) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE TRANSACTIO NS OF VOLUMINOUS AND FREQUENT PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES IN A SYSTEMATI C MANNER RESULTED IN PROFIT AMOUNTING TO RS.7896893/- HAVE GIVEN RISE TO CAPITAL GAIN AND NOT THE BUSINESS INCOME. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IN THE PR ESENT CASE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY ENGAGED IN BUSINESS OF SHAR ES TRADING AND SHARES INVESTMENT ON LONG TERM BASIS. DURING THE YE AR, INTER ALIA, ASSESSEE HAS EARNED FOLLOWING INCOME:- SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN WITHOUT STT RS. 9,9 41 SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN WITH STT RS. 2,01,224 LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN WITHOUT STT RS.76,85,728 RS.78,96,893 DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSING OFFICE R SOUGHT CLARIFICATION FROM THE ASSESSEE WHY THE INCOME SHOW N ABOVE AS CAPITAL GAINS SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME. IN COMPLIANCE THERETO, ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS MAINTAINED SEPARATE RECORDS IN ITS STOCK HELD AS STOCK-IN-TRADE AND HELD AS INVESTMENT I N ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE MAIN BUSINESS IS TO MAKE INVESTMENT ON LONG TER M BASIS IN SHARES AND SECURITIES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMED TO HAVE C ONVERTED ITS STOCK ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 3 INTO INVESTMENT WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2004. HOWEVE R, AO HAS DISREGARDED THE PLEA TAKEN BY ASSESSEE BY HOLDING T HAT THE BUSINESS HAD BEEN CARRIED ON ITS SHARE TRADING BUSINESS TRAN SACTIONS IN A SYSTEMATIC AND ORGANIZED MANNER WITH VIEW TO MINIMI ZING RISK AND MAXIMIZED GAIN. THE ASSESSEE HAS DONE NUMEROUS TRAN SACTIONS OF BUYING AND SELLING SHARES / UNITS OF MUTUAL FUNDS W HICH ARE RUNNING INTO 270 PROXIMATE FOR SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND ABOU T 100 APPROXIMATE FOR LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS. THIS REGULAR ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE CONSTITUTES THE BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS CARRIED OUT LARGE NUMBER TRANSACTIONS WITH LARGE VOLUMINOUS SOME OF THE TRAN SACTIONS WERE COMPLETED WITHIN SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. THE ASSESSEE TILL THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 WAS ONLY IN THE TRADING OF SHARE AND S ECURITIES AS APPARENT FROM THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT THAT THERE WAS NO INVE STMENT IN AY 2004-05. THE AO ALSO OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE MEMORANDUM OF ASSESSEE ITS MAIN BUSINESS IS TO UNDERTAKE THE TRADING OF SHARES AND SECURITIES. IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE DEPARTMENT NEVER EXAMI NED THE ISSUE ON THIS LINE. FINALLY, AO TREATED THE CAPITAL GAINS IN COME AS BUSINESS INCOME AFTER HAVING RELIANCE IN VARIOUS JUDGMENTS AND CB DTS CIRCULAR NO.4 OF 2007 AND PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ACCORD INGLY. 4. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE L D. CIT(A), WHERE IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CBDT IN ITS CIRCULAR NO. 6/2016 HAS CLARIFIED THAT IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A TAXPAYERS TO HAVE TWO POR TFOLIOS I.E., AN INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO COMPRISING OF SECURITIES WHICH ARE TO BE TREATED AS CAPITAL ASSET AND TRADING PORTFOLIO COMPRISING OF STOCK-IN-TRADE , WHICH ARE TO BE TREATED AS TRADING ASSET. AS A RESULT, AS SESSEE HAS TWO PORTFOLIOS AND EARNED INCOME UNDER THE HEADS CAPITA L GAIN, AS WELL AS BUSINESS INCOME. ACCORDINGLY, LD CIT(A) HAS ALLOWE D ASSESSEES ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 4 APPEAL BY OBSERVING IN PARA-4 OF HIS APPELLATE ORDE R, THE RELEVANT EXTRACT IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- 4. AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE SUBMISS ION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE I S ENGAGED IN TRADING BUSINESS AND HOLDING SHARES AND MUTUUAL FUND IN TWO PORTFOLIOS. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FINDINGS OF THE AO AS WELL AS THE WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE APPELLANT ALONG WITH THE CASE LAWS RELIED BY TH E APPELLANT AND THE FACTS OF THE CASE. IT IS NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE IS CONSISTENT LY SHOWING PURCHASE OF THESE SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS AS CAPITAL INVESTMENT IN IT S BOOKS OF ACCOUNT & BALANCE SHEET AND THESE INVESTMENTS ARE FROM NON-IN TEREST BEARING FUNDS AND IS CONSISTENTLY MAINTAINING TWO PORTFOLIOS IN SHARE S. IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ASSESSEE HAS EARNED SUBSTANTIAL DIVID END INCOME OF RS.1.54 LAKHS ON THESE HARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS AND ASSESSEE HAS ALSO BEEN SUBJECTED TO STT ON THESE TRANSACTIONS. I HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE JUDGMENT OF MUMBAI ITAT IN THE CASE OF GOPAL PUROHIT WHICH HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN 228 CTR 5 82 (BOM) AND SLP FILED BY DEPT. HAS ALSO BEEN REJECTED BY THE HON'BL E SUPREME COURT. THE FACTS OF THE CASE UNDER CONSIDERATION ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF GOPAL PUROHIT THEREFORE, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO TREAT PROF ITS ON SALE OF SHARES AS CAPITAL GAINS AND ACCORDINGLY HE IS DIRECTED TO COM PUTE TAX ON CAPITAL GAINS IN ACCORDANCE WITH IT ACT, 1961. THEREFORE, GROUND NO. 1 IS ALLOWED. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. BEFORE US LD. DR CONTENDED THAT THE CONVERSION O F STOCK-IN-TRADE INTO SHARE AS ON 01.04.2004 HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED B Y AO. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CONDITION LAID DOWN OF CBDT IN I TS CIRCULAR ISSUED 6 OF 2016 DATED 29.02.2016 HAS NOT BEEN TESTED THEREFORE PRAYED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED BACK TO THE FI LE OF AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR FILED PAPER BOOK WHICH IS RUNNING PAGES FROM 1 TO 63 AND STATED THAT ASSESSEE CAN VERY MUCH MAIN TAINS TWO PORTFOLIOS FOR INVESTMENT AND FOR STOCK-IN-TRADE. THE INVESTME NT MADE BY ASSESSEE IS VERY MUCH COVERED BY THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY CBDT NO.6 OF 2016 DATED 29.02.201 AND HE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF LD C IT(A). ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 5 6. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE FOREGOING DISCUSSION, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED ITS CAPITAL GAINS INCOME WHIC H AO TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME ON THE GROUND THAT NUMEROUS TRANSAC TIONS WITH LARGE VOLUMINOUS WERE MADE BY ASSESSEE IN SYSTEMATIC AND ORGANIZED MANNER. SO IT SHOULD BE TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME , HOWEVER, LD CIT(A) HAS TREATED THE INCOME EARNED BY ASSESSEE AS CAPITAL GAINS BY OBSERVING THAT ASSESSEE HAS MAINTAINED TWO SEPARATE PORTFOLIOS FOR INVESTMENT AND FOR STOCK-IN-TRADE. WE FIND THAT N OTHING PROHIBITS ASSESSEE FROM HOLDING DUAL PORTFOLIOS (I) SHARES / UNITS HELD AS INVESTMENT (II) SHARES / UNITS HELD FOR TRADING PUR POSES. WE FIND FROM THE BALANCE-SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH ARE PLACED ON P AGES 34, 35, 48, 49, 61 & 62 OF THE ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK WHERE AS SESSEE MAINTAINS TWO PORTFOLIOS AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. EVEN THE CBDT CI RCULAR NO. 4 OF 2007 DATED 15.06.2007 ENVISAGES THE PRACTICE OF ASS ESSEES MAINTAINING DUAL PORTFOLIOS. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE DECISION WAS RENDERED BY THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GOPAL PUROHIT REPORTED IN 228 CTR 582 (BOM), WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD MAINTAINED DUAL PORTFOLIOS AND ULTIMATELY THE COURT HELD THAT THE RESULTANT GAINS FROM INVESTMENT ACTIVITY WOULD BE ASSESSABLE AS CAPITAL GAINS AND NOT BUSINESS INCOME. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE CBDT IN ITS INSTRUCTION NO.1827 DATED 31.08.1989 HAS LAID DOWN CERTAIN CRITERIA TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ACTIVITY OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES IS IN THE N ATURE OF TRADING ACTIVITY OR INVESTMENT ACTIVITY. ONE OF THE CRITERIA LAID DO WN IS THE TREATMENT GIVEN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH IS INDICATIVE OF ASS ESSEES INTENTION WHETHER TO HOLD THE SHARES WITH A VIEW TO EARN DIVI DEND AND LONG TERM APPRECIATION OR WITH A VIEW TO CARRYING ON AS BUSIN ESS. WE FURTHER FIND THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE TO MAINTAIN TWO INDEP ENDENT PORTFOLIOS I.E. ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 6 ONE FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES AND ONE FOR TRADING PUR POSES WHEN HE CONVERTED HIS STOCK IN TRADE INTO INVESTMENT ON DAT ED 1.4.2004. 6.1 WE ARE PUTTING OUR RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. S.RAMAMRITHAN (2008) 217 CTR 206 (MAD), WHILE DISTINGUISHING TRADING AND INVESTMENT, OBSERVED THAT THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS RELEVANT TO DETERMINE WHETHER AN ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS IN SHARES OR INVESTMENT S. THE INITIAL INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE INSTANT CASE IS PROVED BEYON D DOUBT FROM THE MANNER OF MAINTAINING TWO SEPARATE PORTFOLIOS I.E. (1) FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES AND (2) FOR TRADING PURPOSES. THE LD AR F URTHER INFORMED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO KEPT SEPARATE RECORDS TO RECO RD THE TRANSACTIONS OF EACH CATEGORY I.E. DELIVERY BASED AND NON-DELIVE RY BASED. IT IS SETTLED LAW THE A PARTICULAR INCOME IS FROM BUSINESS OR FRO M INVESTMENT MUST BE DECIDED ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL COMMON SENSE VIEW OF THESE WHO DEAL WITH THOSE MATTERS IN THE PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES. THE MOST EXCRUCIATING FACTOR TO BE LOOKED INTO AT THIS JUNCTURE IS THE CO NDUCT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE NEXT POINT TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS ISSUE IS WHE THER THE FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTIONS WOULD ALONE INDICATE THE TRADING ACTIV ITY. IN THIS REGARD, WE FIND THE COORDINATE BENCH OF MUMBAI TRIBUNAL HAD AN OCCASION TO CONSIDER THE SAME IN THE CASE OF JANAK S. RANGAWALLA VS. ACIT (2007) 11 SOT 627 (MUM), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT:- IT IS THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS TO BE SEEN TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF TRANSACTION CONDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE. THOUGH TH E INVESTMENT IN SHARES IS ON A LARGE MAGNITUDE BUT THE SAME SHALL NOT DECIDE THE NATURE OF TRANSACTION. SIMILAR TRANSACTIONS OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES IN THE PRECEDING YEARS HAVE BEEN HELD TO BE INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAINS BOTH ON LONG TERM AND SHORT TERM BASIS. THE TRANSACTION IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSI DERATION ON ACCOUNT OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES IS SAME AS IN THE PRECEDING YEARS AND THE SAME MERITS TO BE ACCEPTED AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR TREATING THE ASSESSEE AS A TRADER IN SHARES, WHEN H IS INTENTION TO HOLD THE SHARES IN INDIA COMPANIES AS AN INVESTMENT AND NOT A STOCK IN TRADE. THE MERE MAGNITUDE OF THE TRANSACTION DOES NOT CHANGE T HE NATURE OF TRANSACTION, ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 7 WHICH ARE BEING ASSESSED AS INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAI NS IN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO SET OFF THE LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS AGAINST THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION. THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISE BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 6.2 FURTHER WE ALSO FIND THE JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE J URISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MERLIN HOLDING P LTD. (2015) 375 ITR 118 (CAL) FOR THE AY 2005-06 AND 2006-07 HAD HELD AS B ELOW:- THE FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTIONS IN SHARES ALONG CANNO T SHOW THAT THE INTENTION OF THE INVESTOR WAS NOT TO MAKE AN INVESTMENT. THE LEGISLATURE HAS NOT MADE ANY DISTINCTION ON THE BASIS-OF FREQUENCY OF TRANSA CTIONS. THE BENEFIT OF SHORT- TERM CAPITAL GAINS CAN BE AVAILED OF FOR ANY PERIOD OF RETENTION OF SHARES UP TO 12 MONTHS. ALTHOUGH A CEILING HAS BEEN PROVED, THER E IS NO INDICATION AS REGARDS THE FLOOR, WHICH CAN BE AS LITTLE AS ONE DA Y. THE QUESTION ESSENTIALLY IS A QUESTION OF FACT. WE ARE PUTTING OUR RELIANCE IN THE CBDTS CIRCULAR 6 OF 2016 DATED 29.02.2016, THE RELEVANT EXTRACT IS REPRODUCED BELO W:- A) WHERE THE ASSESSEE ITSELF, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE P ERIOD OF HOLDING THE LISTED SHARES AND SECURITIES, OPTS TO TREAT THEM AS STOCK- IN-TRADE, THE INCOME ARISING FROM TRANSFER OF SUCH SHARES/SECURITIES WOULD BE TR EATED AS ITS BUSINESS INCOME, B) IN RESPECT OF LISTED SHARES AND SECURITIES HELD FOR A PERIOD OF MORE THAN 12 MONTHS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE DATE OF ITS TRA NSFER, IT THE ASSESSEE DESIRES TO TREAT THE INCOME ARISING FROM THE TRANSF ER THEREOF AS CAPITAL GAIN, THE SAME SHALL NOT BE PUT TO DISPUTE BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER. HOWEVER, THIS STAND, ONCE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN A PARTICULAR A SSESSMENT YEAR, SHALL REMAIN APPLICABLE IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS AL SO AND THE TAXPAYER SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT A DIFFERENT/CONTRARY STAND IN THIS REGARD IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS; C) IN ALL OTHER CASES, THE NATURE OF TRANSACTION (I .E. WHETHER THE SAME IS IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL GAIN OR BUSINESS INCOME) SHALL CO NTINUE TO BE DECIDED KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID CIRCULARS ISSUED BY T HE CBDT. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE PRECEDENT ON THE A FORESAID JUDGMENTS OF HON'BLE HIGH COURTS HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND CIRCULAR OF CBDT, WE CONCLUDE THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY MATERI AL TO THE CONTRARY AND ON APPRECIATION OF CUMULATIVE FACTORS PREVENT A S CULLED OUT ABOVE, WE HOLD THAT SURPLUS IS CHARGEABLE TO CAPITAL GAINS ONLY AND ASSESSEE IS ITA NO.1547-1548/KOL/2011 A.YS 06-07 & 07-0 8 DCIT CIR-10 KOL V. TRISYS ON THE NE T PVT. LTD. PAGE 8 NOT TO BE TREATED AS TRADER IN RESPECT OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES IN INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS. WE UPHOLD THE ORDER PASSED B Y LD CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, REVENUES GROUND IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. COMING TO ITA NO.1548/KOL/2011 FOR A.Y. 07-08. 8. AS STATED EARLIER, THE ISSUE IN THIS YEAR IS SAM E AS THAT OF THE LAST YEAR. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THE AMOUNT INVOLVED. S INCE THE FACTS ARE EXACTLY IDENTICAL, BOTH THE PARTIES ARE AGREED WHAT EVER VIEW TAKEN IN THE ABOVE APPEAL OF REVENUE IN ITA NO. 1547/KOL/2011 FO R A.Y. 06-07 MAY BE TAKEN IN THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE ALSO, WE HOLD AC CORDINGLY. 9. IN COMBINED RESULT, BOTH APPEAL OF REVENUE STAND DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 24/06/2016 SD/- SD/- (S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) (WASEEM AHMED) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *DKP '#$ - 24/06/2016 / KOLKATA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /ASSESSEE-TRISYS ON THE NET PVT. LTD, 15, SARAT CHA TTERJEE AVENUE, KOL-29 2. /REVENUE-DCIT, CIRCLE-1O, P7,CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, 3 RD FL, KOLKATA-69 3. ##%& ' / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' - / CIT (A) 5. ()* ++%& , %& / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. *,- / GUARD FILE. BY ORD ER/ , /TRUE COPY/ / # %&,