Sanjay Chawla, Salem V. DCIT, Salem

ITA 1599/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8039 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C M S VIJAYALAKSHMI
• Assessee Lawyers: T VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition; Assessment record
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 153A; 263; 132; 10; 139

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI , . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NO S . 159 7 , 159 8 AND 159 9 /MDS/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 20 1 0 - 1 1, 2011 - 12 AND 2012 - 13 S HRI SANJAY CHAWLA, GURUKRIPA, NO. 15, VIDYALAYA ROAD, SALEM 636 007. [PAN: A SXPS3092F ] VS. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL 2 , CHENNAI. ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI T. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : MS. C.M.S. VIJAYALAKSHMI, CIT - DR / DATE OF HEARING : 1 5 . 1 1 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 20 . 01 .201 7 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH E S E THREE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE DIFFERENT ORDER S OF THE LD. PRINCIPAL COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX , CHENNAI ALL DATED 29 . 03 .201 6 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR S 20 1 0 - 1 1, 2011 - 12 AND 2012 - 13 CHALLENGING THE ORDERS PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT , 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT] ARE ERRONEOUS AND UNSUSTAINABLE . 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A N INDIVIDUAL AND PROPR I ET O R OF M/S. PALM SPRINGS . H E IS SON OF SHRI MADANLAL D. CHAWLA AND I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 2 SMT. REKHA CHAWLA . A SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED ON 10.01.2012 AT THE BUSINESS PREMISES AT M/S. PALM SPRINGS, CAPITAL TOWERS, 96/4, 3 RD FLOOR, NEAR PRN HOSPITAL, PERAMANUR MAIN ROAD, SALEM. BASED ON THE SEARCH CONDUCTED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006 - 07 TO 2011 - 12 AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) OF THE ACT WAS ALSO ISSUED FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE RETURNS OF INCOME AS UNDER: A.Y. RETURN FILED U/S. 139 RETURNS OF INCOME U/S 153A ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED U/S. 153A DATE OF FILING INCOME RETURNED ( .) DATE OF FILING INCOME RETURNED ( .) 2006 - 07 31.07.2013 0 - 2007 - 08 31.03.2009 1,54,100 31.07.2013 1,54,100 - 2008 - 09 16.01.2009 4,95,520 31.07.2013 4,95,520 - 2009 - 10 25.01.2010 4,98,960 31.07.2013 4,98,960 - 2010 - 11 25.03.2011 2,25,880 31.07.2 013 2,25,880 - 2011 - 12 22.09.2011 13,57,130 31.07.2013 13,57,130 - 2012 - 13 30.09.2012 21,10,370 31.07.2013 28,45,370 7,35,000 THE RETURNS FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT WERE PROCESSED AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE AC T WAS ISSUED. NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) OF THE ACT ALONG WITH QUESTIONNAIRE REQUIRING EXPLANATION FOR THE SEIZED MATERIAL WAS SENT. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED HIS RESPONSES. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE SEARCH DID NOT RESULT IN ANY FINDINGS OR UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. AFTER EXAMINING THE SEIZED I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 3 MATERIALS, ONLY ONE SEIZED MATERIAL CONTAINS DEPOSIT OF .50,000/ - IN FRANKLIN TEMPLETON INVESTMENTS IN THE NAME OF SHRI S ANJAY M. CHAWLA AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ABOVE INVESTMENT IS REFLECTED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13 AND ACCORDINGLY HE HAS COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEARS 2010 - 11, 2011 - 12 AND 2012 - 13 WITHOUT MAKING ANY ADDITION. 3. ON VERIFICATIONS OF RECORDS, THE LD. PCIT HAS NOTICED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH CONDUCTED U NDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT ON 10.01.2012 , IN VARIOUS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE GROU P I.E., ASSESSEE S BUSINESS PREMISES, RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF ASSESSEE S FATHER SHRI MADANLAL CHAWLA, AND OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GROUP, A DOCUMENT AT PAGE NOS. 82 TO 86 OF ANNEXURE A NN/PS/SS/B&D/S - 3, DATED 10.1.2012 WAS FOUND AND SEIZED. THIS IS AN AGREEMENT OF SALE ENTERED INTO BETWEEN S M T L. AMMINI AND SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA (GPA OF SMT . REKHA M CHAWLA), AS VENDORS ON THE ONE HAND AND SMT RATHINAMMAL, AS VENDEE ON THE OTHER HAND, SIGNED ON 18.3.2011, FOR SALE OF PLOTS IN THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE MEASURING 13136 SQ.FT, FOR A CONSIDERATION OF . 1 , 05 ,09, 000 / - @ .800/ - PER SQ. FT. AS PER THE INFORMATION GATHERED DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA PURCHASED THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 4 SALEM, JOINTLY WITH S M T . L. AMMINI, WIFE OF SH RI A. LOGANATHAN OF SALEM, DURING MAY 2008. FURTHER, SMT . REKHA CHAWLA, THE A SSESSEE, REPRESENTED BY HER POA AND SON SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA ALSO PURCHASED AN ADJACENT LAND JOINTLY WITH SMT . L. AMMINI DURING DECEMBER, 2008. ALL THESE LANDS WERE JOINTLY DEVELO PED BY THE C O - OWNERS I. E ., SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA, SMT . REKHA CHAWLA AND SMT . L AMMINI AND CONVERTED INTO 77 PLOTS OF VARIOUS SIZES. THESE PLOTS WERE SOLD DURING THE PREVIOUS YEARS, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11, 2011 - 12 & 2012 - 13 AND THE SALE CONSIDE RATION FROM THE SALE WAS SHARED BETWEEN SMT . L. AMMINIAMMAL AT 50% AND SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA AND SMT . REKHA CHAWLA, JOINTLY AT 50%. 3.1 AS NOTICED BY THE LD. PCIT , NO INCOME ARISING FROM SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FROM THE SALE OF PLOTS IN THARAMANGALAM V ILLAGE, PERTAINING TO HER SHARE IN THAT PROPERTY DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11. FURTHER, AS EVIDENT FROM THE SAID ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE A SS ESSING O FFICER IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, NO ENQUIRY HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER , FOR ASCERTAINING ABOUT THE INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE, FALLING TO HER SHARE, ARISING FROM SALE OF SUCH PLOTS IN THAT THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE. AS STATED ABOVE, T HE SELLING PRICE PER SQUARE FEET OF LAND, IN THAT I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 5 THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, DURING THE F I NANC I AL YEAR 2010 - 11, AS PER THAT SEIZED DOCUMENT VIDE ANNEXURE ANN/PS/SS/B&D/S - 3, PAGE NOS. 82 TO 86 WAS .800/ - PER SQ.FT. ON THE BASIS OF SUCH INFORMATION IN THE SAID SEIZED DOCUMENT AND CONSIDERING AVERAGE INFLATION @ 20% PER YEAR, THE SELLING PRICE DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2009 - 10 RELEVANT T O ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11 WAS ADOPTED AT .640/ - AND ACCORDINGLY APPLYING SUCH RATE OF .640/ - PER SQ.FT, THE SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FROM SALE OF LAND OF 4151.75 SQ.FT, IN THAT LOCALITY, PERTAINING TO HER 50% SHARE IN THAT PROPERTY, WAS DETERMINED AT .26,57,120/ - IN THE CASE OF SMT L. AMMINIAMMAL, AFTER DEDUCTING THE COST OF ACQUISITION FROM THE SAME, THE RESULTANT PROFIT FROM SUCH SALE WAS TAXED, TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME UNDER THE HEAD FROM BUSINESS IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED I N THE CASE OF SMT. L. AMMINI, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13, VIDE ORDER DATED 14.3.2014, U NDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S 153C OF THE ACT. 3 .2 HOWEVER, AS THE SAID SEIZED DOCUMENT AND SUCH INFORMATION CONTAINED THEREIN REGARDING THE SELLING PRICE OF LAND IN THAT THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, HAS NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE A SSESSING O FFICER , WH ILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, VIDE THAT ORDER DATED 24 .3.2014, AFTER REFERRING TO SUCH FACTUAL POSITION , THE LD. PCIT WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT WAS FOUND TO BE ERRONEOUS I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 6 AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE AND ACCORDINGLY, HE ISSUED NOTICE UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT ASK ING THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY AN AMOUNT OF .1 2,83,840 / - SHOULD NOT BE ASSESSED IN H IS HANDS, ARISING FROM SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FROM THAT JOINT VENTURE IN THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME UNDER THE HEAD 'PROFITS & GAINS OF BUSINESS' FOR THE A.Y 2010 - 11. 3. 3 IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID NOTICE, ISSUED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT , THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A COMBINED REPLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11, 2011 - 12 & 2012 - 13, DULY SIGNED BY S HRI K. MEENATCHI SUNDARAM, FCA, LD. AR OF THE ASSESSE E , RECEIVED ON 20.5.2015 BY THE LD. PCI T . AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE ( A) OF EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 263 OF THE ACT, THE LD. PCIT HAS DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION. 4. ON BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE SHRI V.R. VENKATACHALAM V. ACIT IN I.T.A. NO S . 2634 TO 2639 /MDS/201 4 DATED 1 7 .0 7 .201 5 , THE LD. COUNSE L FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. PCIT HAS ERRED IN INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 263 OF THE ACT AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT. I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 7 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS A CLEAR NEGLIGENCE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IGNORING THE MATERIAL DOCUMENT FOUND AND SEIZED, WHICH BECOME THE BASE FOR INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 263 OF THE ACT. BY STRONGLY SUPPORT ING THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. PCIT , THE LD. DR HAS PLEADED THAT THE ORDER PASSED UND ER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT SHOULD BE UPHELD . 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE POINT AT ISSUE IS WHETHER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 15 3A OF THE ACT IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 263 OF THE ACT IS REQUIRED TO BE ANALYZED IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF MALABAR INDUSTRIAL CO. LTD. [2000] 243 IT 83. ON PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN ASSESSEE S CASE , IT GIVES A PICTURE THAT AGAINST THE SEARCH OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT IN THE BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE, RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF SHRI MADANLAL D CHAWLA, ASSESSEE S FATHER , THE DE PARTMENT HAS FOUND AND SEIZED MANY ITEMS . BUT, BEFORE CONCLUDING THE ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT CAREFULLY VERIFIED THE SEIZED MATERIALS TO ENSURE WHETHER ANY ITEM OF MATERIAL SEIZED, HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 8 6.1 O N VERIFICATION OF THE ASSES SMENT DETAILS/RECORDS, THE LD. PCIT HAS OBSERVED THAT A DOCUMENT AT PAGE NOS. 82 TO 86 IN ANNEXURE A NN/PS/SS/B&D/S - 3, DATED 10.1.2012 WAS FOUND AND SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH , WHICH IS AN AGREEMENT OF SALE ENTERED INTO BETWEEN S M T L. AMMINI AND SHR I SANJAY M CHAWLA (GPA OF SMT . REKHA M CHAWLA), AS VENDORS ON THE ONE HAND AND SMT RATHINAMMAL, AS VENDEE ON THE OTHER HAND, SIGNED ON 18.3.2011, FOR SALE OF PLOTS IN THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE MEASURING 13136 SQ.FT, FOR A CONSIDERATION OF . 1 , 05 ,09, 000 / - @ .8 00/ - PER SQ. FT. AS PER THE INFORMATION GATHERED DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA PURCHASED THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, SALEM, JOINTLY WITH S M T . L. AMMINI, WIFE OF SHRI A. LOGANATHAN OF SALEM, DURING MAY 2008. FURTHER , SMT . REKHA CHAWLA, THE MOTHER OF THE A SSESSEE AND HER POA ALSO PURCHASED AN ADJACENT LAND AGAIN JOINTLY WITH SMT . L. AMMINI DURING DECEMBER, 2008. ALL THESE LANDS WERE JOINTLY DEVELOPED BY THE C O - OWNERS I. E ., THE ASSESSEE SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA, SMT . REKHA CHAWLA AND SMT . L AMMINI AND CONVERTED INTO 77 PLOTS OF VARIOUS SIZES. THESE PLOTS WERE SOLD DURING THE PREVIOUS YEARS, RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11, 2011 - 12 & 2012 - 13 AND THE SALE CONSIDERATION FROM THE SALE WAS SHARED BETWEEN SMT . L. AMMINIAMMAL AT 50% AND SHRI SANJAY M CHAWLA AND SMT . REKHA CHAWLA, JOINTLY AT 50%. THUS, H AVING REGARD TO THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE SAID I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 9 SEIZED DOCUMENT AT PAGE NOS. 82 TO 86, VIDE ANNEXURE ANN/PS/SS/B&D/S - 3, DATED 1 0. 0 1.2012, SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARC H AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY ENQUIRY/ V ERIFICATION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER , WITH REGARD TO THE SALE OF LAND, PERTAINING TO H IS SHARE, IN THE SAID JOINTLY OWNED PROPERTY IN THARAMANGALA M , MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO ASSESS MENT YEAR 2010 - 11, INCLUDING ABOUT THE ACTUAL SALE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED AND THE PROFIT EARNED THERE FROM, DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE SAID ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 24 .3.2014 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 11, IN TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE, IS THUS , ACCORDING TO THE LD. PCIT, IS ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF REVENUE. FURTHER, THE LD. PCIT HAS OBSERVED THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS SQUARELY COVERED UNDER CLAUSE (A) OF EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 263 OF T HE ACT, INSERTED VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2015 W.E .F. 0 1. 0 6.2015, WHICH READS AS UNDER : - EXPLANATION 2. - FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, IT IS HEREBY DECLARED THAT AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE ERRONEOUS IN SO FAR AS IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTERESTS OF THE REVENUE, IF, IN THE OPINION OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OR COMMISSIONER, - (A) THE ORDER IS PASSED WITHOUT MAKING INQUIRIES OR VERIFICATION WHICH SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE; 6.2 AS RELIED ON BY THE LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF SHRI V.R. VENKATACHALAM V. ACIT (SUPRA), IT WAS A FACT THAT THE I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 10 ASSESSING OFFICER PROPOSED THAT THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 153A OF THE ACT BE REVISED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER COULD NOT EXAMINE THE ISSUES DUE TO PAUCITY OF TIME. AFTER INVOKING OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT, THE LD. CIT DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PASS FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER WHICH WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT THOUGH TH ERE WAS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, AFTER CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS OF THE CASE, AND WHEN THE LD. CIT HIMSELF AGREED THAT FINDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 HAVING CASCADING EFF ECT ON THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS I.E., FROM 2007 - 08 TO 2012 - 13, THE TRIBUNAL ANNULLED THE ORDERS PASSED UNDER SECTION 263 OF THE ACT AND ALLOWED THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ABOVE CASE RELIED ON BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NO APPLICAT ION TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE BECAUSE, IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE LD. PCIT HAS INDEPENDENTLY, ON VERIFICATION OF ASSESSMENT RECORDS FOUND THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE SEIZED DOCUMENT AT PAGE NOS. 82 TO 86 VIDE ANNEXURE ANN/PS/SS/B&D/S - 3 DATED 10.01.2012, WHICH WAS SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN OMITTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT DATED 24 .03.2014. UNDER THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT I.T.A. NO S . 159 7 TO 159 9 / M/ 1 6 11 THE LD. PCIT HAS RIGHTLY INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 263 OF THE ACT AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO REDO THE ASSESSMENT. WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. PCIT AND ACCORDINGLY, THE GR OUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 7 . IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEAL S FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 20 TH JANUARY , 201 7 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUV VURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 20 . 0 1 .201 7 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.