Alvittas Electricals Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI V. DCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1634/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2636 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 16-07-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNANJCIT
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Proportionate interest; Speculation loss
• Section: 234B; 14A; 115JB; 37; 12

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI ... , . , , BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1634 /MDS./2015 ( ! '! / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010-11) M /S.ALVITTAS ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD ., MODI HOUSE, NO.60(OLD NO.33), KASTURI RANGAN ROAD, ALWARPET, CHENNAI 600 018. VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE I(1), CHENNAI 600 034. PAN AAACA 3056 B ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) #$ % & / APPELLANT BY : MR.ASHOK KUMAR KARILAL MODI, DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY '(#$ % & / RESPONDENT BY : MR.P.RADHAKRISHNAN,JCIT, D.R ) * % +, / DATE OF HEARING : 16.11.2015 -' % +, /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.01.2016 / O R D E R PER A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-I, CHENNA I DATED ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 2 28.05.2015 IN ITA NO.195/13-14/A-1 (NEW NO.ITA 192/ CIT(A)- 1/2013-14 PASSED UNDER SEC.143(3) READ WITH SEC. 250 OF THE ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FIVE ELABORATE GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL; HOWEVER THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT:- I) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN TREATING THE EXPEN DITURE INCURRED TOWARDS SERVICE TAX PAID AMOUNTING TO ` 97,409/- FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES AS EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS EARNING EXEM PT INCOME. II) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISA LLOWANCE OF ` 14,80,724/- BEING THE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST ATTRIB UTABLE FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME U/S.14A OF THE ACT BY APPLYING RULE 8 D OF INCOME TAX RULES. III) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DI SALLOWANCE OF ` 1,56,363/- BEING HALF PERCENT OF INVESTMENT AS PROV IDED IN LIMB (III) OF RULE 8D OF INCOME TAX RULES. ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 3 (IV) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORD ER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN THE BOOK PROFIT WAS INCRE ASED BY THE EXPENDITURE DISALLOWED WHICH IS ATTRIBUTABLE FOR EA RNING EXEMPT INCOME FOR MAT COMPUTATION. V) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDE R OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN HE HAS NOT ALLOWED TO SET OFF SPECULATION LOSS AGAINST CURRENT YEAR SPECULATION PROFIT AMOUNT ING TO ` 2,13,801/-. VI) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORD ER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN HE HAS LEVIED INTEREST U/ S.234A, 234B & 234C OF THE ACT. VII) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORD ER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN HE HAS INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3.1 THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSES SEE IS A COMPANY, ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING ENGINEERIN G GOODS, FILED ITS ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 4 RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON 11.10.2010 ADMITTING NIL INCOME. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT W AS COMPLETED ON 30.03.2013 WHEREIN THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER DISALL OWED CERTAIN EXPENDITURES AMONGST WHICH ONE OF THE THEM PERTAINS TO DISALLOWANCE U/S.14A READ WITH RULE 8D AMOUNTING TO ` 1,49,61,744/-. 3.2 DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, I T WAS NOTICED BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED DIVIDEND INCOME OF ` 11,76,640/- FROM MUTUAL FUNDS AND SHARES WHICH IS EXEMPT FROM TAX U/S.10 OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE L D. ASSESSING OFFICER INVOKED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF TH E ACT AND COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE BASED ON RULE 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RULES. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFIC ER THAT NO EXPENDITURE HAD BEEN INCURRED BY IT FOR EARNING THE EXEMPT INCOME. HOWEVER SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD SUBSEQUENTLY ADMITTE D INTEREST EXPENSES OF ` 2,142, SERVICE TAX EXPENSES ` 97,409/- & OTHER CHARGES ` 4,262/- AS EXPENSES ATTRIBUTABLE FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE SAME. IT WAS FURT HER OBSERVED BY ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 5 THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INC URRED EXPENDITURE TOWARDS INTEREST ON BORROWED CAPITAL AMOUNTING TO ` 55,99,960 DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HENCE THE SAME WAS ALSO TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR COMPUTING THE DISALLOWANCES UNDER RULE 8D OF THE I.T RULES AND ACCORDINGLY AN AGGREGATE AMOUNT O F ` 1,49,61,744/- WAS DISALLOWED BY INVOKING SECTION 14A READ WITH RU LE 8D OF IT RULES. 4.1. GROUND NO.(I) - DISALLOWANCE OF SERVICE TAX . THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TREATED THE SERVICE TAX PAID AMOUNTING TO ` 97,409 FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES/MUTUAL FUNDS AS EXPENSES ATTRIBUTABLE FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME AND DISALLOWED THE SAME BY INVOKING SECTION.14A OF THE ACT. THE LD. CI T (A) CONCURRED WITH HIS VIEW, AGGRIEVED BY WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS I N APPEAL BEFORE US. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF T HE LD. CIT (A) BECAUSE THESE EXPENSES ARE DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE FO R PURCHASE OF SHARES/MUTUAL FUNDS WHICH GENERATE DIVIDEND INCOME THAT IS EXEMPT FROM TAX. THEREFORE WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE RE VENUE ON THIS ISSUE. ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 6 5.1. GROUND NO.(II) DISALLOWANCE OF PROPORTIONATE INTEREST OF ` 14,80,724/- ATTRIBUTABLE FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME. THE LD. CIT (A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE LD. A SSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF ` 14,80,724/- BEING THE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST ATTRIBUTABLE FOR EARNING EXE MPT INCOME. WHILE DOING SO, HE HAS OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS:- 4.2.5 WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST ON I NVESTMENTS AS PER LIMB (III OF RULE 8D, THE AVAILABILITY OF OWN FUNDS ALONE IS NOT A SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION AS OBSERVED BY THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CA SE OF BEACH MINERALS COMPANY P LTD IN T.C. (APPEAL) NO.681 OF 2013 DATED 2.12.2013 WHEREIN THE LORDSHIPS, WHILE SETTING ASIDE FOR DE NOVO ENQUIRY AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN THE EXPLANATION IN THE MANNER KNOWN TO LAW AS REGAR DS PAYMENT OF INTEREST (RELATABLE TO TAXABLE INCOME AND EXEMPT INCOME), HA VE HELD THAT, 11 THE MERE FACT OF THE AVAILABILITY OF 46 CRORES AND ODD BY ITSELF CANNOT BE TAKEN AS FURNISHING OF GOOD EXPLANATION AS REGAR DS THE INVESTMENT EVEN WITH THE RESERVES & SURPLUS FIGURE QUOTED IN THE BALANCE- SHEET, WE FEEL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EXPLAINING THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF 4.09 CRORES. FURTHER, AS SEEN FROM THE BALANCE-SHEET, THE APPELL ANT IS HAVING SHARE CAPITAL OF RS.3,00,000 AND RESERVES AND SURPLUSES OF RS.6.29 C RORES. IN ADDITION TO THAT THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO SHOWED THE BORROWED FUNDS UN DER THE HEADS SECURED LOANS OF RS.1 .39 CRORES AND UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.3.91 CR ORES. AGAINST THE ABOVE SOURCES OF FUNDS, THE APPELLANT HAS MADE INVESTMENT OF RS.1.76CRORES. EVEN ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 7 THOUGH THE APPELLANT IS SHOWING SUFFICIENT OWN FUND S TO TAKE CARE OF THE INVESTMENT IN SHARES, IT HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THE LI NK BETWEEN THE OWN FUNDS AND THE INVESTMENTS IN SHARES. FURTHER, AS DECIDED BY T HE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT CITED ABOVE, THE EXPLANATION THAT THE APPELLANT IS HAVING SUFFICIENT OWN FUNDS IS NOT GOOD AND SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION. IT IS ALSO PER TINENT TO NOTE HERE THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING SUFFICIENT OWN FUNDS TO TAKE CAR E OF ITS BUSINESS NEEDS THERE IS NO NEED TO APPROACH ANY BANK FOR LOANS SINCE SUC H LOANS WILL HAVE INTEREST COSTS. IT IS TRUE THAT THE REVENUE CANNOT DICTATE T HE CORPORATE HOUSES HOW THEY SHOULD MIND THEIR BUSINESS FUNDS, BUT THE CORPORATE HOUSES HAVE TO EXPLAIN THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE INCIDENTAL TO SUCH BORROWINGS. IT IS A FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL BE FORCED TO APPROACH THE BANKS AND OTHER LEND ERS FOR FUNDS WHEN OWN FUNDS WERE NOT SUFFICIENT FOR RUNNING ITS BUSINESS AND OW N FUNDS WERE NOT AVAILABLE FOR INVESTMENT IN EXEMPT INCOME EARNING AVENUES. IN OTH ER WORDS, THE APPELLANT WILL APPROACH BANKS AND OTHER LENDERS WHEN OWN FUNDS ARE ADJUSTED IN OTHER EXPENSES AND NO OWN FUNDS ARE , AVAILABLE FOR INVES TMENT IN EXEMPT INCOME EARNING AVENUES. IF SUCH IS THE CASE, WE CANNOT HOL D THAT THE INTEREST DEBITED HAS NO IMPACT ON THE INVESTMENT MADE IN THE EXEMPT INCO ME EARNING AVENUES. IF THE ASSESSEE SAYS THAT NO INTEREST-BEARING FUNDS HAVE G ONE FOR INVESTMENT IN EXEMPT INCOME EARNING AVENUES, HE HAS TO PROVE FT WITH REG ARD TO LOANS BORROWED AND ITS UTILIZATION IN EARNING ANY PARTICULAR INCOME OR RE CEIPT WHICH IS TAXABLE. THEREFORE, OWN FUNDS ARGUMENT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. IN VIEW OF THIS, THERE IS NO NEED TO INTERVENE ON THE WORKING OF IIMB(II) OF RUL E 8D(2). 5.2 WE DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THIS VIEW OF THE LD. CIT (A). THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OWN FUNDS IN THE FORM OF SHARE CAPITAL, RESERVES & SURPLUS EXCEEDING ` 1.76 CRORES BEING THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN MUTUAL FUNDS AND SH ARES. IT IS ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 8 UPTO THE ASSESSEE TO DECIDE AS TO HOW IT HAS TO DEP LOY ITS OWN FUNDS. THE FUNDS WITHDRAWN FROM RESERVES & SURPLUS AND SHA RE CAPITAL ARE NOT INTEREST BEARING FUNDS. AT ANY POINT OF TIME, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO WITHDRAW ITS INTEREST FREE FUNDS FROM T HE BUSINESS FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IT HAS TO BE PRESUMED THAT THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE IS CARRIED ON BY DEPLOYING INTEREST BEARING FUNDS AND THE INTEREST CHARGES ON SUCH FUNDS ARE AL LOWABLE AS DEDUCTION BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 37 OF THE ACT AND TH AT CANNOT BE DENIED. IN THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS WITHDRAWN 1.76 CRORE FROM ITS INTEREST-FREE FUNDS AND DEPLOYE D THE SAME FOR PURCHASE OF MUTUAL FUNDS AND SHARES. HENCE NO INTER EST CAN BE ATTRIBUTABLE AGAINST THE PURCHASE OF THESE INVESTME NTS. THEREFORE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING EXPENSES INCURRED IN RELAT ION TO EXEMPT INCOME AS PER RULE 8D OF THE IT RULES THE AMOUNT OF ` 14,80,724/- CANNOT BE CONSIDERED. THUS THIS GROUND IS DECIDED I N FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 9 6.1 GROUND NO.(III) DISALLOWANCE OF ` 1,56,363/- BEING HALF PERCENT OF INVESTMENT AS PROVIDED IN LIMB (III) OF RULE 8D OF INCOME TAX RULES. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LD. ASS ESSING OFFICER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4.2.6 WITH REGARD TO APPLICABILITY OF LIMB(III) OF RULE 8D(2) THE DECISION IN ASSESSEE OF ESCORTS LTD, 102 TTJ 522, THE ITAT DELH I HAS CLEARLY HELD THAT INDIRECT MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES QUA LIFY FOR DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A AND THERE IS NO DECISION SO FAR BY ANY SIMILAR FORUM CONTRADICTING THE ABOVE FINDINGS. SIMILAR VIEW WAS ALSO TAKEN BY ITAT CHENN AI IN THE CASE OF SOUTHERN PETROCHEMICAL INDUSTRIES (93 TTJ 161) AS UNDER: ...WHETHER TO INVEST OR NOT TO INVEST AND WHETHER TO RETAIN THE INVESTMENTS OR TO LIQUIDATE THE SAME ARE VERY STRATEGIC DECISIONS WHI CH THE MANAGEMENT IS CALLED UPON TO TAKE. THESE ARE MIND-BOGGLING DECISIONS AND TOP MANAGEMENT IS INVOLVED IN TAKING THESE DECISIONS. THIS DECISION-M AKING PROCESS IS VERY COMPLICATED AND REQUIRES VERY CAREFUL ANALYSIS. MOR EOVER, THE ASSESSEE HAD TO KEEP TRACK OF VARIOUS DIVIDEND INCOMES DECLARED BY THE INVESTEE COMPANIES AND ALSO TO KEEP TRACK OF THE DIVIDEND INCOME HAVING BE EN REGULARLY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. THAT ACTIVITY ITSELF CALLED FOR CONSIDERA BLE MANAGEMENT ATTENTION AND COULD NOT BE LEFT TO A JUNIOR CLERK. , THIS VIEW HAS BEEN FURTHER SUPPORTED BY THE DECISIO N OF HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SMT. LEENA RAMACHANDRAN (2011) (339 ITR 293) (KERALA HC). ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 10 4.2.7 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE AO IS RI GHT IN INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF S.14A AND WORKING OF DISALLOWANCE AS PER RULE 8D. T HE GROUND IS DISMISSED. WITH THIS ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED ARE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN ANSWERED. SINCE THE LD. CIT (A) HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT AND CHENNAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL , WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH HIS ORDER. THUS THIS GROUND IS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 7.1 GROUND NO.(IV) ADDITION MADE U/S.14A OF THE ACT TO BOOK PROFIT FOR MAT CALCULATION. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE ADDITION TO TH E BOOK PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY U/S.115JB OF THE ACT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT OF THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S.14A OF THE ACT. THE LD. C IT (A) UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 5.1 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE S OF THE CASE. THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (F) OF EXPLANATION-I TO S. II 5JB MAKES IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO ANY EXEMPT INCOME, OTHER THAN S.10(38), IS LIABLE TO BE ADDED BACK TO THE AMOUNT OF NET PRO FIT AS SHOWN IN P&L AIC RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE LATEST DECISION OF THE IT AT MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF DABUR LNDIA LTD, 37 TXMANN.COM 289. RELIANCE IS AL SO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF (TAT MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF RBK SHARE BROKING P LTD IN (TA NO.6678 & 75461MUM/1201 I DATED 24.7.2013 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE AMOUNT ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 11 DISALLOWABLE WS 14A CAN BE ADDED BACK WHILE COMPUTI NG BOOS PROFIT UNDER EXPLANATION-I TO S.II5JB QUANTUM OF DISALLOWANCE WA S WORKED OUT BASED ON THE FORMULA ENUNCIATED U/S 14A R.W. RULE 8D BUT THE ACT UAL DISALLOWANCE WAS LEGALLY BEEN DISALLOWED AS PER CLAUSE (F) OF EXPLANATION I TO S.II5JB WHICH SAYS AS UNDER: (F) THE AMOUNT OR AMOUNTS OF EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO ANY INCOME TO WHICH [SECTLON 10 (OTHER THAN THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN CLAUSE (38) THEREOF OR [-- -} SECTION 11 OR SECTION 12 APPLY; OR) SINCE THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED EXEMPTION OF INCOME U/S 10, THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME IS APPLICABLE WHILE WORKING OUT INCOME U/S 115 JB ALSO. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IS UPHELD. THE GROUND IS DISMISSED. 7.2 AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE CO NSIDERED VIEW THAT THE REVENUE IS JUSTIFIED IN MAKE SUCH ADDITION. EXP LANATION 1(F) TO SECTION 115JB (2) OF THE ACT PROVIDES AS FOLLOWS:- S.115JB (2) EVERY ASSESSEE,------------ BEING A COMPANY, SHALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS S ECTION, PREPARE ITS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR IN ACCO RDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF PARTS II AND III OF SCHEDULE VI TO THE COMPANIES AC T, 1956 (1 OF 1956) : ------------------------- ------------------------------ ------------------------------- EXPLANATION 1. FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, ' BOOK PROFIT' MEANS THE NET PROFIT AS SHOWN IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR PREPARED UNDER SUB-SECTION (2), AS INCREASED BY- ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 12 (A) -- (B) -- (C)-- (D) -- (E) (F) THE AMOUNT OR AMOUNTS OF EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO ANY INCOME TO WHICH SECTION 10 [OTHER THAN THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN CLAUSE (38) THEREOF] OR SECTION 11 OR SECTION 12 APPLY ; OR FROM THE ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BOOK PROFIT HA S TO BE INCREASED TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF THE DISALLOWANCE OF EX PENDITURE RELATED TO EXEMPT INCOME U/S.10, 11 OR 12 OF THE ACT OTHER THA N SECTION 10(38) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE IN THIS ISSUE. 8.1. GROUND NO.(V) - SETTING OFF SPECULATION LOSS AGAINST CURRENT YEAR SPECULATION PROFIT AMOUNTING TO ` 2,13,801/-. THE LD. CIT (A) HAD DISMISSED THIS GROUND AS INFR UCTUOUS IN HIS ORDER BECAUSE BEFORE HIM THE LD. A.R. HAD SUBMITTED A LETTER DT 10.12.2013 STATING THAT THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER H AS ALREADY RECTIFIED HIS ORDER U/S.154. NOW THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS BEFORE U S THAT NO SUCH RECTIFICATION WAS MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER IN HIS ORDER. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE REMIT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD.CIT(A) FOR DENOVO CONSIDERATION. ITA NO.1634 /MDS/2015 13 9.1 GROUND NOS. (VI) & (VII) - LEVY OF INTEREST U /S.234A, 234B & 234C OF THE ACT AND LEVY OF PENALTY U/S.271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. SINCE BOTH THESE ISSUES ARE CONSEQUENTIAL IN NA TURE, THEY ARE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 14 TH JANUARY,2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( N.R.S.GANESAN ) ( . '#$ %' ) (A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 14 TH JANUARY,2016. K S SUNDARAM. % '+./ 0 /'+ /COPY TO: 1. #$ /APPELLANT 2. '(#$ /RESPONDENT 3. ) 1+ () /CIT(A) 4. ) 1+ /CIT 5. /4 '+5 /DR 6. 6! 7* /GF