The DCIT, Circle-8, Surat V. Shri Vasantbhai Haribhai Gajera, Surat

ITA 1730/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 173020514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 11 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 15-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIMLENDU VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: R N VEPARI
• Keywords: Peak credit; Deemed dividend

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD D BENCH BEFORE: S H RI G. D. AGRAWAL , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHR I RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER DEPUTY COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE - 8 , ROOM NO. 414, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT (APPELLANT) VS SHRI VASAN TBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA, WARD NO. 15 - D, VRUSHAL NAGAR, KATARGAM ROAD , SURAT PAN: ABTPG2033P (RESPONDE NT) REVENUE BY : SHRI VIMLENDU VERMA, CIT - D . R. ASSESSEE BY: S H RI R.N. VEPARI , A.R. DATE OF HEARING : 15 - 06 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 - 06 - 2 015 / ORDER P ER : RAJPAL YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER : - THE PRESENT APPEAL IS DIRECTED AT THE INSTANCE OF REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 17 TH MARCH, 2011 PASSED FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09. I T A NO . 1730 / A HD/20 11 A SSESSMENT YEAR 200 8 - 09 I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 2 2. THE SOLITARY SUBS TANTIAL GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF R S. 18,45,25 ,00 1/ - WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE AID OF SECTION 2(21)(E) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AS DEE MED DIVIDEND. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESS EE IS AN INDIVIDUAL. HE HAS FI L E D HIS RETURN OF INCOME ELECTRONICALLY ON 31 ST MARCH, 2009 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3,42,49,460/ - . THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSE SSMENT AND A NOTICE U/S. 143(2) WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON SCRUTINY OF THE ACCOUNTS, IT REVEALED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT ASESSEE IS A DIRECTOR IN LAXMI DIAMOND PVT. LTD. HE IS ALSO A PARTNER IN VARIOUS FIRMS WHICH ARE ENGAGED IN RE - ASSORTMENT WORK OF DIAMONDS. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THERE IS A CREDIT BALANCE OF THE COMPANY , M/S LAXMI DIAMOND PVT LTD IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS TO BE CONSIDERED AS DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S. 2(22)(E) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. T H E LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PROPOUNDED THE MEANING AND CONSTRUCTION OF SECTION 2(22)(E) IN PARA NO. 3.4 TO 3.4.3 FOR APPRECIATING THE CON TROVERSY IN MORE SCIENTIFIC WAY. I T IS NECESSARY TO TAKE NOTE OF SECTION 2(22)(E) AS WELL AS THE MEANING APPRECIATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT READS AS UNDER: - (22) DIVIDEND INCLUDES - (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) ANY PAYMENT BY A COMPANY, NOT BEING A COMPANY IN WHICH THE PUBLIC ARE SUBSTANTIALLY INTERESTED, OF ANY SUM (WHETHER AS I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 3 REPRESENTING A PART OF THE ASSETS OF THE CO MPANY OR OTHERWISE) MADE AFTER THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 1987, BY WAY OF ADVANCE OR LOAN TO A SHAREHOLDER, BEING A PERSON WHO IS THE BENEFICIAL OWNER OF SHARES (NOT BEING SHARES ENTITLED TO A FIXED RATE OF DIVIDEND WHETHER WITH OR WITHOUT A RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN PROFITS) HOLDING NOT LESS THAN TEN PER CENT, OF THE VOTING POWER, OR TO ANY CONCERN IN WHICH SUCH SHAREHOLDER IS A MEMBER OR A PARTNER AND IN WHICH HE HAS A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST THEREAFTER IN THIS CLAUSE REFERRED TO AS THE SAID CONCERN) OR ANY PAYMENT BY ANY SUCH COMPANY ON BEHALF, OR FOR THE INDIVIDUAL BENEFIT, OF ANY SUCH SHAREHOLDER, TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE COMPANY IN EITHER CASE POSSESSES ACCUMULATED PROFILE; BUT 'DIVIDEND' DOES NOT INCLUDE - (I) A DISTRIBUTION MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUB - CLAUSE ( C) OR SUB - CLAUSE (D) IN RESPECT OF ANY SHARE ISSUED FOR FULL CASH CONSIDERATION, WHERE THE HOLDER OF THE SHARE IS NOT ENTITLED IN THE EVENT OF LIQUIDATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SURPLUS ASSETS; (IA) A DISTRIBUTION MADE IN ACCORDANCE, WITH SUB - CLAUSE (C) OR SUB - CLAUSE (D) IN SO FAR AS SUCH DISTRIBUTION IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE CAPITALISED PROFITS OF THE COMPANY REPRESENTING BONUS SHARES ALLOTTED TO ITS EQUITY SHAREHOLDERS AFTER THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 1964, A ND BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 1965; (II) ANY ADVANCE OR LOAN MADE TO A SH AREHOLDER OR THE SAID CONCERN BY A COMPANY IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF ITS BUSINESS, WHERE THE LENDING OF MONEY IS A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF T HE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY; (II I) ANY DIVIDEND PAID BY A COMPANY WHICH IS SET OFF BY T HE COMPANY AG AINST THE WHOLE O R ANY PART OF ANY SUM PREVIOUSLY PAID BY IT AND TREATED AS A DIVIDEND WITHIN THE MEANING OF SUB - CLAUSE (E), TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH IT IS SO SET OFF; (IV) ANY PAYMENT MADE BY A COMPANY ON PURCHASE OF ITS OWN SHARES FROM A SHAREHOLDE R IN ACC ORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 77 A OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 (1 OF 1956); (V) ANY DISTRIBUTION OF SHARES PURSUANT TO A DEMERG ER BY THE RESULTING COMPANY TO THE SHAREHOLDERS OF THE DEMERGED COMPANY (WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A REDUCTION OF CAPITAL I N THE DEMERGED COMPANY). EXPLANATION 1 . - THE EXPRESSION 'ACCUMULATED PROFITS', WHEREVER IT OCCURS IN THIS CLAUSE, SHALL NOT INCLUD E CAPITAL GAINS ARISING BEFORE T HE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 1946, OR AFTER THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 1948, AND BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF APR IL, 1956. EXPLANATION 2. - THE EXPRESSION 'ACCUMULATED PROFITS' IN SUB - CLAUSES (A ), (B), (D), AND (E ), SHALL INCLUDE ALL PROFITS OF THE COMPANY UP TO THE DATE OF DISTRIBUTION OR PAYMENT REFERRED TO IN THOSE SUB - CLAUSES, AND I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 4 IN SUB - CLAUSE(C) SHALL INCLUDE AL L PROFITS OF THE COMPANY UP TO THE DATE OF LIQUIDATION, BUT SHALL NOT, WHERE THE LIQUIDATION IS CONSEQUENT ON THE COMPULSORY ACQUISITION OF IT S UNDERTAKING BY THE GOVERNMENT OR A CORPORATION OWNED OR CONTROLLED BY THE GOVERNMENT UNDER ANY LAW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE, INCLUDE ANY PROFITS OF THE COMPANY PRIOR TO THREE SUCCESSIVE PREVIOUS YEARS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH ACQUISITION TOOK PLACE. EXPLANATION 3. - FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS CLAUSE, - (A) 'CONCERN' MEANS A HINDU UNDIV IDED FAMILY , OR A FIRM OR AN ASSOCIATION OF PERSONS OR A BODY OF INDIVIDUALS OR A COMPANY; (B) A PERSON SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN A CONCERN, OTHER THAN A COMPANY, IF HE IS, AT ANY TIME DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR, BENEFICIALLY ENTITLE D TO NOT LESS THAN TWENTY PER CENT, OF THE INCOME OF SUCH CONCERN; 5. THE LANGUAGE OF SECTION 2(22) (E) IS VERY CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS. THE LEGISLATURE HAS IDENTIFIED THE THREE CATEGORIES IN WHICH PAYMENTS MADE BY THE COMPA NY SHALL BE TREATED AS DIVIDEN D : (1) AN Y PAYMENT BY A COMPANY TO A SHAREHOLDER BEING A PERSON WHO IS THE BENEFICIAL OWNER OF SHARES NOT BEING SHARES ENTITLED TO A FIXED RATE OF DIVIDEND WHETHER WITH OR WITHOUT A RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROFITS HOLDING NOT LESS THAN 10 PER CENT OF TH E VOTING POWER; (2) ANY PAYMENT BY A COMPANY TO ANY CONCERN IN WHICH THE AFORESAID S HAREHOLDER IS A MEMBER OR A PAR TNER AND IN WHICH HE HAS SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST; THROUGH EXPLAN ATION 3, SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST WAS AL SO DEFINED IN ITS CLAUSE (B) ACCORDING TO WH ICH, A PE RSON SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE SU BSTANTIAL INTEREST IN A CONCERN OTHER THAN A COMPANY IF HE IS AT ANY T IME DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR BE NEFICIALLY ENTITLED TO NOT LESS THAN 20 PER CENT OF THE INCOME OF SUCH CONCERN, (3) AN Y PAYMENT BY ANY SUCH COMPANY ON BEHALF OF OR FOR THE INDIVI DUAL BENEFIT OF ANY SUCH HOLDERS . I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 5 BUT THE PAYMENT MADE BY A COMPANY CAN BE TREATED TO BE DEEMED DIVIDED ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF ACCUMULATED PROFITS POSSESSED BY THE COMPANY. THROUGH EXPLANATION 1 AND EXPLANATION 2, ACCUMULATED PROFITS HAVE BEEN DEFINED IN UNEQUIVOCAL TERMS AND ACCORDING TO THESE EXPLANATIONS, ACCUMULATED PROFITS SHALL NOT INCLUDE CAPITAL GAIN ARISING BE FORE APRIL 1, 1946, OR AFTER M ARCH 31, 1948, AND BEFORE APRIL 1, 1956. THE ACCUMULATED PROFITS IN SUB - CLAUSES ( A), (B), (D) AND (E) OF SECTION 2(22) SHALL INCLUDE ALL PROFITS OF THE COMPANY UP TO THE DATE OF DISTRIBUTION OR PAYMENT REFERRED TO IN THOSE SUB - CLAUSES AND IN SUB - CLAUSE (E) IT SH ALL INCLUDE ALL PROFITS OF THE COMPAN Y UP TO THE DATE OF LIQUIDATION. 14.3] THEREFORE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS MUST BE SATISFIED BEFORE INVOKING SECTION 2(22) (E) IN ANY CASE 1. THE C OMPANY IN QUESTION MUST BE ONE IN WHICH THE PUBLIC ARE NOT SUBSTANTIALLY INTERESTED. 2. THE BORROWER MUST BE A SHAREHOLDER AT THE DATE WHEN THE L OAN W AS ADVANCED I.E. BEING A P ERSON WHO IS THE BENEFICIAL OWNER OF SHARES, NOT BEING SHARES ENTITL ED TO A FIXED RATE OF DIVIDEND WHETHER WITH OR WITHOUT A RIGHT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE PROFITS HOLDIN G NOT LESS THAN 10 PER CENT OF THE VOTIN G POWER. 3. THE THIRD CONDITION IS THAT THE LOAN IS ADVANCED TO SUCH SHAREHOLDER BY SUCH A COMPANY DURING THE YEAR . 4. THE COMPANY POSSESSED ACCUMULATED PROFIT AT THE DATE OF THE LOAN. 5. THE LOAN MUST NOT HAVE BEEN ADVANCED BY THE COMPANY IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF ITS BUSINE SS. IN OILIER WORDS, THIS PROVISION WOULD NOT APPLY TO CASES WHERE THE LENDING OF MONEY IS A SUBSTA NTIAL PART OF THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY AND SUCH ADVANCE OR LOAN MADE BY THE COMPANY IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF ITS BUSINESS. I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 6 6. THE ADVANCE MUST NOT BE TR ADE ADVANCE AS HELD BY JUDICIAL AU THORITIES INCLUDING BY THE HON'B LE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT DELHI IN THE CASES OF CIT V. AMBASSADOR TRAVE LS PVT. LIMITED [2009] 318 ITR 4 76 (DELHI), CIT V CREATIVE DYING AND PRINTING PVT. LIMITE D [2009] 3 18 ITR 476(DELHI) AND CIT V RAJ KUMAR [2009] 318 ITR 462 (DELHI). 6 . ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, HE HAS AN OPENING BALANCE OF RS . 46,73,85,000/ - . HE FURTHER DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS. 8,17,70, 200/ - . THE COMPANY HAS MADE A PAYMENT OF RS. 47,41,70,000/ - TO T HE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR. THUS, AT THE END OF THE YEAR , ASSESSEE HAS TO RECEIVE A SUM OF RS. 7,49,85,200/ - . ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, THERE IS DEBIT BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE COMPANY RATHER IT IS T HE ASSESSEE WHO HAS TO RECEIVE F R O M THE COMPANY. IN OTHER WORDS , THE COMPANY HAS NO CREDIT BALANCE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, SECTION 2(22)(E) IS NOT APPLICABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS APPRECIATED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE BUT OBSERVED THAT THER E IS DISTINCTION BETWEEN LOAN RECEIPT FROM A DIRECTOR AND AMOUNT RECEIVED AS A SHARE - HOLDER DEPOSIT. THE MONEY RECEIVED FRO M THE DIRECTOR , IT IS TO BE TREATED AS EXEMPT IN DEPOSIT EVEN WHEN THE PERSON FROM WHOM MONEY HAS BEEN RECEIVED CEASES TO BE A DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY. BU T THE CA SE IS NOT SAME IN CASE OF A SHARE - HOLDER. HOWEVER, A SHARE - HOLDER FROM WHOM COMPANY HAS RECEIVED ANY MONEY CEASES TO BE MEMBER OF THE COMPANY, THE EXEMPTION CEASES AND THUS THE AMOUNT RECEIVED F R O M HIM WILL BE CONSIDERED AS A DEPOSIT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 58A OF THE COMPANY. THUS, ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE MONEY WAS RECEIVED BY M/S LAXMI DIAMOND FROM THE DIRECTOR WHICH IS TO BE KEPT IN A SEPARATE ACCOUNT AND THE LOAN GIVEN TO I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 7 THE ASSESSEE WAS GIVEN IN THE CAPACITY OF A SHARE - HOLDER W HICH IS TO BE AS SUMED A DEEMED DIVIDEND. THE OTHER CONDITIONS OF SEC TION 2(22)(E) WERE NOT DISPUTED . ACCORDINGLY, LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS WORKED THE DEEMED DIVIDEND AT RS. 18, 45,25,001/ - WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO ALLEGED LOAN AMOUNT IN THE ACCOUNT OF SHARE - HOLDER. 7 . THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE VERY OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT ISSUE IN DISPUTE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HON BLE HIGH COURT RENDERED IN TAX APPEAL NO. 84 OF 2014 WHICH WAS RENDERED IN THE CA SE OF ASSESSEE S FATHER , SHRI HARIBHAI GAJERA. HE PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY OF HON BLE HIGH COURT S DECISION RENDERED ON 7 TH APRIL, 2015. LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND WAS UNABLE TO CONTROVERT THE CONTENTION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. 8 . THE QU ESTION FRAMED BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT READ S AS UNDER : 'WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE IN LAW, THE HON'BLE ITAT IS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND U/S 2(22)(E) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, BY HOLDING THAT AFTER MERGING ALL ACCOUNTS, THE FINAL POSITION IS ZERO IN THE BALANCE SHEET IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OF THE COMPANY AS ON 31.03.2008, WHEREAS ALL THE ACCOUNTS OF THE AS SESSEE WERE OF DIFFERENT NATURE ?' 9 . THE HON BLE HIGH COURT HAS ANSWERED THIS QUESTION IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE FINDING RECORDED BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT READ S AS UNDER : - HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES AND HAVING PERUSED THE DOCUMENTS ON RECORD, IT CLEARLY EMERGES THAT THOUGH THE S A I D COMPANY DID ADVANCE LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE IN DIFFERENT I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 8 ACCOUNTS, IT IS ALSO AN ESTABLISHED FACT THA T IN TWO SEPARATE ACCOUNTS, THE ASSESSEE WAS THE C R EDITOR OF THE COMPANY TO THE TUNE OF RS. 14,26,15,000/ - . AT THE END OF THE Y E AR, THIS EXACTLY IS THE AMOUNT WHICH IS IN NET THE ASSESSEE WIT HDREW FROM THE COMPANY, MAY BE IN DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS . THE PEAK CREDIT IN DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS NEVER EXCEED RS. 13.16 CRORE. UNDER T HE CIRCUMSTANCES , T HE CIT (APPEALS) AS WELL AS THE TRIBUNAL, BOTH TOOK AN OVERALL VIEW OF THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAID COMPANY TO HOLD THAT SECTION 2(22) (E) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT APPLY. AS IS WELL - KNOW, SECTION 2(22) (E) OF THE A C T WOULD NOT APPLY. AS IS WELL - KNOW, SECTION 2(22) (E) OF THE ACT PERTAINS TO DIVIDEND, WHICH WOULD IN CLUDE SEVERAL PAYMENTS MADE BY THE COMPANY. IN PARTICULAR CLAUSE (E) OF TH E SA ID SUB - SECTION (22) PERTAINS TO PAYMENT B Y A COMPANY TO WHICH A LEGAL FR ICTION WOULD ARISE AND SUCH PAYMENT SHALL BE DE EMED TO BE DIVIDEND DISTRIBUTED BY SUCH COMPANY TO THE PER SON. IT IS WELL - KNOWN THAT A LEGAL FRICTION CAN ARISE ONLY AT TH E CIRCUMSTANCE IN WHICH THE LEGISLATURE ENVISAGES GIVING RISE TO THE SAME. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WHEN THE VERY FUNDAMENTAL CONDITION OF A PAYMENT MADE BY THE COMPANY IS ON FACT FOUND NOT ESTA BLISHED, IN OUR OPINION, BOT H THE CIT (APPEAL S ) AND THE TRIBUNAL CORRECTLY REFUSED TO APPLY THE SAID SECTION. 7. THE JUDGMENTS CITED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE , HOWEVER, BASED ON FACTUAL PREMISE, WHICH ARE DIFFERENT, WOULD NOT CHANGE OUR OPINIO N. 10 . IN THE PRESENT CASE ALSO, IF WE TAKE A CONSOLIDATED FIGURE OF ALL THE ACCOUNTS THEN IT IS THE ASSESSEE, WHOSE CREDIT BALANCE IS THERE IN THE COMPANY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TREATED THE ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF DIRECTOR SEPARATELY AND DID NOT CO NSIDER THE CREDIT BALANCE ALONG WITH THE ACCOUNT IN THE CAPACITY OF SHARE HOLD ER . THUS, T HERE IS NO DISPARITY ON FACTS. THE IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS CONSIDER ED IN T H E CASE OF ASSESSEE S FARTHER. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HON BLE JURIS DICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE FINDING OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). I.T.A NO. 1730 /AHD/20 11 A.Y. 20 08 - 09 PAGE NO D CIT V S. VASANTBHAI HARIBHAI GAJERA 9 11 . IN THE RESULT, THE A PPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 - 06 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( G.D. AGRAWAL ) ( RAJPAL YADAV ) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 24 /06 /2015 AK / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,