SIKAR SAHAKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD., Jaipur V. ITO, Sikar

ITA 177/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 17723114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS NEENA JEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHENDRA GARGIYA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 244A; 148; 263; 12

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 177/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LIMITED, BASANT VIHAR, JAIPUR ROAD, SIKAR. CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SIKAR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AABSA 0923 N VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MAHENDRA GARGIYA (ADV) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : MRS. NEENA JEPH (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 24/06/2015 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11/08/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27/11/2012 PASSED BY THE LEARNED C.I.T.(A)-III, JAIP UR FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10. THE RESPECTIVE GROUNDS OF ASSESSEES APPEA L ARE AS UNDER:- 1.1 71,62,624/-: THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE DENIAL OF T HE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION MADE BY THE SOCIETY U/S ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 2 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION SO CONFIRMED/DENIED, BEING TOTALLY CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS KINDLY BE ALLOWED AS CLAIMED. 1.2 THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN FURTHER CONFIRMING INVOKING AND MISINTERPRETING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) OF TH E ACT AND CONSEQUENTLY, DENYING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTIO N MADE BY THE SOCIETY U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION SO CONFIRMED/DENIED, BEING TOTAL LY CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS KINDLY B E ALLOWED AS CLAIMED. 2. THE A.O. & LD. CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN LAW AS WELL A S ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN CHARGING INTEREST U/S 234A, 234B, 234C AND 234D OF THE ACT AND AS ALSO IN WITHDRAWING INTEREST U/S 244A OF THE ACT. THE APPELLANT TOTALLY DENIES ITS LIABILITY OF CHARGING AND WITHDRAWAL OF ANY SUCH INTEREST. THE INTEREST SO CHARGED/WITHDRAWN, BEING CONTRARY TO THE PROVISIONS OF LAW AND FACTS, KINDLY BE DELETED IN FULL. 3. THE APPELLANT PRAYS YOU HONOUR INDULGENCE TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER OF OR ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING 2. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN ON 30/09/2009 IN TH E STATUS OF SOCIETY/AOP DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. NIL. THE C ASE WAS SCRUTINIZED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). THE ASSESSEE IS A SOCIETY AND ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS O F BANKING. DURING ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 3 THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE EARNED I NCOME OF RS. 71,62,624/-. AGAINST THIS INCOME, THE ASSESSEE COOP ERATIVE SOCIETY CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE SAME AMOUNT AND DE CLARED NIL INCOME. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER OBSERVED TH AT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED BEFORE HIM THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY A GRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY AND PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RU RAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. AS PER SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT W.E.F. 01/4/2 007 ONLY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OF PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK ARE ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION. THE ASS ESSING OFFICER GAVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD ON THIS ISSUE AND ASKED TO CLARIFY WHETHER THE ASSESSEE FALLS UNDER THE DEFINIT ION OF A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY COOPERATIV E AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE AS SESSEE IS COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 19/09/ 2011 BUT VIDE LETTER DATED 23/09/2011, IT WAS CLAIMED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY AND IS THEREFORE ENTITL ED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER CONSIDERED THE DEFINITION OF PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY AS GIVEN IN BANK REGULA TION ACT, 1949, WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 4 (1) THE PRIMARY OBJECT OR PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF WHI CH IS TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ACCOMMODATION TO ITS MEMBERS FOR A AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES OR FOR PURPOSES CONNECTED WITH AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES (INCLUDING THE MARKETING OF CROPS); AND (2) THE BYE-LAWS OF WHICH DO NOT PERMIT ADMISSION OF ANY OTHER CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AS A MEMBER: THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE P RIMARY OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE IS TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ACCOMMODATION TO I TS MEMBERS FOR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES OR PURPOSES CONNECTED WITH AGR ICULTURAL ACTIVITIES. THE ASSESSEE SOCIETYS MAIN FUNCTION IS OF BANKING A ND PROVIDING LONG TERM FINANCIAL TERM OF 3 TO 15 YEARS FOR THE DEVELO PMENT OF LAND. FOR GRANTING LONG TERMS FINANCE, THE BANK ACCEPT HYPOTH ECATION OF LAND/RESIDENTIAL BUILDING OR ANY IMMOVABLE PROPERTY OF THE BORROWER. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY. SECONDLY, A PRIMARY AG RICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETYS BYE LAWS SHOULD NOT PERMIT ADMISSION OF AN Y OTHER COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AS A MEMBER BUT SECTION 12 OF THE BYE LAWS O F M/S SIKAR SAHAKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. PROVIDE FOR FOUR TY PES OF MEMBERS. THIS PROVISION ALSO KEEPS THE ASSESSEE AWAY FROM THE AMBIT OF THE ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 5 DEFINITION OF A PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY . THIRDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO NOT COVERED IN THE DEFINITION OF A PRIMARY CO OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK AS IS GIVEN IN EXPLANATI ON (B) TO SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE BANKS AREA OF OPERA TION IS NEITHER CONFINED TO A TALUK NOT ITS PRINCIPAL OBJECT IS TO PROVIDE FOR LONG TERM CREDIT FOR AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT ACTIV ITIES. THE PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE IS TO PROVIDE LONG TERM FINA NCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF LAND AS PER SECTION 67 OF THE RAJAST HAN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT, 2001 AND THEREFORE, IS NOT PRIMARILY E NGAGED IN PROVIDING LOANS FOR AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES AND RURAL DEVELOP MENT. THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO REPRODUCED THE BOARDS CIRCULAR DATED 20/09/2010 ON PAGE 4 OF ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT IS FURTHER HELD THAT AFTE R INSERTION OF SUB- SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P ONLY PRIMARY AGRICULTURA L CREDIT SOCIETY OF PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPM ENT BANK ARE ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT. FURTHER THE DEFINITION OF COOPERATIVE BANK AND PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SO CIETY PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK HAS ALSO BEEN DEFINED IN THE ACT JUST BELOW THE SUB-SECTION (4) O F SECTION 80P. THE ASSESSEE IS NEITHER PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOC IETY OR PRIMARY COOPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK ENGAGED IN THE ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 6 ACTIVITIES AS DEFINED IN EXPLANATION TO SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P, THEREFORE, THE DEDUCTION OF RS. 71,62,624/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BANK U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT IS NOT ALLOWABLE AN D SAME WAS ADDED IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT( A), WHO HAD UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- IT IS EVIDENT FROM RECORDS THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT WAS DECIDED BY CIT(A) FOR A.Y. 2008-09 IN ITA NO. 314/JPR/10-11 VIDE ORDER DATED 29/08/2011. IT WAS HELD THEREIN THAT THE APPELLANT IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P AFTER THE AMENDMENT MADE W.E.F. 01/04/2007. SINCE THE FACTS ARE SAME IN THE INSTANT YEAR I.E. A.Y. 2009-10, THE DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P IS CONFIRMED FOR THE REASONS GIVEN IN THE APPELLANT OR DER OF A.Y. 2008-09. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD. A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT A BARE READING OF THE P ROVISIONS CONTAINED U/S 80P OF THE ACT, IT IS EXPLICITLY CLEAR THAT IF A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF BANKING OR P ROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS AND ITS GROSS TOTAL INCOM E INCLUDES ANY INCOME ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 7 THEREFROM, SUCH CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENTITLED FO R THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATI VE SOCIETY AND IS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITY TO ITS MEMBERS AND DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2) HAD ALL ALONE BEEN GRANTED ON THAT BASIS ON LY. THE ASSESSEE IS NEITHER A COOPERATIVE BANK NOR A PRIMARY COOPERATIV E BANK NOR EVEN A REGIONAL RURAL BANK.. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING INASMUCH AS IT HAS NOT OBTAINED THE LICENSE REQUIRED U/S 22 READ WITH 56(A) OF BANKING REGULATION ACT FOR DOING SUCH BUSINESS FROM THE NABARD OR RESERVE BANK OF INDIA. THUS THE ASSESS EE IS COVERED BY SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P WAS INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2006 W.E.F. 01/4/2007 I .E. FOR A.Y. 2007- 08. HOWEVER, DESPITE AMENDMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICE R ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) AS CLAIMED AND ARGUED TH AT THE ASSESSEES CASE IS COVERED FROM THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT FOR A. Y. 2007-08 VIDE ORDER DATED 30/03/2009. IT IS FURTHER ARGUED THAT T HE DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA DO NOT APPLY TO INCOME TAX PROCEEDING YET HOWEVER, UNLESS THERE IS A CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, T HE VIEW TAKEN EARLIER SHOULD NORMALLY BE TAKEN CONSISTENTLY. HE RELIED ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF SARDAR KEHAR SINGH VS. CIT (1992) 195 ITR 76 9 (RAJ.) AND A VERY RECENT DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. EXCEL IN DUSTRIES LTD. (2013) ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 8 358 ITR 295 (SC). THE BURDEN LIES ON THE REVENUE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE BANK, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN D ISCHARGED BY THE REVENUE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A STATE/CENTRA L COOPERATIVE BANK. HE HAS FURTHER DRAWN OUR ATTENTION OF DIFFERENCE BE TWEEN COOPERATIVE BANK AND COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATION WAS ALSO TO DISENTITLE ONLY THOSE COOPERATIVE BANKS, WHO WERE AND ARE WORKING AT PAR WITH THE OTHER COMMERCIAL BANK, FROM GETTING THE DEDUCTION. HE HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION ON BOARDS CIRCULAR ON IT W.E.F. 01/4/2007. THE DEFINITION OF INCOME U/S 2(24)(VIIA) ALSO HAD BEEN AMENDED (INCLUDING PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES) CARRIED ON BY A COOPE RATIVE SOCIETY WITH ITS MEMBERS. THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND P ROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS BUT NOT DOING ANY BANKING BUSINESS OR IS NOT A COOPERATIVE BANK. IN ABSENCE OF BANKING LICENSE OR OTHERWISE STILL CONTINUED TO BE COVERED U/S 80P(2) OF THE ACT. HE F URTHER RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. 362 ITR 331 WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE SIMILAR ADDITION U/S 80P OF THE ACT AND EXCLUSION PROVIDED IN SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80 P WOULD NOT APPLY. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE KARNAT AKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SHREE BILURU GURUBASAVE PATTINA SAHK ARI SANGH ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 9 NIYAMITHA IN ITA NO. 5006/2013 DATED 05/02/2014 WHER EIN ASSESSEES STATUS WAS COOPERATIVE SOCIETY AND NOT A COOPERATIVE BANK AND EXEMPTION FROM THE PAYMENT OF TAX U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) WAS HELD JUSTIFIED BY THE HONBLE COURT. THE OTHER CASE LAWS RELIED BY THE LD AR ARE AS UNDER:- (I) CIT VS. BANGALORE CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LT D. IN ITA NO. 598/2013 (KAR.) (II) SAGAR CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. VS. CIT (2014) 40 CCH 0036 (BANG TRIB). (III) CIT VS. SURAT VANKAR SAHAKARI SANGH LTD. IN TA X APPEAL NO. 1150 OF 2013 (GUJ). 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD DR HAS VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTE D THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER GOI NG THROUGH THE CASE LAWS CITED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BYELAWS OF SOCIE TY, REVEALED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A COOPERATIVE BANK BUT COOPERAT IVE SOCIETY. THE EXCLUSIVE PROVISION TO SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 8 0P IS NOT APPLICABLE IN ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 10 THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CASE LAW REFERRED BY TH E ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS COOPERATIVE CREDI T SOCIETY LTD. (SUPRA) IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE. THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- FROM THE ABOVE CLARIFICATION, IT CAN BE GATHERED T HAT SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P WILL NOT APPLY TO AN ASSESSEE WH ICH IS NOT A COOPERATIVE BANK. IN THE CASE CLARIFIED BY CBDT, DEL HI COOP URBAN THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. WAS UNDER CONSIDER ATION. CIRCULAR CLARIFIED THAT THE SAID ENTITY NOT BEING A COOPERATIVE BANK, SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT WOULD NOT APPLY TO I T. IN VIEW OF SUCH CLARIFICATION, WE CANNOT ENTERTAIN THE REVENUE S CONTENTION THAT SECTION 80P(4) WOULD EXCLUDE NOT ONLY THE CO-OP ERATIVE BANKS OTHER THAN THOSE FULFILLING THE DESCRIPTION C ONTAINED THEREIN BUT ALSO CREDIT SOCIETIES, WHICH ARE NOT COOPERATIVE BANKS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, RESPONDENT ASSESSEE IS ADMITTEDLY NOT A CREDIT SO- OPERATIVE BANK BUT A CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY. E XCLUSION CLAUSE OF SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P, THEREFORE, WOULD NOT APPLY. IN THE RESULT, TAX APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. THE DEPARTMENT ITSELF HAS ALLOWED DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2 )(A)(I) OF THE ACT IN A.Y. 2007-08, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN REOPENED U/S 14 8 AND NO ORDER U/S 263 WAS PASSED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THE LD DR HAD N OT BROUGHT ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE THAT IN PRECEDING YEAR, THE ASS ESSING OFFICERS ORDER IN A.Y. 2007-08 HAD NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. BY ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 11 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJAR AT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS COOPERATIVE CREDI T SOCIETY LTD.(SUPRA) ON IDENTICAL ISSUE, WE HOLD THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY NOT A COOPERATIVE BANK AND IS E NTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 7. THE SECOND GROUND OF APPEAL IS AGAINST CHARGING O F INTEREST U/S 234A, 234B, 234C AND 234D OF THE ACT. THIS GROUND I S CONSEQUENTIAL TO THE ABOVE FINDING, THEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO TAKE DECISION AS PER LAW. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/08/2015. SD/- SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH VH-VKJ-EHUK (R.P.TOLANI) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 11 TH AUGUST, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LIMITED, SIKAR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD-1, SIKAR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT ITA 177/JP/2013_ M/S SIKAR SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD. VS. ITO 12 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 177/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR