MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN PVT.LTD., Sikar V. ACIT, Sikar

ITA 195/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5223 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 03-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DHK
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3); 56

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13. M/S MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN PVT. LTD, SIKAR, (RAJSTHAN). CUKE VS. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - SIKAR, (RAJSTHAN). LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AADCS 4525 L VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJEEV SOGANI (C.A) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27.04.2017. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15/05/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-3, JAIPUR DATED 31.12.2015 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2012-13. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING REVISED GROUN DS OF APPEAL :- 1. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LD. AO IN MAKING ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 8,04,302/- BEING 10% OF ADMINIS TRATIVE AND OTHER EXPENSE, OUT OF THE TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 14,08 ,597/-. THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED, ARBITRAR Y AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED BY QUASH ING THE SAID DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 8,04,302/-. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCE OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) HA ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN DISALLO WING ELECTRICITY EXPENSES OF RS. 11,56,945/- U/S 40A OF THE I.T. ACT , 1961 OUT OF THE TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 13,37,643/-. THE ACTION OF LD. CIT(A) IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED, ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE FAC TS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED BY QUASHING THE SAID DISALLOW ANCE OF RS. 11,56,945/-. 2 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. 3. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CRAVES ITS RIGHTS TO ADD, AMEND OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSMEN T WAS FRAMED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE ORDER DATED 06.02.2015. WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT, THE AO MA DE DISALLOWANCE OUT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OF RS. 13,37,643/- AND DISA LLOWANCE OF EXPENSES BY INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. 3. GROUND NO. 1 IS AGAINST DISALLOWANCE MADE OUT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES ON AD HOC BASIS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REI TERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AS MADE IN THE WRITTEN BRIEF. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED TH AT, IT WAS CONTENDED BEFORE LD. CIT(A), THAT OUT OF TOTAL EXPENSES, THE ASSESSEE HA S ALREADY DISALLOWED RS. 17,85,760/- BEING INCOME-TAX EXPENSES AND RS. 2,76, 290/-, BEING 50% OF THE DONATION PAID IN COMPUTATION OF THE TOTAL INCOME. ANY FURTHER DISALLOWANCE OF 10% ON THE SAME AMOUNT, WILL AMOUNT OF DOUBLE TAXATION. EXPLANATION IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) W HICH HAD BEEN EXCLUSIVELY INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD NOT POINTED OUT ANY SPECIFIC INSTANCE OF PERSONAL N ATURE EXPENSES DEBITED INTO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. 3.1 HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE DISALLOW ANCE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 8,04,302/-. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE APPELLANT IS A PR IVATE LTD. COMPANY. ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPAN IES ACT, AS WELL AS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IN BOTH THESE AUD ITED REPORTS NO REMARK FOR QUALIFICATION IS MADE BY THE AUDITORS. EVIDENCES OF THE EXPENSES WERE FOUND 3 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. SATISFACTORY BY THE AUDITORS. BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WER E PRODUCED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS . THESE BOOKS HAD BEEN ACCEPTED AND WERE NOT REJECTED U/S 145(3) OF THE AC T. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THAT, HE HAD CONDUC TED DETAILS SCRUTINY OF VARIOUS EXPENSES DEBITED TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNTS UNDER THE HEAD ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER EXPENSES. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF S.S.P PV T. LTD [2011] 202 TAXMAN 386 (P & H-HC). 3.2 ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVES OPPOSED THE SUBMISSIONS AND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER. 3.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW . THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT EVIDENCE WHICH WAS PRODUCED IN SUPPOR T OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER EXPENSES WERE DEFECTIVE IN ONE WAY OR OTHER. ADMITT EDLY, THE DISALLOWANCE IS MADE ON ADHOC BASIS, NO SPECIFIC DEFECT OR SHORTCOMING I S POINTED OUT BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THEREFORE, UNDER THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CA SE, WE HEREBY DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE MADE O N ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 4. GROUND NO. 2, IS AGAINST CONFIRMATION OF DISALLO WANCE OF ELECTRICITY EXPENSES BY INVOKING OF PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE A CT. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT JAIPUR VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. IS A GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN COMPANY, THE STATE IS HOLDING 100% SHARES . THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT COMPLETE DETAILS WERE PROVIDED. THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE, 4 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. ASSESSEE FALLS UNDER THE CATEGORY OF EXEMPTION CLAU SE AS PROVIDED UNDER RULE 6DD(B) OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES 1962. 4.1 THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE IS THAT, SINCE THE GOVERNMENT COMPANY FALLS UNDER CATEGORY OF STATE IN TERMS OF ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. THEREFORE, THE EXEMPTION PR OVIDED TO GOVERNMENT UNDER RULE 6DD(B) IS AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNS EL FURTHER REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS AS MADE IN THE WRITTEN BRIEF. 4.2 ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENT ATIVES OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION AND SUBMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS ARE CL EAR. THERE IS NO AMBIGUITY INTO THE PROVISION AND INTERPRETATION THEREOF. HE SUBMI TTED THE ORDER OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, IS JUSTIFIED AS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE DOE S NOT FALL UNDER EXEMPTION AS PRESCRIBED UNDER RULE 6DD OF THE INCOME-TAX RULE, 1 962. 4.3 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD. CIT (A) AFFIRMED THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN PARA 6.3 BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 6.3 I FIND THAT OUT OF TOTAL PAYMENT OF 13,37,643/ - AS SUM OF RS. 180698/- (105751+23733+25093+26121) IS PAID BY CHEQ UE EARLIER AND ADJUSTED DURING THE YEAR. THIS IS IN FACT PAYM ENT BY CHEQUE. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 18 0698/- IS DELETED. SO FAR AS THE BALANCE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1156945/- IS CONCERNED, THE PAYMENT IS TO JVVNL WHICH IS NOT A PAYMENT TO GOVT. AND ALSO NOT COVERED IN ANY EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES. THE HON BLE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH IN CASE OF KHETAN MINERALS (P) LTD. VS. ITO 1 235/JP/2008 DATED 30.09.2005 HELD THAT CASH PAYMENT TO JVVNL IS HIT B Y THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3). RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER O F ITAT JAIPUR BENCH, 5 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO TO THE EXTENT OF RS . 11,56,945/- IS CONFIRMED. 4.4 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED AND PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH RENDERED I N THE CASE OF SAPNA SANJAY RAISONI VS. ITO, WHEREIN THE HONBLE CO-ORDINATE BE NCH WAS PLEASED TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONB LE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SHRI LAXMI SATYANARAYAN OIL MILL VS. CIT 367 ITR 200 (AP). THE LD. COUNSEL ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH RENDERED IN THE CASE OF SMT. USHA MAHESHWARI V/S DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 UDAIPUR ITA NO. 187 & 188 /JU /2013 WHEREIN ALSO THE DECISION WAS RENDER ED ON THE BASIS THAT THE MONEY WAS COLLECTED BY THE GOVERNMENT COMPANY. WE ARE UN ABLE TO ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AS PROVISIONS ARE QUITE CLEAR THE DECISION HAVE BEEN RENDERED UNDER THE BELIEF THAT IF ANY GOVERNME NT COMPANY QUALIFIES TO BE STATE IN TERM OF ARTICLE 12 WOULD BE ENTITLED FOR E XEMPTION UNDER RULE 6DD(B). IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE PROVISIONS ARE CLEAR FOR T HE SAKE OF CLARITY RULE 6DD IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 6DD. NO DISALLOWANCE UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 40 A SHALL BE MADE AND NO PAYMENT SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE PROFI TS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OF PROFESSION UNDER SUB SECTION (3A) OF SE CTION 40A WHERE A PAYMENT OF AGGREGATE OF PAYMENTS MADE TO A PERSON I N A DAY, OTHERWISE THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DRAWN ON A BANK OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT, EXCEED TWENTY THOUSAND RU PEES IN THE CASES AND CIRCUMSTANCES SPECIFIED HEREUNDER, NAMELY:- (A) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE TO- 6 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. (I) THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA OR ANY BANKING COMPANY AS DEFINED IN CLAUSE (C) OF SECTION 5 OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 (10 OF 1949); (II) THE STATE BANK OF INDIA OR ANY SUBSIDIARY BANK AS D EFINED IN SECTION 2 OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA (SUBSIDIARY BANKS) ACT, 1959 (38 OF 1959); (III) ANY CO-OPERATIVE BANK OR LAND MORTGAGE BANK; (IV) ANY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR ANY PRIM ARY CREDIT SOCIETY AS DEFINED UNDER SECTION 56 OF THE B ANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 (10 OF 1949); (V) THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA ESTABLISHED UNDER SECTION 3 OF THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION ACT, 19 56 (31 OF 1956) (B) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE TO THE GOVERNMENT AND, UN DER THE RULES FRAMED BY IT, SUCH PAYMENT IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE IN LEGAL TENDER; (C) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE BY- (I) ANY LETTER OF CREDIT ARRANGEMENTS THROUGH A BANK; (II) A MAIL OR TELEGRAPHIC TRANSFER THROUGH A BA NK; (III) A BOOK ADJUSTMENT FROM ANY ACCOUNT IN A BANK TO ANY OTHER ACCOUNT IN THAT OR ANY OTHER BANK; (IV) A BILL OF EXCHANGE MADE PAYABLE ONLY TO A B ANK; (V) THE USE OF ELECTRONIC CLEARING SYSTEM THROUGH A BANK ACCOUNT; (VII) A CREDIT CARD; (VIII) A DEBIT CARD. EXPLANATION- FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CLAUSE AND CLA USE (G), THE TERM BANK MEANS ANY BANK, BANKING COMPANY OR SOCI ETY REFERRED TO IN SUB-CLAUSE (I) TO (IV) OF CLAUSE (A) AND INCLUDES ANY BANK [NOT BEING A BANKING COMPANY AS DEFINED IN CLUSE (C) OF SECTION 5 OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 (1 0 OF 1949), 7 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. WHETHER INCORP9ORATED OR NOT, WHICH IS ESTABLISHED OUTSIDE INDIA; (D) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE BY WAY OF ADJUSTMENT AGAINST THE AMOUNT OF ANY LIABILITY INCURRED BY THE PAYEE FOR A NY GOODS SUPPLIED OR SERVICES RENDERED BY THE ASSESSEE TO SU CH PAYEE; (E) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE FOR THE PURCHASE OF- (I) AGRICULTURAL OR FOREST PRODUCE; OR (II) THE PRODUCE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY (INCLUDING LIV ESTOCK, MEAT, HIDES AND SKINS) OR DIARY OR POULTRY FARMING; OR. (III) FISH OR FISH PRODUCTS OR (IV) THE PRODUCTS OF HORTICULTURE OR APICULTURE, TO THE CULTIVATOR, GROWER OR PRODUCER OF SUCH ARTICLES, PR ODUCE OR PRODUCTS; (F) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE FOR THE PURCHASE OF T HE PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED OR PROCESSED WITHOUT THE AID OF POWER IN A COTTAGE INDUSTRY, TO THE PRODUCER OF SUCH PRODUCTS; (G) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE IN A VILLAGE OR TOWN, WHICH ON THE DATE OF SUCH PAYMENT IS NOT SERVED BY ANY BANK, TO ANY PERSON WHO ORDINARILY RESIDES, OR IS CARRYING ON ANY BUSIN ESS, PROFESSION OR VOCATION, IN ANY SUCH VILLAGE OR TOWN; (H) WHERE ANY PAYMENT IS MADE TO AN EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE OR THE HEIR OF ANY SUCH EMPLOYEE ON OR IN CONNECTION W ITH THE RETIREMENT, RETRENCHMENT, RESIGNATION, DISCHARGE OR DEATH OF SUCH EMPLOYEE, ON ACCOUNT OF GRATUITY, RETRENCHMENT COMPENSATION OF SIMILAR TERMINAL BENEFIT AND THE AG GREGATE OF SUCH SUMS PAYMENT TO THE EMPLOYEE OF HIS HEIR DOES NOT EXCEED FIFTY THOUSAND RUPEES. (I) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE BY AN ASSESEE BY WAY OF SALARY TO HIS EMPLOYEE AFTER DEDUCTING THE INCOME-TAX FROM SA LARY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 192 OF TH E ACT, AND WHEN SUCH EMPLOYEE- 8 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. (I) IS TEMPORARILY POSTED FOR A CONTINUOUS PERIOD O F FIFTEEN DAYS OR MORE IN A PLACE OTHER THAN HIS NORMAL PLACE OF DUTY OR ON A SHIP; AND (II) DOES NOT MAINTAIN ANY ACCOUNT IN ANY BANK AT SUCH P LACE OR SHIP; (J) WHERE THE PAYMENT WAS REQUIRED TO BE MADE ON A DAY ON WHICH THE BANKS WERE CLOSED EITHER ON ACCOUNT OF HOLIDAY OR STRIKE; (K) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE BY ANY PERSON TO HIS AGENT WHO IS REQUIRED TO MAKE PAYMENT IN CASH FOR GOODS OR SERVI CES ON BEHALF OF SUCH PERSON; (L) WHERE THE PAYMENT IS MADE BY AN AUTHORIZED DEAL ER OR A MONEY CHANGER AGAINST PURCHASE OF FOREIGN CURRENCY OR TRAVELERS CHEQUES IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF HIS BUSINESS. EXPLANATION- FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS CLAUSES, THE EXPRESSIONS AUTHORIZED DEALER OR MONEY CHANGER MEANS A PERSO N AUTHORIZED AS AN AUTHORIZED DEALER OR A MONEY CHANG ER TO DEAL IN FOREIGN CURRENCY OR FOREIGN EXCHANGE UNDER ANY L AW FOR THE TIME BEING IN FORCE.] 4.5 FROM A BARE READING OF THE ABOVE RULES, IT IS C LEAR THAT BANKING COMPANIES AND SUCH OTHER GOVERNMENT COMPANIES, WHICH AS PER T HE LEGISLATION WOULD REMAIN EXEMPT IS GIVEN IN THE AFORESAID PROVISION. THE TE RMS STATE CANNOT BE CONSTRUED AS GOVERNMENT AS GIVEN IN THE AFORESAID PROVISION. TH E TERMS STATE, IS USED FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE BUT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTERPRETATIO N OF RULES 6DD(B), THIS CANNOT BE TAKEN AS IF ALL THE GOVERNMENTS COMPANIES ARE EXEM PT MERELY BECAUSE THEY QUALIFIED TO BE TERMED AS STATE UNDER ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. HAD THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATION WAS TO EXEMPT OTHER GO VERNMENT COMPANIES AS WELL AS SAME WOULD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED IN THE PROVISION OF RULE 6DD(B) AS HAS BEEN 9 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD. SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN CLAUSE (A) OF RULE 6DD IN RESPECT OF RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, BANKING COMPANY., STATE BANK OF INDIA OR ANY SUBSID IARY BANKING ANY COOPERATIVE BANK, LAND MORTGAGED BANK ANY PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY, ANY PRIMARY CREDITS SOCIETY, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDI A. 4.6 IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, CLAUSE (B) OF RULE 6DD CANNOT BE STRETCHED TO THE EXTENT OF BRINGING EVERY GOVERNMENT ENTITY/COMPANY INTO THE FOLD OF EXEMPT CATEGORY. THEREFORE, HAD THE INTENTION OF THE LEGI SLATION WAS TO EXEMPT THE GOVERNMENT ELECTRICITY COMPANY, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN MENTIONED IN THE CLAUSE (B) OF RULE 6DD. THEREFORE, THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON MONDAY, THE 15 TH DAY OF MAY 2017. SD/- SD/- ( HKKXPUN ( DQY HKKJR ) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 15/05/2017. POOJA/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- M/S SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN P VT. LTD, SIKAR. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE ACIT CIRCLE- SIKAR (RAJASTH AN). 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 195/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 10 ITA NO. 195/JP/2016 SHRI MODI LEVIGATED KAOLIN (P) LTD.