Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, V. The Rayat Sevak Co-operative Bank Ltd., Satara

ITA 1960/PUN/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 196024514 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 07-11-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 143(3); 6; 63; 28

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SATARA CIRCLE, SATARA . APPELLANT VS. THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., 455/20/F, SADAR BAZAR, SATARA PAN: AAAAT0952H . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI RAJESH DAMOR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.K. KULKARNI DATE OF HEARING : 08-10-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27-10-2014 ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A)- III, PUNE DATED 27-08-2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AGAINST ORDER PASSED U/S. 143(3) R.W.S. 263 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS CONTRARY TO THE LAW AND FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN TREATING THE INCOME FROM INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE COOPERATIVE BANK FROM VOLUNTARY RESERVES AS INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO BUSINESS OF BANKING ELIGIBLE FOR DEDU CTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I). 3. WHETHER INTEREST EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE WOULD COME I N THE CATEGORY OF INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' AND WOULD NOT QUALIFY FOR ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 2 DEDUCTION AS BUSINESS INCOME UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A) (I) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 4. WHETHER THE CIT(A) IS TO RIGHT IN IGNORING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN THE CASE OF TOTGAR'S CO- OPERATIVE SALE SOCIETY LTD VS. ITO [2010] 188 TAXMAN 282 (SC). 5. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, ALT ERNATIVELY, WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ASCERTAINING WHETHER THE INVESTMENTS OU T OF VOLUNTARY RESERVES WERE MADE IN EASILY REALIZABLE SECURITIES. 6. FOR THESE AND SUCH OTHER REASONS AS MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING, THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX (APPEALS) MAY BE VACATED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OF FICER BE RESTORED. 7. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR DELET E ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL DURING THE COURSE OF APP ELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITAT. 3. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUND S OF APPEAL BUT THE SOLITARY ISSUE RELATES TO THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT IN RELATION TO A SU M OF RS.31,43,742/-, WHICH WAS DENIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSMEN T WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT AND THEREAFTER, THE CIT-III, PUNE VIDE ORDER DATED 22.02.2010 PASSED UNDER SECTION 2 63 OF THE ACT SET ASIDE THE EARLIER ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R. THE CIT NOTED THAT THE NON-STATUTORY / VOLUNTARY RESERVES W ERE UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE IN MAKING INVESTMENTS ON WHICH INTEREST INCOME H AD BEEN EARNED, ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDE R SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH TH E DETAILS OF THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED AND HOW MUCH OUT OF THE SAID INCOME WAS UTILIZED FOR BANKING BUSINESS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE RECORD AND SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, NOT ED THAT THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT FULLY SUPPORTE D BY ANY ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 3 EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE PARA 5.8 OF THE ASSESS MENT ORDER OBSERVED THAT IT WAS NOT CLEAR AS TO HOW MUCH INTEREST INCOME EARNED ON INVESTMENTS OF NON-STATUTORY / VOLUNTARY RESERVES W ERE UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE COURSE OF ITS REGULAR BANKING BUSINES S AND UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW TH AT QUANTUM OF INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE SAID FUNDS HAD TO BE ESTIMATED. THE ASSESSEE WAS, THUS, SHOW CAUSED AS T O WHY THE INTEREST INCOME FROM ITS INVESTMENTS OF VOLUNTARY RESERVES LIKE BUILDING FUNDS, COMPUTERIZATION FUND, DEVELOPMENT FUNDS, ETC. SH OULD NOT BE BROUGHT TO TAX AS THE SAME WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR D EDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ASKED TO INFORM THE AVERAGE RATE OF INCOME EARNED DURING THE YEAR. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER ESTIMATED THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVED INTEREST INCOM E AT 9.53% FROM ITS TOTAL STATUTORY/ VOLUNTARY FUNDS OF RS.3,29,87,854/- ON WHICH THE INTEREST WORKED OUT TO BE RS.31,43,742/- AND THE SA ME WAS ADDED AS INCOME TO THE ASSESSEE AND IT WAS HELD THAT THE SAM E WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 5. THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING A COOPE RATIVE BANK WAS GOVERNED BY THE MAHARASHTRA COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT AND SINCE IT WAS IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING, IT WAS ALSO BOUND BY THE PROVISIONS OF BANKING REGULATION ACT. UNDER THE SAID ACT, CLAUSE (N) OF SECTION 6(1) OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, THE BANKS WERE PERMITTE D TO DO ALL SUCH THINGS AS ARE INCIDENTAL OR CONDUCIVE TO THE PROMOT ION OR ADVANCEMENT OF THE BUSINESS OF THE BANKING COMPANY. RELIA NCE WAS PLACED ON THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIG H COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BARODA PEOPLES CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. R EPORTED IN (2006) 280 ITR 282 (GUJ) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE INVE STMENT OF SO- ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 4 CALLED SURPLUS FUNDS, WERE IN THE NATURE OF PROMOTION OR AD VANCEMENT OF THE BUSINESS OF THE BANKING. IT WAS FURTHER HELD BY TH E GUJARAT HIGH COURT THAT A BANKING COMPANY INCLUDING A COOPERATIV E SOCIETY MAY ACCEPT DEPOSITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF LENDING OR INVEST MENT AND THE DEFINITION DOES NOT STIPULATE THAT THE INVESTMENT HAD TO B E MADE ONLY TO THE EXTENT PROVIDED UNDER THE GUJARAT COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT OR THE BANKING REGULATION ACT. THE CIT(A), THUS, HELD THAT THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF BUILDING FU ND, COMPUTERIZATION FUND AND DEVELOPMENT FUND HAD BEEN MADE IN THE NORMAL BANKING BUSINESS AND IN VIEW THEREOF, THE DENIAL OF D EDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT BEING INTEREST ATTRIBUT ABLE AT ESTIMATED RATE 9.53% ON THE VOLUNTARY RESERVES, WAS NOT JUSTIFIE D. 6. THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A). T HE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSE SSEE ON THE OTHER HAND PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IN RELATION TO T HE ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESS EE IS A COOPERATIVE BANK AND CERTAIN NON-STATUTORY / VOLUNTARY RESERVES WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PR ESENT APPEAL IS WHETHER THE INTEREST INCOME ON INVESTMENT OF SUCH RES ERVES WAS UTILIZED IN THE COURSE OF REGULAR BANKING BUSINESS. THE ASS ESSEE HAD MADE THE FOLLOWING VOLUNTARY RESERVES. ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 5 SR.NO. NATURE OF FUND AMOUNT (RS.) 1 BUILDING FUND 2,24,87,864/ - 2 COMPUTERIZATION FUND 55,00,000/ - 3 DEVE LOPMENT FUND 50,00,000/ - TOTAL 3,29,87,864/ - 9. THE ASSESSEE CLARIFIED THAT THE BUILDING FUND AND OTHER FUNDS HAD BEEN FULLY UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSES FOR WHICH THE SAME WERE CREATED I.E. FOR BUILDINGS, COMPUTERS, ETC. THE DEVELOPMENT FU ND WAS NOT SEPARATELY USED OR INVESTED AND SO INCOME FROM TH IS FUND WAS NOT ASCERTAINABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HOWEVER, ESTIMATED THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE SAID FUNDS AND IN TEREST AT THE AVERAGE RATE EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ITS WORKING FU NDS I.E. AT 9.53% WAS APPLIED AND A SUM OF RS.31,43,742/- FROM THE TOTAL VOLUN TARY FUND OF RS.3.29 CRORES WAS HELD TO BE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCT ION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. 10. THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKIN G AND IS GOVERNED BY THE BANKING REGULATION ACT. UNDER THE PROV ISIONS OF BANKING REGULATION ACT, THE BANK IS PROMOTED TO CARRY OU T SUCH ACTIVITIES WHICH ARE INCIDENTAL OR CONDUCIVE TO THE PROMOTIO N OR ADVANCEMENT OF THE BUSINESS OF BANKING COMPANY. THE NA TURE OF ACTIVITIES WHICH CAN BE CARRIED ON BY BANK HAS BEEN ELABO RATELY CONSIDERED BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF BARODA PEOPLES CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. (SUPRA) AND RELEVANT OBSE RVATIONS OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT ARE AS UNDER: 20. ONCE THIS IS THE SCHEME LAID DOWN BY THE STATUT E, ALL SUCH ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE, IN THE FORM OF VARIOUS ALLOWANCES A ND DEDUCTIONS, ARE ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF FROM THE INCOM E EARNED BY AN ASSESSEE UNDER A PARTICULAR HEAD. IN THE CASE OF INCOME FALLING UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINES S OR ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 6 PROFESSION SECTION 29 OF THE ACT STIPULATES THAT T HE INCOME REFERRED TO IN SECTION 28 SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORD ANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTIONS 30 TO 43D OF THE A CT. THEREFORE, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE CARRYING ON BUSINESS OF BA NKING IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, INCOME UNDER SECTION 28 IS COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 29 OF THE ACT AND S UCH NET FIGURE IS TAKEN AS A COMPONENT OF THE TOTAL INCOME OR GROSS T OTAL INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VI-A. IF THIS BE THE POSITION, THE DIRECTION ISSUED BY THE APEX COURT CAN NOT BE READ TO MEAN THAT AN EXERCISE TO ASCERTAIN THE EXPENDITURE I S REQUIRED TO BE UNDERTAKEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATION OF DE DUCTIBILITY OR OTHERWISE OF INCOME EARNED FROM UTILIZATION OF VOLUNTARY RESERVES. 21. EXAMINING THE ISSUE FROM A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT AN GLE, ONE MAY TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 4 READ WITH SECTION 5 AND SECTION 2(45) OF THE ACT. THE CHARGE O F INCOME-TAX IS FASTENED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF T HE TOTAL INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. SUCH TOTAL INCOME INCLUDES ALL IN COME FROM WHATEVER SOURCE DERIVED WHICH IS EITHER RECEIVED OR ACCRUES TO AN ASSESSEE DURING ANY PREVIOUS YEAR. SECTION 2(45) OF T HE ACT DEFINES TOTAL INCOME TO MEAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF I NCOME REFERRED TO IN SECTION 5, COMPUTED IN THE MANNER LAI D DOWN IN THE ACT. THUS, ALL INCOME RECEIVED BY OR ACCRUING TO AN A SSESSEE DURING ANY PREVIOUS YEAR IS TO BE CHARGED TO TAX A FTER COMPUTATION IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED BY THE ACT. TH EREFORE, IN THE CASE OF AN ASSESSEE, LIKE THE PRESENT ASSESSEE, A LL INTEREST INCOME, ACTUALLY RECEIVED OR ACCRUED, HAS TO BE COMPUT ED IN THE MANNER PROVIDED IN THE ACT SO AS TO FORM THE TOTAL INCOME WHICH IS SUBJECTED TO CHARGE UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE ACT. THAT ONCE AGAIN GIVES AN INDICATION THAT ALL SUCH INCOME HAS TO BE C OMPUTED AS PROVIDED ON A CONJOINT READING OF SECTIONS 28 AND 2 9 OF THE ACT AND ONLY THEREAFTER THE NET FIGURE IS REQUIRED TO BE TAKEN UP FOR CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASCERTAINING DEDU CTIBILITY OR OTHERWISE UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE ACT WHICH FALLS UN DER THE HEADING C OF CHAPTER VI-A OF THE ACT. 22 23 24. THE LEGAL POSITION THUS IS THAT AN ORDER OF THE APEX COURT CANNOT BE UNDERSTOOD AS LAYING DOWN A PROPOSITION C ONTRARY TO LAW. THE ORDER OF THE APEX COURT CANNOT AND SHOULD N OT BE CONSTRUED IN A MANNER SO AS TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE STATUTE AS THE APEX COURT COULD NO T HAVE CONTEMPLATED PASSING AN ORDER CONTRARY TO THE PROVI SIONS OF THE ACT. THE CONTENTION ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE, THEREF ORE, TO THE EXTENT THAT THE DESTINATION OR THE APPLICATION OF T HE INCOME HAS TO BE ASCERTAINED FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETERMINING THE DEDU CTIBILITY OF THE INCOME BASED ON THE AFORESAID DIRECTION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF MEHSANA DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BA NK LTD. [2001] 251 ITR 522 CANNOT BE ACCEPTED FOR THE AFORESTATED REASONS. TH E SCHEME OF THE ACT AS TO ACCRUAL OF INCOME, CHARGE OF TAX AT THE POINT OF ACCRUAL ; WHETHER A PARTICULAR RECEIPT IS OF THE NATURE OF REVENUE OF THE NATURE OF INCOME, GETS DETERMINED O NCE AND FOR ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 7 ALL WHEN THE INCOME IS EARNED ; AND IS NOT DEPENDENT UPON ITS DESTINATION OR MANNER OF UTILISATION. ALL EXPENSES, A LLOWANCES AND DEDUCTIONS ARE ALREADY TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE INCOME FORMS PART OF TOTAL INCOME. IT IS AT THIS STA GE THAT THE ELIGIBILITY TO DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P OF THE AC T COMES UP FOR DETERMINATION. THE DIRECTION OF THE APEX COURT CANNO T BE READ TO HAVE MEANT AS BEING INCONSISTENT WITH THE BASIC STA TUTORY SCHEME OF THE ACT. 25. THEN, IT BECOMES NECESSARY TO READ AND UNDERSTAN D THE DIRECTION MADE BY THE APEX COURT. IT IS STATED THAT FACTUALLY IT MAY BE ASCERTAINED WHETHER THE INCOME DERIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE INVESTMENTS OF ITS VOLUNTARY RESERVES HAS BEEN UTILISED BY IT IN THE COURSE OF ITS ORDINARY BANKING BUSINESS . CONSIDERING THE SCHEME OF THE ACT, THE ONLY MEANING THAT ONE CAN MAKE OF THE DIRECTION IS TO READ THE DIRECTION TO INTEND TO CON VEY SO AS TO ASCERTAIN THAT INCOME EARNED BY AN ASSESSEE IN EARL IER YEARS FROM INVESTMENT OF FUNDS CONSTITUTING VOLUNTARY RESERVES H AS BEEN UTILISED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING FURTHER INVESTMENTS WHICH ARE IN EASILY REALISABLE SECURITIE S, IN PERMISSIBLE MODES OF INVESTMENTS AND ANY INCOME ATT RIBUTABLE TO SUCH INVESTMENTS WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDE R SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. ONE CANNOT SAY THAT THE DIRE CTION TO ASCERTAIN UTILISATION IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERM INATION OF ACCRUAL OF INCOME OR FOR DETERMINING ITS ELIGIBILITY TO DEDU CTION CONSIDERING THE SCHEME OF THE ACT WHICH IS SET OUT HEREINBEFOR E. THE EXPENSES, WHICH A BANK IS REQUIRED TO INCUR IN THE C OURSE OF ITS ORDINARY BANKING BUSINESS, HAVE ALREADY GONE INTO CO NSIDERATION BEFORE THE NET FIGURE IS WORKED OUT FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLAIMING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. HENC E, TO REITERATE, THE DIRECTION CAN ONLY MEAN ASCERTAINMENT OF UTILIS ATION OF NET INCOME OF EARLIER YEARS, WHICH FORMS PART OF THE FUN DS WHICH ARE INVESTED, AND GIVEN THE NOMENCLATURE OF VOLUNTARY RESERV ES. 11. THE CIT(A) VIDE PARA 4.4 HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE VO LUNTARY RESERVES TOTALING TO RS.3.29 CRORES WERE INVESTED IN THE FORM OF BUILDING FUND OF RS.2.24 CRORES, COMPUTERIZATION FUND OF RS.55 LA CS AND DEVELOPMENT FUND OF RS.50 LACS, WHICH IN TURN WAS INVES TED EITHER IN CONSTRUCTION OF BUILDING, COMPUTERIZATION OR IN THE NORMAL BANKING BUSINESS. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR TH E REVENUE HAS FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A). ONCE THE R ESERVES HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR CARRYING ON THE BANKING ACTIVITY, WE FIND NO MERIT IN THE DENIAL OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. W E ARE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD AND UPH OLDING THE ITA NO. 1960/PN/2013 THE RAYAT SEVAK CO-OP. BANK LTD. 8 SAME, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO THE CLAIM O F DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(2)(A)(I) OF THE ACT. THUS, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 27 TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PUNE, DATED: 27 TH OCTOBER, 2014. RK / GCVSR COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : - 1) THE ASSESSEE; 2) THE DEPARTMENT; 3) THE CIT(A)-III, PUNE; 4) THE CIT-III, PUNE; 5) THE DR A BENCH, I.T.A.T., PUNE; 6) GUARD FILE. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., PUNE