The ACIT,GNR Circle, Gandhinagar V. Gujarat State Seeds Corporation, Gandhinagar

ITA 2057/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 89640 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SONIA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: J P SHAH
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JM & ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM ITA NOS.2955/AHD/2010 ASST. YEAR 2007-08 DY. CIT, GNR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, BLOCK NO.14, 4 TH FLOOR, UDYOG BHAVAN, SECTOR-11, GANDHINAGAR. VS GUJARAT STATE SEEDS CORPN, BEEJ BHAVAN, SECTOR- 10A, GANDHINAGAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PA NO.AAACG5619A & ITA NO.2057/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 ASSTT. CIT, GNR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, BLOCK NO.14, 4 TH FLOOR, UDYOG BHAVAN, SECTOR-11, GANDHINAGAR. VS GUJARAT STATE SEEDS CORPN, BEEJ BHAVAN, SECTOR- 10A, GANDHINAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) AND ITA NO.1666/AHD/2012 ASST. YEAR 2009-10 ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 2 DY. CIT, GNR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR, BLOCK NO.14, 4 TH FLOOR, UDYOG BHAVAN, SECTOR-11, GANDHINAGAR. VS GUJARAT STATE SEEDS CORPN, BEEJ BHAVAN, SECTOR- 10A, GANDHINAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SMT. SONIA KUMAR, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI SUNIL TALATI & SHRI J. P. SHAH, A.R. DATE OF HEARING: 01.06.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT:29/06/2015 O R D E R PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER. ALL THESE APPEALS OF REVENUE PERTAIN TO THE SAME A SSESSEE AND THE ISSUES INVOLVED ARE SIMILAR, SO THEY WERE H EARD TOGETHER AND THEY ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. IN ITA NO.2955/AHD/2010, ASST. YEAR 2007-08: ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 3 GROUND NO.1: THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DE LETING THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF CLOSING STOCK OF RS.1,61,88,935/- BEING 50% OF THE VALUE OF SEEDS PR OCURED BY IT. 3. THE FACTS ARE THAT THE AO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1,61,88,935/- BEING 50% OF THE VALUE OF SEEDS PU RCHASED ON JANGAD BASIS. THE ASSESSEE IS A STATE GOVERNMENT COMPANY ENGAGED IN PRODUCTION PROCESSING AND MARKETING OF S EEDS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE SEEDS PROCURED FRO M FARMERS ARE EXCLUDED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE INVENTORY OF THE CORPORATION UNTIL CERTIFICATION FROM CONCERNED AGENCY IS OBTAIN ED. THE ASSESSEE CLARIFIED THAT SEEDS ARE PROCURED FROM FARMERS UNDE R CONTRACT FARMING. THE PAYMENT OF 50% OF APPROXIMATE MARKET V ALUE OF SEEDS BROUGHT BY FARMERS TO ASSESSEE IS MADE TO THE FARMERS. THEN THE SEEDS ARE SENT FOR CERTIFICATION FOR QUALITY. O NCE THE SEEDS ARE CERTIFIED BY GUJARAT STATE SEEDS CERTIFYING AGENCY THEN ONLY THE SEEDS ARE SHOWN IN THE PURCHASES. UNTIL THEN THIS R EMAINS JANGAD STOCK KEPT ON BEHALF OF THE FARMERS WITH CORPORATI ON AND PAYMENT MADE TO FARMERS IS SHOWN AS ADVANCE TO FARMERS. TH E ASSESSEE FURTHER CLAIMED THAT THE ABOVE SYSTEM WAS BEING CON SISTENTLY ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 4 FOLLOWED BY IT OVER THE YEARS. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R REJECTED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OBSERVING AS UNDER :- AS PER THE SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES, PURCH ASES OF SEEDS PROCURED FROM FARMERS UNDER SEED PRODUCTION PROGRAM MES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR AS PURCHASES ONLY AFTER NECESSARY CER TIFICATION FROM THE CONCERNED AGENCY. PENDING SUCH CERTIFICATION, T HE STOCK RECEIVED FROM FARMERS ARE TREATED AS GOODS RECEIVED ON BEHALF OF THE FARMERS AND ARE ALSO EXCLUDED FROM THE INVENTOR Y OF THE CORPORATION. THUS, THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER SHOWN S UCH SEEDS AMOUNTING TO RS.3,23,77,870/- AS ITS PURCHASES NOR HAS INCLUDED SUCH SEEDS IN ITS CLOSING STOCK. AS PER ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS, IT HAS MADE AN ADHOC PAYMENT OF 50% OF SUCH STOCK TO T HE FARMS AND SUCH PAYMENT IS SHOWN AS ADVANCES TO FARMERS. ON PE RUSAL OF THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN ANY SUCH ADVANCES TO THE FARMERS ON THE ASSET SIDE OF THE BALANCE SHEET. THEREFORE, 50% OF THE VALUE OF SEEDS AMOUNTING TO RS.1,61,88,935/- SHALL BE ADDED TO THE ASSESSEES I NCOME. 3.1. THE MATTER WAS CARRIED IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FI RST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHEREIN DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERED THE SUBMI SSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICE R GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. THE SAME HAS BEEN OPPOSED. 3.2. BEFORE US THE LD. DR REITERATED THE STAND OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RI GHTLY OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NEITHER SHOWN SUCH SEEDS AMOU NTING TO ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 5 RS.3,23,77,870/- AS ITS PURCHASES NOR HAS INCLUDED SUCH SEEDS IN ITS CLOSING STOCK. THEREFORE, HE MADE ADDITION OF 50% O F THE VALUE OF SEEDS AMOUNTING TO RS.1,61,88,935/-. ON THE OTHER H AND, THE LD. ARS. ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN M AKING ADDITION OF RS.1,61,88,935/- AS INCOME ON VALUE OF SEEDS PRO CURED ON JANGAD BASIS. SEEDS ARE PROCURED FROM FARMERS SUB JECT TO APPROVAL AND CERTIFICATION FROM GUJARAT STATE SEEDS CERTIFYING AGENCY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN NOT CONSIDER ING THE SEEDS PROCURED FROM FARMERS ON APPROVAL BASIS. THE ASSESS EE HAS BEEN ADOPTING THIS PRACTICE FOR LAST ONE YEAR. BUT NO DI SALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE IN EARLIER YEARS. IN A NUT SHELL THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BE UPHELD. 3.3. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED RS.1,61,88,935/- I.E. 5 0% OF JANGAD STOCK OF RS.3,23,77,870/- HE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS NEITHER SHOWN SEEDS OF RS.3,23,77,870/- AS PURCHASES NOR H AS INCLUDED IN ITS CLOSING STOCK. THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BE EN THAT GOODS ARE RECEIVED ON APPROVAL BASIS. TILL THE GOODS ARE CERT IFIED TO BE OF RELIABLE QUALITY, THE SAME REMAINS PROPERTY OF FARM ERS AND ARE KEPT IN THE GODOWN OF ASSESSEE. ONLY AFTER CERTIFICATION OF THE SEEDS BY THE CONCERNED CERTIFYING AGENCIES, THE ABOVE SEEDS ARE TAKEN INTO ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 6 PURCHASE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE. ONLY THEN THAT WOULD FORM CLOSING STOCK AT THE END OF THE YEAR. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE WAS MAKING ADHOC PAYMENT OF 50% OF THE STOCK TO THE FARMERS AS ADVANCES ON RECEIPT OF GOOD S ON APPROVAL WHILE AS PER THE BALANCE SHEET, THE ASSESSEE HAS NO T SHOWN SUCH ADVANCES ON THE ASSET SIDE OF THE BALANCE SHEET. TH E ASSESSEE GAVE DETAILED BIFURCATION IN THIS REGARD AND HAD STATED THAT IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. AS PER SC HEDULE J OF LOANS AND ADVANCES, ADVANCES RECOVERABLE IN CASH OR KIND ARE SHOWN AT RS.3,18,56,035/- IN BALANCE SHEET. THE GRO UPING OF SCH. J SHOWS ADVANCES TO PRODUCERS (FARMERS AGAINST JANGAD PURCHASES) AT RS.56,64,882/- WHICH IS SUPPORTED BY THE DETAILED STATEMENT OF PART PAYMENT MADE OF JANGAD STOCKFAR MER-WISE. THE ASSESSEE FULLY EXPLAINED ITS STAND AS TAKEN IN ITS ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THIS SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTI NG IN A CONSISTENT MANNER. SAME HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DE PARTMENT AS EVIDENT FROM THE ORDERS PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE AC T IN THE EARLIER YEARS. THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AUDITED BY TAX AUDITORS, GOVERNMENT AUDITORS AND STATUTORY AUDITORS. THE ASS ESSEES RELIANCE ON PROVISIONS OF SECTION 24 OF THE SALE OF GOODS AC T AND ACCOUNTING STANDARDS IN THIS REGARD WAS FOUND APPRO PRIATE. KEEPING IN VIEW OF OUR DISCUSSION, WE FIND THAT CIT (A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,61,88,93 5/-. NO ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 7 INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE WELL REASONED ORD ER OF CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY SAME IS UPHELD. 4. THE SIMILAR ISSUE AROSE IN ITA NO.2057/AHD/2011 ASST. YEAR 2008-09 BEING GROUND NO.5 AS IS INVOLVED IN AY 2007 -08. THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THAT OF AY 2007-08 WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED BY US VIDE PARA NO. 3 ABOVE OF THIS ORDER. THEREFORE, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTER FERE IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. THE SAME IS UPHELD. 5. NEXT ISSUE AS RAISED IN THE GROUND NO.4 IN ITA NO.2057/AHD/2011 FOR AY 2008-09 (AND GROUND NO.3 OF ITA NO.1666/AHD/2009-10 ARE COMMON REGARDING DELETION O F ADDITION OF RS.40,00,000/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF REVOLVING FUND ). THE ADDITION OF RS.40 LAKHS TREATING THE RECEIPTS FROM GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT AS REVENUE RECEIPTS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER DECIDED THE SAME IN ASSESSMENT ORDER AS UNDER :- 4.1 FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, IT IS CLEAR THAT G OVERNMENT OF GUJARAT HAS REGULARLY GIVEN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR VARIOUS PURPOSES AS UNDER : I) TO STRENGTHEN THE PROCESS OF PURCHASING, STORAGE OF SEEDS; ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 8 II) TO GIVE FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO GUJARAT STATE SEED S CORPORATION LTD., SO THAT THE GOOD QUALITY SEEDS AR E AVAILABLE TO THE FARMERS AT REASONABLE RATES; III) TO MEET THE WORKING CAPITAL REQUIREMENT OF THE GUJARAT STATE SEEDS CORPORATION LTD. IT IS FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS FULLY UTI LIZED THE FUND FOR THESE PURPOSES. 4.2 IT IS ALSO CLEAR THAT WHILE OTHER SUBSIDIES ARE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS A NODAL AGENCY FOR DISBURSEMENT TO VARI OUS OTHER CONCERNS BELONGING TO GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT RS.40 L AC RECEIVED UNDER REVOLVING FUND PARTAKE THE CHARACTER OF REVEN UE RECEIPT FOR THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT RETURNED BACK TO AMOUNT, UNDER REVOLVING FUND, TO THE GOVERN MENT IN SPITE OF HAVING SURPLUS UNDER THIS HEAD. STRENGTHEN THE F ACT THAT IT IS INDEED REVENUE RECEIPT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . 4.3 THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SAHNEY STEEL AND PRESS WORKS LTD. & OTHERS 228 ITR 253 HAS HELD THAT IF SOME SUBSIDY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ASSISTING HIM IN CARRYING OUT THE BUSINESS OPERATION SUCH SUBSIDY MUST BE TREATED AS ASSISTANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRADE AND HENCE CLASSIFIED AS RE VENUE RECEIPTS. IN THE PRESENT CASE TOO, DURING THE YEAR, RS.40 LAC IS RECEIVED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DAY-TO-DAY BUSINESS VIZ. PURCHASING, PROCURING, PROCESSING, STORAGE OF SEEDS AND MEETING THE WORKIN G CAPITAL REQUIREMENT. THE ASSESSEE HAS UTILIZED THE GRANT FO R THIS PURPOSE ONLY. 4.4 IN VIEW OF THE FACTS BROUGHT OUT AS ABOVE RS.40 LAC RECEIVED FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT UNDER THE HEAD REVO LVING FUND ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 9 DURING F.Y. 2007-08 IS TREATED AS REVENUE RECEIPT I N THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5.1 THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLA TE AUTHORITY WHERE IN THE CONTENTIONS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AS MENTIONED IN PARA 4.2 OF THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND AFTER CONSID ERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE CIT(A) HAS DELETED TH E ADDITION HOLDING THE FUND NOT TO BE OF THE NATURE OF INCOME. 5.2 THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT CIT(A) ERRED IN DELET ING THE ADDITION OF RS.40 LAKH BECAUSE THE SAME WAS NOT UTI LIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IT WAS GIVEN. THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE RESTORED . ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 5.3 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GOI NG THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE BEFOR E US IS TREATMENT OF REVOLVING FUNDS RECEIVED FROM GOVERNMENT OF GUJA RAT. THE PURPOSE OF THE FUNDS IS TO AUGMENT THE TRADING ACTI VITY OF THE ASSESSEE MEANING THEREBY IF IT WAS A CASE OF NON RE TURNABLE GRANT OR SUBSIDY IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A REVENUE RECEIPT. THE A SSESSING OFFICER FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE FUND IS RETUR NABLE ON DEMAND. ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 10 THE NATURE OF THIS FUND IS THAT OF A LOAN WITHOUT I NTEREST. A LOAN CAN NEVER PARTAKE THE FORM OF INCOME. THE AMOUNT GIVEN WAS NEITHER RETURNABLE AND NOR A LIABILITY. IT IS UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE IT IS GIVEN. SO, THIS CANNOT BE HELD TO BE OF THE NATURE OF INCOME. IN THIS BACKGROUND, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE CIT(A). SAME IS UPHELD. THI S TAKE CARE OF THIS ISSUE IN BOTH YEARS I.E. ASST. YEARS 2008-09 & ASST. YEAR 2009-10. 6. NEXT ISSUE AS RAISED IN GROUND NO.4 IN ITA NO.1666/AHD/2012 FOR AY 2009-10 IS AS UNDER :- 4. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO TOWARDS ENHANCEMENT OF CLOS ING STOCK AMOUNTING TO RS.12,71,103/- 7. THE FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE AD DITION OF RS.12,71,103 STATING THAT THE EXPENSES INCURRED UND ER THE HEAD CARRIAGE INWARD, PROCESSING, INSPECTION, SEED TESTI NG, LOADING & UNLOADING CHARGES, OCTROI ETC. ATTRIBUTABLE TO CLOS ING STOCK OF SEEDS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ASSESSEE. HE THEREFORE, MODIFIED THE CLOSING STOCK UPWARDS BY RS.12,71,103/ - AND MADE THE CORRESPONDING TRADING ADDITION. ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 11 7.1 THE MATTER WAS CARRIED IN APPEAL TO THE CIT(A) WHERE THE CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED AS RECORDED IN PARA 5.1 OF CIT(A)S ORDER. HAVING CONSIDERED THE SAME THE CIT(A) HAS GRANTED R ELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. SIMILAR ADDITION WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER IN THE PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR WITHOUT CONFRONTING T HE ISSUE TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, WHEN THE FACTS WERE REMANDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE MISTAKE WAS ACCEPTED AND THE ADDITION WAS DELETED. THIS YEAR ALSO, THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE AUDIT REPORT ANNEXED WITH THE RETURN AS WELL AS THE SPECIFIC AUTHORS CERTIFICATE IN THIS REGARD BEFORE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER VIDE ANNEX.E TO ITS LETTER DATED 14/10/2011 IN THE ASSES SMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT IT IS CLEAR F ROM THE ABOVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY CONSIDERED THE EXPENS ES UNDER FOUR HEADS I.E. CARRIAGE INWARD, PROCESSING INSPECTION, SEED TESTING, LOADING AND UNLOADING CHARGES AND OCTROI FOR SEED P URCHASE. THEREFORE, THERE REMAINS NO FURTHER SCOPE FOR ADDIT ION OF RS.12,71,103/- AS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE REFORE, THE ADDITION MADE IS UNCALLED FOR AND WAS DIRECTED TO B E DELETED. ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 12 7.2 THE DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CI T(A). 7.3 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GOI NG THROUGH THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, IN OUR OPINION THERE IS NO NEED TO INTERFERE IN THE WELL REASONED ORDER OF CIT(A) BECAUSE THE AS SESSEE HAS ALREADY CONSIDERED THE EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD CARR IAGE INWARD, PROCESSING, INSPECTION, SEED TESTING, LOADING & UNL OADING CHARGES AND SEEDS PURCHASE. NO SUCH DISALLOWANCE WA S DESIRABLE. THEREFORE, WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 8. GROUND NO.5 IN ITA NO.1666/AHD/2012 FOR AY 2009- 10 READS AS UNDER :- THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DEL ETING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO IN THE VALUE OF SEEDS PURC HASED AMOUNTING TO RS.57,79,414/-. 9. AN IDENTICAL ISSUE CAME UP BEFORE US FOR AY 2007 -08 FOR OUR CONSIDERATION AND AFTER DETAILED DISCUSSION WE HAVE DECIDED THE ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 13 SAME VIDE PARA-3.3 ABOVE. THE FACTS BEING SIMILAR, THIS ISSUE IS TAKEN CARE OF BY OUR ABOVE DECISION. NOTHING CONTRA RY HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY THE REVENUE, SO, WE FIND N O INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) WHO HAS DELETED THE IMPUGNED AD DITION. 10. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REV ENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29/6/15 SD/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED :_29/6/2015 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD ITA NOS.2955, 2057 & 1666 ASST. YEARS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 14 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 1/6/2015 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 3/6/2015 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: __________ 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 29/6/15 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: