The DCIT, Cent, Circle-1, Surat V. M/s. Surya Enclave Developers, Surat

ITA 2092/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 89671 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V K SINGH
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 5(2); 27; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND S.S. GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2092/AHD/2011 (ASS TT. YEAR 2008-09) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, ROOM NO.505, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT PAN ABBFS 3082 Q VS M/S. SURYA ENCLAV E DEVELOPERS, 2 ND FLOOR, ASCON CITY, CITY LIGHT ROAD, SURAT. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) BY REVENUE SHRI V.K. SINGH, SR. D.R. BY ASSESSEE. SHRI RAJESH SHAH, A.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 22-06-2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 25/06/2015 / O R D E R PER ANIL CHATURVEDI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE OR DER OF CIT (A)-II, AHMEDABAD DATED 14-6-2011 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERI AL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER. ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. IN THIS CASE, A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS PREMISES AND AT THAT TIME MANAG ING DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY, SHRI JAIPRAKASH ASWANI, MADE A TOTAL DISCL OSURE OF RS.2 CRORE IN THE SURYA ENCLAVE PROJECT. THEREAFTER, THE ASSES SEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 12-1-2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2, 40,48,820/- WHICH INCLUDED THE DISCLOSURE OF RS.2 CRORE MADE AT THE T IME OF SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION. THEREAFTER, ASSESSMENT WAS FRAM ED UNDER SEC. 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DATED 31-12-2009 AND T OTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.2,89,46,800/-. ON THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.2 CRORE, A.O. VIDE ORDER DATED 29-6-2010, LEVIED PENA LTY OF RS.20 LAC UNDER SECTION 271AAA OF THE ACT FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH HAD FAILED TO SPECIFY T HE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME WAS DERIVED BY IT. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORD ER OF A.O. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT (A)., WHO VIDE OR DER DATED 14-6-2011 DELETED THE PENALTY BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE MENTION ED BY THE A.O., THE BASIS OF LEVY OF PENALTY, SUBMISSIONS MAD E BY LD. AR ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPO N. 5.1. THE LD. ARS ARGUMENT THAT THE INCOME DISCLOSE D BY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT BE COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME AS DEFINED IN EXPLANATION (A) TO SECTION 27 1AAA OF THE ACT, CANNOT BE ACCEPTED BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HIMSEL F MADE DISCLOSURE OF UNACCOUNTED INCOME WHILE RECORDING TH E STATEMENT U/S.132(4) OF THE I.T. ACT. HE HAS ALSO ADMITTED TH AT UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS INVESTED IN LAND, UNACCOUNTED CASH, JEWE LER AND RECEIVABLES AND UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS NOT RECORDED N THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FO R UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.2,00,00,000/-, IS CLEARLY COVERED UNDE R THE DEFINITION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME AS PER EXPL. (A) TO SECTION 271AAA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 5.2 ON PERUSAL OF ASSESSMENT ORDER IT IS FOUND THA T THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED NOTICE FOR INITIATING PENA LTY UNDER SECTION ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 3 274 R.W.S. 271AAA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WITHOUT REC ORDING HIS SATISFACTION THAT INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FI RM WAS NOT COVERED UNDER SECTION 271 AAA OF THE ACT AND I ALSO PERUSED THE STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE RECORDED UNDER SECTION 13 2 (4) OF INCOME TAX ACT. THE AO HAS LEVIED THE PENALTY U/S 2 71AAA OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE FIRST TWO CONDITIONS OF SECTION 271 AAA(2) ARE NOT FULFILLED BY THE APPELLANT. THE THREE CONDITIONS PR OVIDED IN SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 271 AAA ARE REPRODUCED AS UN DER: (I) IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH, IN A STATEMENT UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 132, ADMITS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME A ND SPECIFIES THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED; (II) SUBSTANTIATES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLO SED INCOME WAS DERIVED; AND (II) PAYS THE TAX TOGETHER WITH INTEREST, IF ANY, I N RESPECT OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME. . . CLAUSE (I) LAYS DOWN THE FIRST CONDITION THAT UNDIS CLOSED INCOME SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE ST ATEMENT U/S 132(4) AND ASSESSEE SHOULD SPECIFY THE MANNER IN WH ICH IT HAS BEEN DERIVED. THE KEY PERSON OF THE GROUP, SHRI JAI PRAKASH K. ASWANI IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) BEFORE THE DEPUTY DIT IN COURSE OF SEARCH ON 19 & 2.0.2.2008, STATED IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 11, AND DISCLOSED TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2 0.23 CRORES OUT OF WHICH UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.2.00 CRORES B ELONGED TO THE ASSESSEE FIRM. IN THE SAME QUESTION THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER HIMSELF STATED 'IN THESE TRANSACTIONS IT MAINLY APPEARS THA T RECEIPTS OF ON- MONEY FROM VARIOUS RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS BY YOUR GRO UP COMPANIES,' CLEARLY IMPLIES THAT THE INCOME IS EARN ED FROM ON- MONEY. THE ASSESSEE IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 1 32(4) DISCLOSED RS.2.00 CRORES ON ACCOUNT OF NET INCOME F ROM ON-MONEY RECEIPTS FROM BOOKING OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE PROJECT DEVELOPED AND CONSTRUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM ITSE LF. SO ASSESSEE SPECIFIED THE MANNER IN WHICH UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS EARNED. CLAUSE (II) LAYS DOWN THE SECOND CONDITION THAT ASS ESSEE SHOULD SUBSTANTIATE THE MANNER IN WHICH UNDISCLOSED INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED. THE KEY PERSON OF THE GROUP SHRI JAIPRAKAS H K. ASWANI, IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED U/S 132(4) ON 19 & 20.2.2 008, IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO. 11, MADE DISCLOSURE OF TOTAL INCOME OF RS.20.23 CRORES AND HAS PROVIDED BIFURCATION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN DIFFERENT HANDS AND MADE DISCLOSURE OF RS.2.00 CROR ES IN THE ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 4 HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM. IN THE SAME QUESTION TH E AUTHORIZED OFFICER MENTIONED THAT IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT THE ASSESSEE EARNED INCOME FROM ON MONEY RECEIVED FROM BOOKING O F RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND SUBSTANTIATED THE MANNER IN WHICH UNACCOUNTED INCOME WAS EARNED. 5.3 THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTS IN THE CASES OF CIT V. MAHENDRA C. SHAH [2008] 299 ITR 305 ; (GUJ.) AND SECOND CIT V. RADHA KRISHNA GOEL [2005] 278 ITR 454 /[2006] 152 TAXMAN 290 (ALL.), ARE ALSO SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE. IN THE C ASE OF CIT V. MAHENDRA C. SHAH, HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS OBSERVED THAT WHEN THE STATEMENT IS BEING RECORDED BY THE AU THORIZED OFFICER, IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE AUTHORIZED OFFICE R TO EXPLAIN THE PROVISION OF EXPLANATION 5 IN ENTIRELY TO THE ASSES SEE CONCERNED AND THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER CANNOT STOP SHORT AT A P ARTICULAR STAGE SO AS TO PERMIT THE REVENUE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF SU CH LAPSE IN THE STATEMENT. THE REASON IS NOT FAR TO SEEK. IN TH E FIRST INSTANCE, THE STATEMENT IS BEING RECORDED IN THE QUESTION AND ANSWER FORM AND THERE WOULD BE NO OCCASION FOR AN ASSESSEE TO S TATE AND MAKE AVERMENTS IN THE EXACT FORMAT STIPULATED BY TH E PROVISIONS CONSIDERING THE SETTING IN WHICH SUCH STATEMENT IS BEING RECORDED. SECONDLY, CONSIDERING THE SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO EXPECT FROM AN ASSESSEE, WHETHER LITERATE OR ILLITE RATE, TO BE SPECIFIC AND TO THE POINT REGARDING THE CONDITIONS STIPULATED BY THE SECOND EXCEPTION WHILE MAKING STATEMENT UNDER SECTI ON 132(4). EVEN IF THE STATEMENT DOES NOT SPECIFY THE MANNER I N WHICH THE INCOME IS DERIVED, IF THE INCOME IS DECLARED AND TA X THEREON PAID, THERE WOULD BE SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE NOT WARRANTIN G ANY FURTHER DENIAL OF THE BENEFIT. IN THE CASE OF CIT V. RADHA KRISHNA GOEL [2005] 278 ITR 454, THE HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT GAVE SIMILAR FINDINGS AND LAID DOWN SIMILAR PRINCIPLES AS UNDER:- '...FROM A PERUSAL EXPLANATION 5, IT IS EVIDENT THA T THE CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH OTHERWISE DID NOT ATTRACT THE P ENALTY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271(1)(C), NOW BY A DEEMING P ROVISION ATTRACT PENALTY PROVISIONS. BUT AN EXCEPTION IS PRO VIDED IN CLAUSE (2) OF EXPLANATION 5 WHERE THE DEEMING PROVISION WI LL NOT APPLY IF DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH THE ASSESSEE MAKES THE STATEMENT UNDER SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 132 THAT THE MONEY , BULLION, JEWELLERY ETC. FOUND IN HIS POSSESSION HAS BEEN ACQ UIRED OUT OF HIS INCOME WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DISCLOSED SO FAR IN HIS R ETURN OF INCOME AND ALSO SPECIFIES IN THE STATEMENT THE MANNER IN W HICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED AND PAYS THE TAX TOGETHER W ITH INTEREST, ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 5 IF ANY, IN RESPECT OF SUCH INCOME....UNDER SECTION 132(4) OF THE ACT, UNLESS THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER PUTS A SPECIFIC QUESTION WITH REGARD TO THE MANNER IN WHICH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIV ED, IT IS NOT EXPECTED FROM THE PERSON TO MAKE A STATEMENT IN THI S, REGARD AND IN CASE IN THE STATEMENT THE MANNER IN WHICH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED, HAS NOT BEEN STATED BUT HAS BEEN STATED SU BSEQUENTLY, IT AMOUNTS TO COMPLIANCE WITH EXPLANATION 5(2). IF THE RE IS NOTHING TO THE CONTRARY IN THE STATEMENT- RECORDED UNDER SE CTION 132(4) OF THE ACT, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIFIC STATEMEN T ABOUT THE MANNER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME, HAS BEEN DERIVED, IT C AN BE INFERRED THAT SUCH UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DERIVED F ROM THE BUSINESS WHICH HE WAS CARRYING ON. THE OBJECT OF TH E PROVISION IS ACHIEVED BY MAKING THE STATEMENT ADMITTING THE NON- DISCLOSURE OF MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY, ETC. THUS, MUCH IMPORTAN CE SHOULD HOT BE ATTACHED TO THE STATEMENT ABOUT THE MANNER IN WH ICH SUCH INCOME HAS BEEN DERIVED. IT CAN BE INFERRED ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANYTHI NG TO THE CONTRARY. THEREFORE, MERE NON-STATEMENT OF THE MANN ER IN WHICH SUCH INCOME WAS '.DERIVED WOULD NOT MAKE EXPLANATIO N 5(2) INAPPLICABLE. '(P. 454).' . 5.4 AFTER GOING THROUGH THE STATEMENT RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132 (4) OF THE IT ACT AND THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONOURABLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT AND ALLAHABAD HIGH CO URT, IT IS HELD THAT THE AO HAS WRONGLY REJECTED THE ASSESSEE' S ARGUMENTS ON THE GROUND THAT THE DECISION WAS RENDERED IN REF ERENCE TO EXPLANATION 5 OF SECTION 271(1)(C) AND NOT WITH REG ARD TO THE SECTION 271AAA. THE HONOURABLE COURTS HAVE LAID DOW N THE PRINCIPLE THAT THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER IS TO EXPLAIN THE PROVISION TO THE ASSESSEE AND ASK THE RELEVANT QUESTIONS ON THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS EARNED AND IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS APPLICABLE FOR SECTION 271AAA INSTEAD OF EXPL ANATION 5 OF SECTION 271(1). IN THE WHOLE, STATEMENT RECORDED UN DER SECTION 132(4) ON 19 & 20.2.2008, THE AUTHORIZED OFFICER HA S NOT ASKED ANY FURTHER QUESTION BUT WAS SATISFIED WITH THE MAN NER THE INCOME WAS EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. CLAUSE (III) LAYS DOWN THE THIRD CONDITION REGARDIN G THE PAYMENT OF TAX ALONG WITH INTEREST ON UNDISCLOSED INCOME ADMIT TED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH. IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE TA X AND INTEREST HAD BEEN PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HIMSELF STATED THE SAME IN THE PENALTY ORDER. THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE DISCLOSURE OF UNACCOUNTED INC OME WHILE RECORDING STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 132(4) OF THE INC OME TAX ACT AND PAID THE TAXES WITH INTEREST. THE DISCLOSURE WA S NEITHER MADE ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 6 AGAINST ANY MONEY, BULLION, JEWELLERY OR OTHER VALU ABLE ARTICLES OR THINGS FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH NOR RRIA.D E AGAINST ANY ENTRY IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS OR OTHER DOCUMENTS O R TRANSACTIONS FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH BECAUSE NO SUCH ASSET S OR TRANSACTIONS WERE FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH . THE DISCLOSURE OF UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE ENTIRE GROU P WAS MADE IN THE STATEMENT OF KEY PERSON OF THE GROUP, SHRI JAIP RAKASH K.ASWANI RECORDED U/S.132(4) ON THE GROUND OF 'ON M ONEY' COLLECTED ON BOOKING OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN T HEIR PROJECTS AND FROM THE TEXTILE BUSINESS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE CIRCUMSTANCES AND ON THE BASIS OF PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE HONOURABLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COU RT AND BY THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE ABOVE CITED CASES THE A SSESSEE CAN BE SAID TO HAVE SUBSTANTIALLY DISCHARGED THE ONUS OF E XPLAINING AND SUBSTANTIATING THE MANNER OF EARNING UNDISCLOSED IN COME BECAUSE THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ASSESSMENT OF DISCLOSURE MADE BY ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL INCOME AND NOT ON T HE BASIS OF THE INVESTMENT/EXPENDITURE UNDER THE VARIOUS DEEMING PR OVISIONS. MOREOVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER, IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT, ACCEPTED THE DISCLOSED INCOM E DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE RETURNED INCOME INCLUDED DISCLOSU RE AMOUNT OF RS.2,00,00,000/- MADE DURING SEARCH WHILE RECORDING STATEMENT U/S.132(4) OF THE ACT. THE A.O. HAS NOT MADE ANY C OMMENT OR OBSERVATION ABOUT THE SOURCE AND NATURE OF INCOME, MANNER IN WHICH INCOME WAS DERIVED OR SUBSTANTIATING THE MANN ER. THIS SHOWS THAT THE A.O. HIMSELF WAS SATISFIED ABOUT THE DISCLOSED INCOME OFFERED IN RETURN OF INCOME. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN IN THE DECISIONS BY THE HON'BL E HIGH COURTS NARRATED ABOVE IN PARAS 4.1 AND 5.3 OF THIS ORDER, IT IS HELD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN LEVYING THE PENALTY U/S 271AAA OF THE ACT AND HENCE THE SAME IS DELETED. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE CIT (A), THE REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. BEFORE US THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A. O. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. A.R. REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFO RE THE A.O. AND THE CIT (A). AND ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION O F AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 7 IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. SMT. SULOCHANADEVI D. AGARW AL IN ITA NO.1052/AHD/2012 ORDER DATED 20-7-2012 AND DELHI BE NCH TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SMT. RAJ RANI GUPTA VS. DCIT ORDER DATE D 30-3-2012. HE THUS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT (A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT CIT (A) WHILE DE LETING THE PENALTY HAS NOTED THAT THE DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE OF U NDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.2 CRORE WAS COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME AS PER THE EXPLANATION (A) TO SECTION 271AAA R.WS. 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSEE HAD SPECIFIED THE MANNER IN WHICH THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS EARNED AND HAD SUBSTANTIATED THE MANNER IN WHIC H UNACCOUNTED INCOME WAS EARNED. THE CIT (A) WHILE RELYING ON TH E DECISION OF HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MAHENDRA C. SHAH [2008 ] 299 ITR 305 (GUJ.) AND CIT VS. RADHA KISHAN GOEL [2005] 278 ITR 454 HAS HELD THAT THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE AFORESAID DECISION SQUARELY APPLIES TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT CASE. BEFORE US THE REVENUE AS NOT BROUGHT ANY CONTRARY BINDING DECISION IN ITS SU PPORT NOR COULD DEMONSTRATE AS TO HOW THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY T HE DECISIONS RELIED UPON THE CIT (A) ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE AFORESAID CASE. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFER E WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) AND THUS THIS GROUND OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON THURSDAY, THE 25 TH /06/2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ANIL CHATURVEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2092/ AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 8 AHMEDABAD. DATED 25/ 6 /2015 PATKI / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! / CONCERNED CIT 4. ! () / THE CIT(A) II, AHMEDABAD 5. $%& '', , )*++ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. &,- . / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ! '#$, &' / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION- 22-6-2015 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER :23-6-2015 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P .S./P.S. 23-6-2015 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: 25-6-2015 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK : 25 -6-2015 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 7. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 8. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER