The DCIT, Central Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad V. Nirma Chemical Works Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 2168/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0859 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 06-06-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R I PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: H C SHAH AR SR NO; S N SOPARKAR
• Keywords: Business income; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 234B; 14A; 145

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2168/AHD/2008 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 1 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1), AHMEDABAD VS NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD, NIRMA HOUSE, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD PAN : AAACN 5353 L ./ ITA NO. 2281/AHD/2008 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 2 NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD, NIRMA HOUSE, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD PAN : AAACN 5353 L VS DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(1), AHMEDABAD ./ ITA NO. 2273/AHD/2011 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03 3 NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD, NIRMA HOUSE, ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD PAN : AAACN 5353 L VS DCIT, CIRCLE-5, AHMEDABAD ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.N. SOPARKAR, AR FOR SR. NO.1&2 SHRI H.C. SHAH, AR FOR SR. NO.3 REVENUE BY : SHRI R.I. PATEL, CIT-DR / DATE OF HEARING : 16/06/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12/08/2016 / O R D E R PER R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- ITA NOS. 2168 AND 2281/AHD/22008 ARE THE CROSS APPE ALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AND ASSESSEE RESPECTIVELY AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-II, AHMEDABAD DATED 27.03.2008 FOR AY 2004-05. ITA ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 2 NO. 2273/AHD/2011 IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XI, AH MEDABAD DATED 17.06.2011 FOR AY 2002-03. SINCE ALL THESE APPEALS INVOLVE COMMON ISSUES, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE IS WITHDRAWING THE APPEA L BEARING ITA NO.2273/AHD/2011 FOR AY 2002-03; HENCE THE SAID APP EAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. 3. CROSS APPEALS FOR AY 2004-05 3.1 THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DE LETING THE ADDITION OF RS.55,27,29,731/-, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND LEGAL POSITION INCLUDING THE CIRCULAR NO.2 OF 2002 OF CBD T. 2. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELET ING THE ADDITION OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON THE DEEP DISCOUNT BONDS/DEBENTU RES WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE AMENDMENT IN SECTION 145 BROUGHT IN WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.1997 THAT THE ASSESSES IS REQUIRED TO FOLLOW EITHER MERCANTIL E OR CASH SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND NO MIXED SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING IS PER MISSIBLE. 3. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT CONSIDERING THE VITAL FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AS WAS EVIDENT FROM THE RECORD AND THE TAX AUDIT REPOR T OF THE AUDITOR FURNISHED U/S.44AB OF THE ACT. MOREOVER, INCOME AND EXPENSES IN CLUDING INTEREST INCOME AND INTEREST EXPENDITURE HAVE ALSO BEEN SHOW N AND CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN P&L A/C ON ACCRUAL BASIS. 4. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN WRON GLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE ITAT, AHMEDABAD IN THE CASE O F KISAN DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TRUST AND OTHERS IN ITA NO. 1850/AHD/2007 DAT ED 02.11.2007, WITHOUT VERIFYING THE FACTS OF BOTH THE CASES. IN T HE CASE OF KISAN DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TRUST AND OTHERS, THE CASH SYS TEM OF ACCOUNTING WAS FOLLOWED AND HENCE THE ADDITION WAS DELETED, BUT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE ON HAND , THE MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING WAS REGU LARLY FOLLOWED. ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 3 5. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT FOLLOWING THE CORRECT LEGAL POSITION AS HELD BY THE HON'BLE ITAT, AHMEDABA D IN THE CASE OF SARABHAI HOLDINGS PVT LTD VIDE ORDER DATED 08.08.20 05 IN ITA NO.1617/AHD/1999 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT CORPORATE ASSESSEE WERE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING MANDATORI LY AND HENCE THE INCOME ON BONDS WAS REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN ON ACCRUAL BASIS. 6. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE A.O. 3.2 ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. IN LAW AND IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE AP PELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS GROSSLY ERR ED IN POINTS OF LAW AND FACTS. 2. IN LAW AND IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE A PPELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS GROSSLY ERR ED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.2,86,937 U/S .14A OF IT ACT OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES. 3. IN LAW AND IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APP ELLANT'S CASE, THE COMMISSIONER OR INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS GROSSLY ERR ED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF RS.37,37,962/- U/S 14A OF IT ACT OUT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE AND PAYMENT TO EMPLOYEES. 4. IN LAW AND IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APP ELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS GROSSLY ERR ED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENSES RS. 1,02,74,427/- . 5. IN LAW AND IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE AP PELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) HAS GROSSLY ERR ED IN DIRECTING TO CHARGE INTEREST U/SS.234B AND 234D OF IT ACT CONSEQU ENTIALLY. 4. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL R ELATES TO DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.55,27,29,731/-. ASSESSING OFFICER M ADE THIS ADDITION FOR THE ACCRUED INTEREST ON DEEP DISCOUNT BONDS (DDBS)/DEBE NTURES OF VARIOUS COMPANIES IN WHICH THE INVESTMENT WAS MADE BY THE A SSESSEE, RELYING UPON THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.2/2002 DATED 15.02.2002. ON APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY , DELETED THE ADDITION RELYING ON THE DECISION OF ITAT, AHMEDABAD IN THE C ASE OF KISHAN ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 4 DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TRUST DATED 02.11.2007 FOR AY 2003-04, BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4.3 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND T HE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS. I FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS NOW COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD IN THE CASE OF KISHAN DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TRUST DATED 02.11.2007 FOR AY 2003-04, WHEREBY THE SIMILAR ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DE LETED BY THE ITAT. FOR THIS REASON FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF ITAT, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION AS PER THE DIRECTIONS CONTAINED IN THE ABO VE DECISION OF ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 4.1 AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE PREFERRED THE PRESENT AP PEAL. 4.2 LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE O RDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 4.3 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, ON THE OTHER HAND CONTENDS THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE D ECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2002-03 IN ITA NO.1244/A HD/2006, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER:- 5.4.1. AT THIS POINT OF TIME, WE WOULD LIKE TO REC ALL THAT A SIMILAR ISSUE TO THAT OF THE PRESENT ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY TH E EARLIER BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KISHAN DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TURST VS. ACIT IN ITA NO.1850/AHD/2007 DATED 02.11.2007. THE RELEVANT PO RTION OF THE FINDING OF THE TRIBUNAL IS AS UNDER: THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE ON ITS PART, IN OUR OPINIO N, SUCCEEDED IN ESTABLISHING THE CHANGE OF BONA FIDE BECAUSE IT HAS CEASED TO HAVE ANY BUSINESS INCOME AND HAD ADOPTED THE CHANGE WELL BEF ORE THE SEARCH AS WELL AS COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT FOR BLOCK PERIOD A ND ALSO BEFORE COMING OF CIRCULAR NO.2 OF 2002 ON THE STATUTE. SI NCE THE ASSESSEE HAS FOLLOWED THE SAME SYSTEM IN ALL THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS, WE SEE NO REASON AS TO WHY THE ASSESSEES CHOICE/PREFERENCE T O ADOPT THE CHANGED SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING BE NOT ACCEPTED. IN VIEW OF T HE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS SETT LED PROVISIONS OF LAWS DISCUSSED HEREINBEFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RIGHT TO ADOPT THE CHANGED SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND BY CHANGING THE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING FROM MERCANTILE TO CASH WAS A BONA FIDE CHANGE. ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 5 5.4.2 IN CONFORMITY WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE CO-OR DINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL (SUPRA), THIS ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR O F THE ASSESSEE. 4.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. WE FIND FORCE IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE THAT THE ISSUE HAS BEEN ALREADY DECIDED BY ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR AY 2002-03 IN ITA NO.1244/AHD/2006, WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL, FOLLOWING T HE DECISION IN THE CASE OF KISHAN DISCRETIONARY FAMILY TRUST VS. ACIT IN ITA NO. 1850/AHD/2007 DATED 02.11.2007, HELD THAT THE ASSES SEE HAS RIGHT TO ADOPT THE CHANGED SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND BY CHANGING TH E SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING FROM MERCANTILE TO CASH WAS A BONA FIDE CHANGE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING ITAT JUDGMENT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE (SUP RA), WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD. ACCORDINGL Y GROUNDS IN THIS BEHALF AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 5. COMING TO ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY 2004-05, THE FIRST GROUND IS GENERAL IN NATURE. 6. THE SECOND AND THIRD GROUNDS OF ASSESSEES APPEA L RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.2,86,937/- AND RS.37,37,962/- MA DE U/S 14A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES AND ADMINIS TRATIVE EXPENSES RESPECTIVELY. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, ASSE SSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID INTEREST OF RS.1,05,61,3 64/- IN RESPECT BORROWED LOANS AND THE ASSESSEE HAD ADVANCED LOAN AND ADVANC ES OF RS.49.14 CRORES AND UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.5.89 CRORES. ASSESSEE WA S ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE AND UTILIZATION OF THE FUNDS BORROWED AND T HE DETAILS OF INTEREST CHARGED ON THE ADVANCES MADE TO SISTER CONCERNS AND INTERCORPORATE DEPOSITS. IN RESPONSE, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT INTEREST OF RS.2,16,098/- AND RS.70,839/- WERE PAID TO NIRMA SOAP & DETERGENT S PVT LTD AND NAVIN DETERGENTS PVT LTD RESPECTIVELY. THESE EXPENSES WE RE IN RESPECT OF FUNDS ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 6 USED FOR INVESTMENT IN SHARES. THEREFORE, THE ASSES SING OFFICER HELD THAT SUCH INTEREST IS NOT ADMISSIBLE AS PER PROVISIONS O F SECTION 14A, WHICH COMES TO RS.2,86,937/-. 6.1 THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS SHOWN TOTAL INCOME OF RS.17,81,45,302/- AGAINST TOTAL EXPENDITU RE OF RS.35,38,445 AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO INCURRED PROVISION FOR EMPLOYEES OF RS.35,04,393/-. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE PROPORTIONA TE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.37,37,962/- RELATING TO EX EMPTED INCOME AS PER SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. 6.2 AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO, AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY, UPHELD THE ADDITIONS MADE BY ASSE SSING OFFICER; HOWEVER, DIRECTED HIM TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF THE AS SESSEE W.R.T. EXEMPTED INCOME, BY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS:- 5.2 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS. IN MY VIEW WHEN THE APPELLANT ITSELF HAS EXPLAINED BEF ORE THE AO THAT THE INTEREST OF RS.8,61,050/- WAS RELATING TO THE BORRO WINGS WHICH WERE USED FOR ACQUIRING SHARES, THE INTEREST SO PAID BY THE APPEL LANT IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO EARNING OF EXEMPTED AND THEREFORE, THE AO WAS JUSTIF IED IN MAKING SUCH DISALLOWANCE IN SO FAR AS PRORATE EXPENSES DISALLOW ED BY THE AO IS CONCERNED. IN MY VIEW THE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES DO FORM PART OF EXPENSES RELATING TO INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND TAX FREE SECURITIES AND HE NCE THE AO WAS JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING PROPORTIONATE EXPENSES. HOWEVER, TH E AO IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THE CLAIM THAT THE EXEMPTED INCOME COMPUTED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER IS NOT CORRECT. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO VERIFY THIS CLAIM AF TER VERIFICATION AND IF IT IS FOUND TO BE IN ORDER, HE MAY MODIFY THE DISALLOWANC E. 6.3 AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS IN APPEAL BE FORE US. 6.4 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE IT ACT AS THE COMPANY HAD SHARE CAPITAL AND RESERVES MORE THAN TH E TAX FREE INVESTMENTS. REVISED WORKING OF THE INTEREST EXPENSE OF NIRMAN S OAPS & DETERGENTS PVT ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 7 LTD AND NAVIN DETERGENT PVT LTD HAS ALREADY BEEN SU BMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AT PAGE NO.27 OF THE PAPER-BOOK. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF UTI BANK LTD, REPORTED IN 32 TAQXMANN.COM 370) (GUJ.). THUS, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE PLEADED THAT THE AFORESAID DISALLOWANCE SH OULD BE DELETED. 6.5 ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 6.6 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. IT EMERGES FROM THE RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED ON REC ORD A REVISED WORKING OF THE INTEREST EXPENSES OF NIRMAN SOAPS & DETERGENTS PVT LTD AND NAVIN DETERGENT PVT LTD, WHICH REQUIRES TO BE VERIFIED AT THE ASSESSING OFFICERS LEVEL ALONGWITH OTHER RELEVANT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES OF THE CASE ALONGWITH THE CASE LAW RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF UTI BANK LTD (SUPRA). THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THUS, THESE GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. 7. GROUND NO.4, WHICH RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF IN TEREST EXPENSES OF RS.1,02,74,427/- U/S 14A, IS ALSO SIMILAR TO THE IS SUE WE DECIDED ABOVE IN GROUND NOS. 3 & 4. FOR THE REASONS STATED ABOVE, THIS ISSUE IS ALSO RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. AO FOR DECISION AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO T HE ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICA L PURPOSES. 8. GROUND NO.5 IS AGAINST THE CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 234B & 234D. THIS IS ADMITTED TO BE CONSEQUENTIAL. WE, THEREFOR E, DIRECT THE ASSESSING ITA NOS. 2168 & 2281/AHD/2008 AND 2273/AHD/2011- NIRMA CHEMICAL WORKS LTD- CROSS APPE ALS AY : 2004-05 & 2002-03 8 OFFICER TO RE-WORK OUT THE INTEREST IN ACCORDANCE W ITH LAW, IF ANY, AFTER THE RE-DETERMINATION OF THE INCOME. 9. THE ADDITIONAL GROUND WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANC E OF POWER PROJECT EXPENSES IS NOT PRESSED BY THE ASSESSEE; HENCE, THE SAME IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 10. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL AS WELL AS ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.2273/AHD/2011 IS DISMISSED, WHILE ASSESSEES APP EAL IN ITA NO.2281/AHD/2008 IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 12 TH AUGUST, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ANIL CHATURVEDI (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) R.P. TOLANI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD; DATED 12/08/2016 *BIJU T. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD