Kumar Urban Development Pvt. Ltd., Pune V. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,

ITA 2299/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9346 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANIL KUMAR CHAWARE
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Commercial expediency
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/201 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 7 - 08 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS KUMAR HOUSING & LAND DEVELOPMENT LTD.) , 10 TH FLOOR, KUMAR BUSINESS CENTER (KBC), OPP. BUND GARDEN ROAD, PUNE 411001 . / APPELLANT PAN: AAACK7659N VS. THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE 11, PUNE . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR CHAWARE / DATE OF HEARING : 30 .0 5 . 2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 16 . 0 6 .201 7 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J M : TH IS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT (A) - I , PUNE , DATED 28.03.2014 RELATING TO AS SESSMENT YEAR 20 0 7 - 08 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 14 3(3) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT , 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2 . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - ON FACTS AND IN LAW, 1] THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWA NCE OF RS.1,13,55,258/ - U/S 14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 2 1.1] THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE LEARNED A.O. WAS REASONABLE CONSIDERING THE QUANTUM OF EXEMPT INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND THEREBY, ERRED, IN C ONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 14A OF THE ACT. 1.2] THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD NOT INCURRED ANY DIRECT EXPENDITURE TO EARN EXEMPT INCOME AND ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. BY APPLYING THE PR OVISIONS OF RULE 8DWAS NOT JUSTIFIED AT ALL. 1.3] THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 8D WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CURRENT YEAR AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DIRECT NEXUS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED EXPENDITURE TO EAR N EXEMPT INCOME, NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A WAS WARRANTED. 1.4] THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENT OWN FUNDS TO MAKE TAX FREE INVESTMENTS AND ACCORDINGLY, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY NEXUS ESTABLISHED BY THE A.O. THAT INTERE ST BEARING FUNDS WERE UTILISED FOR MAKING TAX FREE INVESTMENTS, NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A IN RESPECT OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE WAS WARRANTED. 1.5] WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE IS VERY HIGH AND THE S AME MAY BE REDUCED SUBSTANTIALLY. 2] THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ENHANCING THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BY AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,05,52,337/ - BY MAKING DISALLOWANCE U/S 36( 1 )(III). 2.1] THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD UTILISED INTER EST BEARING FUNDS FOR GIVING INTEREST FREE ADVANCES TO ITS RELATED CONCERNS AND ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE U/S 36(1)( III ) OF RS.1,05,52,337/ - WAS WARRANTED. 2.2] THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE FU NDS AVAILABLE FOR GIVING ADVANCES TO RELATED PARTIES AND HENCE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY NEXUS BEING ESTABLISHED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD UTILIZED BORROWED FUNDS FOR ADVANCING INTEREST FREE ADVANCES TO RELATED PARTIES, NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 36( 1 )(III) WAS WARRANTE D. 2.3] THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ADVANCES MADE TO SISTER CONCERNS WERE ON ACCOUNT OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND HENCE, NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 36( 1 )(III) WAS JUSTIFIED ON FACTS OF THE CASE 3. THE ISSUE RAISED I N GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO.1 TO 1.4 IS AGAINST DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT AT RS.1,13,55,258/ - . THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1.5 IS WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE IS VERY HIGH AND THE SAME SHOULD BE REDUCED. THE SECOND ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO.2 TO 2.3 IS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT AT RS. 1,05,52,337/ - . BOTH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE LINKED I.E. IN RESPECT OF INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 3 ASSESSEE. CONSEQUENTLY, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED THE RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.32,22,251/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDERS, DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTERS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED PROFIT FROM PARTNERSHIP FIRM TO THE TUNE OF RS. 12,82,88,290/ - AS EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10(2A) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO SUBMIT WORKING OF AMOUNT DISALLOWABLE AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED WORKING OF DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A(1) OF THE ACT AT THE REQUEST OF ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS. 1,13,55,258/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN VARIOUS PARTNERSHIP FIRMS AND TOTAL INVESTMENT AS ON 31.03.2007 WAS RS.17,10,34,949/ - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE DISALLOWANCE HAS TO BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE BOTH ON AC COUNT OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE AT RS.1,04,16,130/ - AND ON ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES OF RS. 9,39,128/ - , TOTALING RS.1,13,55,258/ - . HENCE, DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (IN SHORT THE RULES ) , WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THUS, MADE THE SAID DISALLOWANCE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. 5. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE PLEA OF ASSESSEE WAS THAT IT HAD SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE FUNDS AND THERE WAS NO MERIT IN MAKING ANY DISALLOW ANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT ON THIS COUNT. THE CIT(A) HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 8D OF THE RULES WERE NOT APPLICABLE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION AND METHOD ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR COMPUTING DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE ATTRIBU TABLE TO EXEMPT INCOME COULD NOT BE ACCEPTED. HOWEVER, NOTWITHSTANDING THE NON - APPLICABILITY OF RULE 8D OF THE RULES, THE NEXT QUESTION ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 4 WHICH WAS ADDRESSED BY THE CIT(A) WAS THE QUANTUM OF EXPENDITURE DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OTHERWISE REAS ONABLE HAVING REGARD TO THE NATURE OF INVESTMENTS, EXEMPT INCOME AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE EXPENDITURE IN RELATION TO EXEMPT INCOME WAS ESTIMATED AT 10% OF THE EXEMPT INCOME I.E. WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD EARN ED EXEMPT INCOME OF RS. 12,82,88,790/ - , 10% OF THE SAME WORKED OUT TO RS. 1,28,28,879/ - , AGAINST WHICH THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RS.1,13,55,258/ - . ACCORDINGLY, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT RS.1,13,55,258/ - WAS S USTAINED BY THE CIT(A). 6. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE CIT(A) NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PROVIDED INTEREST FREE LOANS AND ADVANCES TO ITS GROUP CONCERNS AND SUBSIDIARIES TOTALING RS. 36,19,44,246/ - . THE CIT(A) NOTED THAT NO INTERE ST WAS RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE ON THE SAID ADVANCES MADE TO THE SISTER CONCERNS WHICH WERE OUTSTANDING AS ON 31.03.2007. THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD DIVERTED INTEREST BEARING FUNDS TO THE SISTER CONCERN S AS ADVANCES, SHOW CAUSE N OTICE UNDER SECTION 25 1(2 ) OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY OUT OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE CHARGED TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF RS. 6,49,83,484/ - , PRORATA INTEREST ATTRIBUTABLE TO INTEREST FREE FUNDS PROVIDED TO THE ASSOCIATES AND SU BSIDIARY COMPANIES , SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED AND ADDED TO THE INCOME ASSESSED. IN RESPONSE TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT MAJORITY OF THE ADVANCES WERE NOT INTEREST FREE ADVANCES AS THE ASSESSEE HAD CHARGED INTEREST ON THE SAID ADVA NCES AND THE SAME WAS OFFERED TO TAX, THE DETAILS OF THE SAME ARE REPRODUCED UNDER PARA 5.1 AT PAGE 9 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT IT HAD CHARGED INTEREST ON THE MAJORITY OF ADVANCES EXCEPT INTEREST ON ADVANCES TOTALING RS. 4,18,298/ - . FURTHER, IT HAD ALSO NOT DEBITED / CLAIMED INTEREST OF ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 5 RS. 16,40,709/ - ACTUALLY PAYABLE TO BANDRA REALTY PVT. LTD. SO, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT NO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE AS PROPOSED IN THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 251(2) OF THE ACT IS WARRAN TED. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT THE ADVANCES WERE DURING THE COURSE OF BUSINESS AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND HENCE, THERE IS NO D IVERSION OF FUNDS OR NON - BUSINESS PURPOSES TO WARRANT ANY DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. 7 . THE CIT(A) HOWEVER, REJECTED THE PLEA OF ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH COMPLETE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF INTEREST PAYABLE BY IT TO BANDRA REALTY PVT. LTD. THE CIT(A) COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT A T RS. 1,05,52,337/ - ATTRIBUTABLE TO INTEREST FREE ADVANCES MADE TO GROUP CONCERNS AND SUBSIDIARIES AND DISALLOWED THE SAME AND ADDED TO THE TOTAL INCOME. 8 . THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) ON BOTH THESE COUNTS. 9 . THE LEARNED AUTHOR IZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF FIRST DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 8D OF THE RULES WHICH WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. OU R ATTENTION WAS DRAWN TO THE COPY OF BALANCE SHEET PLACED AT PAGE 13 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WHEREIN OPENING INVESTMENT WAS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.6.69 CRORES AND CLOSING INVESTMENT WAS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.30.87 CRORES . FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAD RESERVES & SURPLU S WITH OPENING AT RS.9.10 CRORES AND CLOSING BALANCE OF RS.64.00 CRORES. HE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT ON ACCOUNT OF OWN FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE WHICH WERE MORE THAN INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ON WHICH, THE INCOME EARNED WAS EXEMPT AND IN AB SENCE OF ANY DIRECT RELATION BETWEEN THE ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 6 INTEREST BEARING FUNDS TO THE INVESTMENT MADE, NO DISALLOWANCE WAS WARRANTED ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. HDFC BANK LTD. (2014) 366 ITR 505 (BOM) . IN RESPECT OF INDIRECT EXPENSES, HE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT SOME DISALLOWANCE MAY BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. IN RESPECT OF GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE POIN TED OUT THAT ENHANCEMENT NOTICE WAS GIVEN BY THE CIT(A), WHEREIN DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST FREE ADVANCES MADE TO THE RELATED CONCERNS. HE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND REFERRED TO THE LIST OF PARTIES PLAC ED AT PAGE 15 OF APPELLATE ORDER. 10 . THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 1 1 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE FIRST ISSUE RAISED BY WAY OF GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 IS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08 AND THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 8D OF THE RULES ARE NOT ATTRACTED. HOWEVER, DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT IS TO BE MADE WHERE T HE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED EXEMPT INCOME AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RECORDED SATISFACTION THAT THE EXPENDITURE RELATING TO EXEMPT INCOME HAS BEEN INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHICH HAS TO BE DISALLOWED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE WHILE COMPUTING INCOME IN THE INS TANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNER IN VARIOUS PARTNERSHIP FIRMS AND THE TOTAL INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRM IS RS. 17,10,34,949/ - AND THE INCOME ARISING THEREFROM IS EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10(2A) OF THE ACT AND HENCE, T HE APPLICABILITY OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1 4A OF THE ACT. THE PERUSAL OF THE BALANCE SHEET REFLECTS ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 7 THE ASSESSEE TO HAVE OPENING SHARE CAPITAL AND RESERVES & SURPLUS OF RS.9.10 CRORES AND CLOSING BALANCE OF RS.64.00 CRORES AS ON 31.03.2007. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE SECURED LOAN DURING THE YEAR, ON WHICH, THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE INTEREST AND THE QUESTION IS WHETHER IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RELATABLE TO SUCH INVESTMENTS WHICH ARE TAX FREE, IS TO BE DISALLOWED IN THE HA NDS OF ASSESSEE. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN VIEW OF INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE, WHEREIN OWN FUNDS ARE MORE THAN INVESTMENTS MADE IN THE FIRMS, ON WHICH EXEMPT INCOME IS EARNED, NO DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST RELATABLE TO SUCH INVESTMENTS IS WARRANTED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. APPLYING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. HDFC BANK LTD. (SUPRA) , WE DELETE THE ADDITION MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE. HOWEVER, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INDIRECT EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF RS.4 LAKHS BEING ATTRIBUTABLE TO EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. HENCE, THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 R AISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 1 2 . NOW, COMING TO THE ISSUE VIDE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2, WHEREIN THE CIT(A) HAD GIVEN ENHANCEMENT NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 251(2) OF THE ACT AND HAD MADE THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF UTILIZATION OF INTEREST BEARING FUNDS FOR INTEREST FREE ADVANCES MADE TO THE RELATED CONCERNS. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ITS CASE AND IN THE TOTALITY OF THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES, WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTEDLY, RAISED INTEREST BEARING FUNDS DURING THE YEAR, WHICH IN TURN, APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTMENT IN GIVING ADVANCES TO THE RELATED AND SISTER CONCERNS ON INTEREST FREE, THEN THERE IS MERI T IN THE DISALLOWANCE TO BE MADE UNDER ITA NO. 2299 /P U N/20 1 4 KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. 8 SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. IT MAY BE POINTED OUT HEREIN ITSELF THAT OWN FUNDS OF ASSESSEE GET EXHAUSTED IN THE INVESTMENT MADE, AGAINST WHICH, THE ASSESSEE EARNED EXEMPT INCOME WHICH IS SUBJECT TO THE DISALLOWANC E UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. IN THE PARAS HEREINABOVE, WE HAVE ALREADY TAKEN NOTE OF SUCH INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE VIS - - VIS INVESTMENTS MADE ON WHICH, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT ARE ATTRACTED AND NO DISALLOWANCE IS MAD E ON SUCH ACCOUNT . ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DISALLOWING SUM OF RS.1,05,52,337/ - UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT . THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS, PARTLY ALLOWED. 1 3 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 16 TH DAY OF JUNE , 201 7 . SD/ - SD/ - (ANIL CHATURVEDI ) (SUSHMA CHOWLA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 16 TH JUNE , 201 7 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT; 3. ( ) / THE CIT (A) - I , PUNE ; 4. / THE CIT - I , PUNE ; 5. , , / DR A , ITAT, PUNE; 6. / GUARD FILE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, , / ITAT, PUNE