The ITO, Ward-3, Bharuch V. M/s. The Ankleshwar Taluka ONGC Land Looser Travellers Co.Op.So.Ltd., Ankleshwar

ITA 2303/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6579 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 20-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOKA JOHRI
• Assessee Lawyers: J P SHAH
• Section: 43B; 40A(3); 143(3); 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, B BENCH (BEFORE S/SHRI G.D. AGARWAL, VICE-PRESIDENT AND T.K. SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 [ASSTT. YEAR : 2005-2006] ITO, WARD-3 BHARUCH. VS. THE ANKLESHWAR TALUKA ONGC LAND LOOSER TRAVELLERS CO-OP. SOCIETY LTD. OPP: MILAN CINEMA ANKLESHWAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI J.P. SHAH REVENUE BY : SHRI ALOKA JOHRI O R D E R PER T.K. SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-VI, BARODA DATED 15.04.2008 ARISING OU T OF THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS APPEAL READS AS U NDER: 1 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN THE LAW IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS .2,57,36,353/- MADE U/S.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT BEING AMOUNTS PAID TO SUB- CONTRACTORS WITHOUT DEDUCTING THE TAX AT SOURCE AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 194C(2) OF THE IT ACT, 1961. 3. THE FACTS IN BRIEF RELATING TO CONTROVERSY INVOL VED IN THE AFORESAID MATTER ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE SOCI ETY. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL, IT HAS DECLARED TOTAL INCOME AT NIL. THE AO FRAMED ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 29-10 -2007 WHEREIN HE DISALLOWED A SUM OF RS.2,57,36,253/- BY INVOKING TH E PROVISIONS OF ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -2- SECTION 40A(IA) OF THE ACT OF THE IT ACT, 1961. TH E AO GAVE THE FOLLOWING REASONS FOR DISALLOWANCE: I) THE ONGC HAS DEDUCTED TDS ON PAYMENT TO CONTRAC TOR AND PERIODICALLY PAYMENT WERE MADE TO THE ASSESSEE ONLY AND ONGC HAS NOT STATED THAT THESE PAYMENT HAS MADE TO THE SOCIETY ON BEHALF OF ITS MEMBERS; II) AS PER SECTION 199 OF THE IT ACT, CREDIT SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE TDS FOR AY FOR WHICH SUCH INCOME I S ASSESSABLE. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE CREDIT FOR THE ENTIRE TDS AND THEREFORE THE ENTIRE INCOME IS ASSESSABLE IN THE HA NDS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SOCIETY IS ONLY DISTRIBUTING INCOME DOES NOT HAVE A NY MERIT; III) THE ASSESSEE IS A PERSON AS PER SECTION 2(31) AND THE STATUS OF THE ASSESSEE IS AOP. ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON TH E BUSINESS OF TRAVELING AGENCY AS PER THE TAX AUDIT REPORT. ANNU AL ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE AUDITED. IV) THE ASSESSEE ITSELF HAS STATED THAT THE SERVICE TAX PAID IS ALLOWABLE AS PER SECTION 43B OF THE ACT AND HAS CLA IMED CREDIT FOR TDS AS PER SECTION 199 OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSEE CANNOT TAKE A STAND THAT ONLY THOSE SECTIONS WHICH SUIT THE ASSES SEE ARE APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE AND THOSE SECTIONS WHICH DO NOT SUI T THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT APPLICABLE. 4. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), IT WAS CONTENDED TH AT MAIN OBJECT OF THE SOCIETY WAS THAT WHEN ONGC ACQUIRED THE LAND OF VARIOUS FARMERS, IN COMPENSATION, THE FARMERS COULD NOT GET ANY JOB OR SERVICES AS PROMISED. ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -3- SO IT WAS DECIDED THAT EACH LAND LOOSER WHO COULD N OT BE PROVIDED JOB WOULD BUY A VEHICLE AND RENT OUT TO ONGC. OVER THE YEARS, THE ONGC WAS NOT ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE ACCOUNTS OF EACH FARME RS. SO IT WAS DECIDED TO FORM A CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY OF SUCH LAND LOOSING FARMERS. SUCH SOCIETY WAS TO MANAGE ON BEHALF OF THE MEMBERS, THE PAYMENT FROM ONGC AND AFTER DEDUCTING ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES, THE REMAIN ING AMOUNT WAS TO BE DISTRIBUTED AMONGST THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY AS P ER THE VEHICLE RENTED OUT DURING THE PERIOD. IT WAS ALSO STATED BEFORE T HE AO THERE WAS NO INTENTION TO EARN PROFIT FROM SUCH ACTIVITY BUT ONL Y TO HELP SUCH ILLITERATE FARMERS BY MAINTAINING ACCOUNTS OF EACH MEMBER OF H IS VEHICLE AND THEN DISTRIBUTE AMOUNT AFTER DEDUCTION OF EXPENSES ETC. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED COMPLETE DETAILS OF SUCH FARMERS VIZ. NAM E AND ADDRESS OF THE MEMBERS, DETAILS OF MONTH-WISE HIRING INCOME DISTRI BUTION ETC. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO PARALLEL TO THE CONCEPT OF CONTRACTOR AND SUB- CONTRACTOR. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE MEMBER OF TH E SOCIETY OWNING A VEHICLE AND GIVING OUT TO THE SOCIETY TO CARRY OUT THE WORK. THE SOCIETY IS A WHOLE A UNIT CONSISTING OF ITS MEMBERS. THE HIRI NG OF THE WORK OF THE SOCIETY CANNOT BE SPLIT UP INTO PARTS AND CANNOT BE SEPARATED OR IDENTIFIED BECAUSE THE SOCIETY IS MEDIA OR COLLECTIVE BODY. T HE SOCIETYS IDENTITY IS WITH ITS MEMBERS WITHOUT WHICH THERE IS NO EXISTENC E OF THE SOCIETY. THERE IS NO CONCEPT OF CONTRACTOR-CONTRACTEE OR CON TRACTOR AND SUB- CONTRACTOR EXIST IN THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, P ROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C(2) AND SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT WERE NOT APPL ICABLE TO THE PRESENT CASE. CONSIDERING ALL THESE, THE CIT(A) DELETED TH E DISALLOWANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 4.3. I HAVE DEEPLY PONDERED OVER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS THE CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT. THE UNDISPUTED FACT IS THAT ON DISCOVERY OF OIL IN ANKLESHWAR, HANSOL AND NEARBY TALUKAS OF BHARUCH THE ONGC ACQUIRED THE LAND OF ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -4- LARGE NUMBER OF FARMERS AND AS PART OF THE COMPENSA TION MECHANISM SOME OF THE ELIGIBLE FARMERS WERE GIVEN J OB OR SERVICES AS PER THEIR QUALIFICATIONS AND MANY OTHER ILLITERA TE FARMERS WERE PROVIDED ONE JEEP EACH (TRANSPORT VEHICLE) WHICH WA S IN TURN RENTED OUT TO ONGC SO THAT MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD IN T ERMS OF JEEP RENTALS ACCRUED TO THE FARMERS. ONGC HAD ENTERED IN TO AN AGREEMENT WITH THESE INDIVIDUAL FARMERS. THIS ARRAN GEMENT CONTINUED FOR A FEW YEARS. HOWEVER SUBSEQUENTLY ONG C ROUND IT DIFFICULT TO DEAL WITH EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL FARME RS AND IT WAS DECIDED THAT A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY BE FORMED WHICH CAN MAINTAIN THE INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNT OF EACH OF THE FARMERS AND W OULD BE ONE STOP ENTITY COORDINATING ALL MATTERS WITH ONGC LIMI TED ON BEHALF OF FARMERS. THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY WAS FORMED ON 2 9.8.1988. THE SOCIETY IS O NON PROFIT MAKING ORGANIZATION MAINTAI NING VEHICLE- WISE ACCOUNTS COMPRISING OF DETAILS OF EXPENSES AND RECEIPTS. ALL THESE VEHICLES WERE HIRED BY ONGC AND THE LUMPSUM R ECEIPT WAS PAID BY ONGC AFTER DEDUCTING THE TDS TO THE SOCIETY WHO THEREAFTER ALLOCATED THE AMOUNT TO RESPECTIVE MEMBE RS AFTER DEDUCTING THE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES DEPENDING ON ACTUAL USAGE. THE VEHICLES ARE IN THE NAME OF THE INDIVIDUAL FARM ERS. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE SOCIETY RECEIVED RS.2, 57,62,253/- AND THE ENTIRE AMOUNT WAS DISTRIBUTED TO THE FARMERS. 4.3.1. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT T HE SOCIETY IS FUNCTIONING AS A SUB-CONTRACTOR AND THAT IT OUGHT T O HAVE DEDUCTED IDS ON PAYMENTS MADE TO EACH OF THE FARMERS AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40((LA) AND SECTION 194C. ACCORDING TO ASSE SSING OFFICER OPERATIONS OF THE SOCIETY ARE IN THE NATURE OF HIRI NG OF JEEPS AMOUNTING TO WORK CONTRACT ATTRACTING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C. T11 SOCIETY HAS CONTRACTOR AND SUB CONTRACTOR RELAT IONSHIP WITH ONGC AND ALSO THERE IS NO WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN ONGC AND THE SOCIETY. THE MANNER IN WHICH THE OPERATIONS HAV E CONTINUED SUGGESTS AN ORAL CONTRACT BETWEEN ONGC AND APPELLAN T. FURTHERMORE, ACCORDING TO ASSESSING OFFICER THE APP ELLANT'S OPERATIONS ARE AKIN TO RENT A CAR SCHEME AS IT IS E NGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF RENTING OF JEEPS ON CONTINUOUS BASIS. I I IS HIRING THE CABS FROM FARMERS AND RENTING IT OUT TO ONGC. THE ASSESS ING OFFICER RELIED ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF SECY. FEDERN. OF BUS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF T.N. VS. UNION OF INDIA -1 34 ELT 618(MAD) WHEREIN WHILE HOLDING THE CONSTITUTIONAL V ALIDITY OF SERVICE TAX ON 'TOUR OPERATORS' OR RENTING A CAB SC HEME OPERATOR IT IS HELD THAT THE TAX ON SERVICE IS LEVIED ON A PERS ON IF HE IS ON THE ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -5- BUSINESS OF ENGAGING TAXIES FOR HIS CUSTOMERS AND E VEN GIVING SERVICES WITHOUT OWNING THE VEHICLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS FURTHER STATED THAT THE APPELLANT IS A PERSON IN TE RMS OF SECTION 2(31) IN THE STATUS OF AOP AND AGAINST JEEP RENTAL INCOME OF RS.2,57,36,253/- VARIOUS EXPENSES INCLUDING SERVICE TAXES WERE DEBITED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. SINCE IN RE SPECT OF JEEP RENTAL EXPENDITURE OF RS.2,57,62,253/- NO TDS WAS D EDUCTED UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) THE ENTIRE EXPENDITURE IS NOT ALL OWABLE. IN ADDITION AS THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF RS.2,57,36,253/- W AS PAID TO THE FARMERS IN CASH 20% OF THE EXPENDITURE AMOUNTING TO RS.51,47,250/- WAS ALSO ADDED TO THE INCOME UNDER S ECTION 40A(3). 4.3.2. IN THE GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES, I AM OF THE HUMB LE OPINION THAT THE FUNCTIONS PERFORMED BY THE SOCIETY HAVE NO PROF IT MOTIVE AND IT IS MORE OF A WELFARE ACTIVITY PERFORMED BY THE SOCI ETY. THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE SOCIETY WAS FORMED WAS ESSENTIALLY TO FACILITATE RECEIPTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF INCOME AND ACCOUNTING FOR THE EXPENSES. IT ACTED AS AN INTER FACE BETWEEN FARMERS AND ONGC FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF RECEIVING THE JEEP RENTAL IN COME ON BEHALF OF THE ILLITERATE FARMERS. THIS MECHANISM HELPS BOTH O NGC AND THE FARMERS AS IT PRECLUDES THE INDIVIDUAL INTERACTION AND SMOOTHENS THE ENTIRE OPERATION. THE SOCIETY PREPARES THE INDI VIDUAL LOGBOOK FOR THE FARMERS AND ON THE BASIS OF SUCH LOG BOOKS THE ONGC RELEASES THE PAYMENT WHICH IS DISTRIBUTED TO THE' F ARMERS. THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT ALWAYS REMAINED BETWEEN THE ONGC AND THE INDIVIDUAL FARMERS. THE ONGC IS MANDATED TO PAY THE HIRE CHARGES EVEN IF ANY VEHICLE IS NOT UTILIZED. FURTHER THE SO CIETY IS DEBARRED FROM HIRING THE VEHICLES OF THE FARMERS TO OTHER CLIENTS. THE SOCIETY AS AN INTERMEDIARY DID THE LIAISON JOB WITHOUT UNDE RTAKING RISKS OR RESPONSIBILITY. HAD IT BEEN A SUBCONTRACTOR SOME RI SK AND RESPONSIBILITY WOULD HAVE PASSED ON TO THE SOCIETY FOR WHICH IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN COMPENSATED. BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH TRANSFER OF RISK & RESPONSIBILITY AND THE A CTIVITY OF THE SOCIETY IS MERELY A PASS-THROUGH AND TO FACILITATE THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE INCOME TO THE MEMBERS. THE SOCIETY DID NOT HIRE VEHICLES FROM OUTSIDE OTHER THAN FROM LAND LOSING FARMERS OR HIRE OUT THESE VEHICLES TO ANY OTHER AGENCY OTHER THAN ONGC, NEITH ER DID IT PERFORM ANY OTHER BUSINESS ACTIVITY. THE FARMERS RE CEIVED THE ENTIRE INCOME AS PER THEIR ELIGIBILITY DETERMINED B Y THE LOG BOOK MAINTAINED BY THE SOCIETY . I AM THEREFORE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE APPELLANT THAT THE AMOUNT OF RECEIPTS FROM ONGC I.E . RS.2,57,36,253/ IS NOT IN THE NATURE OF EXPENDITURE BUT WAS ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -6- DISTRIBUTION OF THE INCOME AS IT WAS NOT THE EXPEND ITURE OF THE SOCIETY. THERE IS NO ELEMENT OF WORK CONTRACT IN TE RMS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C DISCERNIBLE IN THE ACTIVITIES PERFO RMED BY THE SOCIETY. 4.3.3. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RELIED ON THE DECI SION OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SECY. FEDERN. OF BUS OPER ATORS ASSOCIATION OF VS. UNION OF INDIA - 134 CLT 618(MA D) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT VICE TAXES LEVIABLE ON LOUR OPERATORS AND RENT A CAB SCHEME OPERATORS AND THAT THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO DE DUCTED SERVICE TAX AND PAID IT TO THE CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT. I N MY VIEW THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INAPPROPRIATELY QUOTED THE DE CISION OF THE HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT PE RFORMED THE SERVICE OF TOUR OPERATOR, IF AT ALL, ANY SERVICE IS PROVIDED, IT IS PROVIDED TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY. 4.3.4. RELIANCE ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF DATT A DIGAMBER SAAKARI KAMGAR SANSTHA LTD. VS. ACIT 83 ITD 148 ( PUNE) BY THE APPELLANT IS MORE RELEVANT AND IDENTICAL TOT HE FAC TS AT HAND. 4.3.5. IN VIEW OF ABOVE THE DISALLOWANCE OF.RS.2,57 ,62,253/- UNDER SECTION 40(A)(I) IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. F URTHER, THERE IS NO CASE FOR DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40A(3) AS NO EX PENDITURE IS INCURRED BY THE SOCIETY IN DISTRIBUTING THE RENTALS TO THE FARMERS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ALSO DIRECTED TO ALLOW THE STATUTORY DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P(C)(II) OF THE INCOME TA X ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, THE LEARNED DR POINTED OUT THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE AO RIGHTLY DISALLOWED RS.2 ,57,36,253/- BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN SECTION 40A(IA ) OF THE ACT. THE AO ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE MADRAS HIGH CO URT IN THE CASE OF SECRETARY FED. OF BUS OPERATORS ASSOCIATION OF TN V S. UNION OF INDIA, 134 ELT 618 (MAD) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT SERVICE TAX IS PAYABLE ON TOUR OPERATORS OR RENTING A CAB SCHEME OPERATOR A ND SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED SERVICE TAX AND PAID TO THE CENTRA L EXCISE DEPARTMENT THE SAME IS NOT LIABLE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF T HE ACT. HE POINTED OUT ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -7- THAT THIS DECISION WAS RIGHTLY QUOTED BY THE AO AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THIS IS NOT APPLICABL E TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEES CASE, BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PERFO RMED THE SERVICE OF TOUR OPERATOR. HE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT EVEN IN CASE OF THE SERVICE PROVIDED TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY, IN THAT EVE NT ALSO RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IS SQUARELY APPLI CABLE. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). HE POINT ED OUT THAT THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, PUNE BENCH IN THE CASE OF DAT TA DIGAMBER SAHA. KAMGAR SANSTHA LTD. (SUPRA) IS MORE RELEVANT AND ID ENTICAL TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE ON HAND. THEREFORE, DISALLOWANCE OF R S.2,57,36,253/- DELETED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) MAY BE UPHELD. 8. IN REJOINDER, THE LEARNED DR RAISED ALTERNATE PL EA THAT IN CASE THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) DELETING THE DISAL LOWANCE OF RS.2,57,62,253/- IS UPHELD, IN THAT EVENT, THE DISA LLOWANCE OF RS.51,47,250/- UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT MADE BY THE AO BE RESTORED. ELABORATING THIS PLEA, THE LEARNED DR P OINTED OUT THAT IN PARA 4.3.5 ON PAGE NO.10 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE LEAR NED CIT(A) DELETED THIS DISALLOWANCE ON THE GROUND THAT NO EXPENDITURE IS INCURRED BY THE SOCIETY IN DISTRIBUTING THE RENTALS TO THE FARMERS. IN REPLY, THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUCH PLEA IN THE GROUND, THIS ALTERNATE PLEA OF THE LEARNED DR CANNO T BE ACCEPTED. 9. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE AO DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE PAYM ENT MADE TO THE FARMERS AMOUNTING TO RS.2,57,62,253/- BY INVOKING T HE PROVISIONS OF ITA NO.2303/AHD/2008 -8- SECTION 40(A)(I) OF HE IT ACT. APART FROM THIS, TH E AO DISALLOWED RS.51,47,250/- UNDER SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. T HUS, THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.51,47,250/- WAS MADE TWICE I.E. ONCE UNDER SE CTION 40A(3) AND THEN INVOKING SECTION 40(A(IA). AFTER CAREFULLY CO NSIDERING THE REASONS WHICH LEAD TO FORMATION OF THE SOCIETY, WE ARE CONV INCED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO PROFIT MOTIVE AND MORE OF A WELFARE ACTIVITY PERFORMED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS ACTED AS AN INTERFACE BETWEEN FAR MERS AND THE ONGC FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF RECEIVING THE JEEP RENTAL IN COME ON BEHALF OF THE ILLITERATE FARMERS. THE MAIN PURPOSE OF THIS MECHA NISM IS TO HELP BOTH ONGC AND THE FARMERS AS IT PRECLUDED THE INDIVIDUAL INTERACTION AND SMOOTHEN THE ENTIRE OPERATION. THE SOCIETY WAS ALS O DEBARRED FROM HIRING THE VEHICLES OF THE FARMERS TO OTHER CLIENTS WHOSE LAND IS ACQUIRED BY THE ONGC. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LEARNED C IT(A) IS FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY CORRECT IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S NOT PERFORMED THE SERVICE OF TOUR OPERATORS. IT WAS PROVIDING SERVIC ES TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SOCIETY ONLY. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, PUNE BENCH IN THE CASE OF DATTA DIGAMBER SAHA. KAMGAR SA NSTHA LTD. (SUPRA) RELIED UPON BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED O RDER IS MORE RELEVANT AND IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS BEFORE US. IN VIEW OF T HIS, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). 10. BEFORE PARTING WITH, WITH REGARD TO ALTERNATE P LEA OF THE LEARNED DR, WE MAY POINTED OUT THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY G ROUND OF APPEAL, WE ARE UNABLE TO ADJUDICATE THIS PLEA, WHICH IS REJECT ED. 11. IN RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20 TH MAY, 2011 SD/- SD/- (G.D. AGARWAL) VICE-PRESIDENT (T.K. SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER