The ACIT, Circle-2, Surat V. M/s. Dhru Automobiles, Surat

ITA 2424/AHD/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9031 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-02-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-01-2010
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M C PANDIT
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI T.K. SHARMA, JM AND D.C.AGRAWAL, AM D.C. I.T., CIRCLE-2, ROOM NO.110, 1 ST FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT. V/S . M/S DHRU AUTOMOBILES, OPP. CENTRE POINT, NR. KADIWALA SCHOOL, SAGRAMPURA, SURAT. PAN NO.AABFD 7977 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) A.C. I.T., CIRCLE-2, ROOM NO.110, 1 ST FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT. V/S . M/S DHRU AUTOMOBILES, OPP. CENTRE POINT, NR. KADIWALA SCHOOL, SAGRAMPURA, SURAT. PAN NO.AABFD 7977 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) AND A.C. I.T., CIRCLE-2, ROOM NO.110, 1 ST FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT. V/S . M/S DHRU AUTOMOBILES, OPP. CENTRE POINT, NR. KADIWALA SCHOOL, SAGRAMPURA, SURAT. PAN NO.AABFD 7977 J (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI M. C. PANDIT, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY:- WRITTEN SUBMISSION ITA NO.3123/AHD/2007 ASST. YEAR :2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008 ASST. YEAR :2005-06 ITA NO.2167 /AHD/2009 ASST. YEAR :2006-07 ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 2 O R D E R PER D.C.AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. THESE ARE THREE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAIN ST THE DIFFERENT ORDERS OF CIT(A) FOR ASST. YEARS 2004-05, 2005-06 & 2006-07. COMMON ISSUES HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ALL THESE THREE YEARS ABOUT DELETION OF ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO BY DISALLOWING COMMISSION PAYMENT BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE THREE ASST. YEARS. SINCE COMMON FACTS AND REASONINGS ARE GIVEN BY THE AO AND THE CIT(A) I N ALL THE THREE ASST. YEARS, THEY ARE TAKEN UP TOGETHER FOR THE SAKE OF C ONVENIENCE. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY WE REPRODUCE THE GROUND TAKEN BY TH E REVENUE IN ASST. YEAR 2004-05 : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.44, 18,750/- ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF COMMISSION EXPENSES PAID TO AGENTS INCLUDING ITS SISTER CONCERNS WHICH ARE COVERED U/S 40A(2)(B) OF THE ACT. THE AMOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE FOR THE OTHER TWO ASST. YEARS ARE AS UNDER :- ASST. YEAR COMMISSION PAYMENT 2005-06 RS.45,27,006/- 2006-07 RS.26,54,510/- 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS E NGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF SALE AND SERVICE OF HERO HONDA MOTOR-CY CLES AND PARTS. IT IS AN AUTHORISED DEALER OF HERO HONDA MOTOR-CYCLES, EX CLUSIVELY ENGAGED IN SELLING BRAND NEW HERO HONDA MOTOR-CYCLES AND SERVI CES THEREOF. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AO FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT OF RS. 44,18,750/- TO VARIOUS PERSONS INCLU DING PERSONS COVERED ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 3 UNDER SECTION 40A(2)(B). THE AO REQUIRED THE ASSESS EE TO FURNISH THE IDENTITIES OF THE AGENTS, NATURE OF SERVICES RENDER ED BY THE AGENTS AND COPIES OF AGREEMENTS WITH THEM AND DETAILS OF PAYME NTS. IT WAS EXPLAINED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT AGENTS ARE ALLOWED TO DISPLAY AND DEMONSTRATE THE PRODUCT AT THEIR SHOW-ROOMS AND OFFICES. THEY PROVI DE TEST-DRIVE TO PROSPECTIVE CUSTOMERS, PROVIDE INFORMATION RELATING TO THE PRODUCT, ITS PRICING ETC. TO THE CUSTOMERS, CONVINCE THE CUSTOME RS TO BUY THE PRODUCT AND EFFECT THE SALES OF THE PRODUCTS, CO-ORDINATE W ITH THE CUSTOMERS AND THE FINANCE COMPANIES FOR GETTING VEHICLE LOANS SAN CTIONED FOR THE CUSTOMERS, COLLECT BOOKINGS AND ORDERS FOR SALE OF VEHICLES, PREPARE DOCUMENTS RELATING TO SALES, INSURANCE, RTO REGISTR ATIONS, ETC. ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE. THE AO DID NOT AGREE AND OPINED THAT A LL THESE SERVICES CAN BE PROVIDED BY OFFICE, ADMINISTRATIVE AND MARKETING STAFF OF THE ASSESSEE AND STAFF MEMBERS OF RTO. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE P ARTIES TO WHOM COMMISSION WAS PAID WERE SISTER CONCERNS NAMELY DH RU TRACTORS, SIDDHI AGENCIES, DHRU SERVICES, SIDDHI VINAYAK AGENCIES (P ) LTD. AND DHRU ENTERPRISES. THE AO HELD THAT DISPLAY AND DEMONSTRA TION OF PRODUCT AT THE SHOW-ROOM OF THE SISTER CONCERNS CAN BE DONE BY PAY MENT OF RENT INSTEAD OF COMMISSION PAYMENT. TEST DRIVE IS GENERALLY DONE BY IN-HOUSE STAFF EMPLOYED BY THE DEALER I.E. THE ASSESSEE. FINANCING IS CO-ORDINATED BY THE BANK WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF STAFF MEMBERS OF THE AS SESSEE COMPANY, COLLECTING BOOKING FOR SALE OF VEHICLE IS AGAIN PRO VIDED BY THE STAFF EMPLOYED BY THE DEALER I.E. THE ASSESSEE AND DOCUME NTS FOR SALE, INSURANCE, RTO REGISTRATION ARE ALSO PROVIDED BY IN -HOUSE STAFF MEMBERS OF DEALER. 3. THE ASSESSEE ALSO EXPLAINED THAT COMMISSION WAS PAID AT A CERTAIN SUM PER VEHICLE SOLD/FINANCED FROM THE SAID PREMISE S OR A MINIMUM ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 4 GUARANTEED AMOUNT. THE LD. AO FURTHER EXAMINED THE RECORDS OF THE SISTER CONCERNS AND FOUND THAT SIDDHI VINAYAK AGENCIES (P) LTD. TO WHOM A COMMISSION OF RS.28,12,500/- IS PAID, IS SHOWING HU GE AMOUNT OF LOSSES. TOTAL AMOUNT OF LOSSES AND UN-ABSORVED DEPRECIATION AMOUNTED TO RS.34,96,448 AND RS.7,73,211 RESPECTIVELY. THUS COM MISSION WAS REALLY A TRANSFER OF THE INCOME TO THE SISTER CONCERN TO B E SET OFF AGAINST BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES. THE AO EMPHASIZED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY CONCRETE DOCUMENT NOR HAS BEEN ABLE TO SHOW THAT TH E SERVICES WERE ACTUALLY RENDERED BY THE SISTER CONCERN FOR WHICH T HE COMMISSION WAS PAID. HE REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREM E COURT IN THE CASE OF LACHMINARAYAN MADAN LAL VS. CIT (1972) 86 ITR 439 ( SC) WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT AO CAN EXAMINE WHETHER COMMISSION SAID TO HAVE BEEN PAID TO THE SELLING AGENT IS WHOLLY OR IN PART DEDUCTIBLE UNDER SECTION 37(1). THEN HE REFERRED TO THE DECISION OF HON. BOMBAY HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF GOODLAS NEROLAC PAINTS LTD. VS. CIT (1982) 137 ITR 58 (BOM) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT BURDEN IS ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THAT AMOUNT SPENT OR ACTUALLY INCURRED WAS FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSE. SO WAS THE RATIO OF HON. SUPREME COURT IN L.H. SUGAR FACTORY & OIL MILLS (P) LTD. VS. CIT (19980) 125 ITR 293 (SC). THUS FINALLY HOLDING THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY EVIDENCE OF SERVICES BEING RENDERED, HE DISALLOWED THE COMMISSION PAYMENT IN ALL THE THREE YEARS. 4. LD. CIT(A) ON THE OTHER HAND, FOUND THAT PAYMENT S WERE MADE BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES WHICH WERE DULY ACCOUNTED FOR BY THE PARTIES TO WHOM THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE AND THEY ARE IDENTIFIABL E. THEIR NAMES AND ADDRESSES WERE PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE DETAIL S OF THE SERVICES RENDERED WERE FURNISHED BY THE PARTIES. THE AO HAD ACCEPTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE PAYMENTS. HE NEGATIVED THE CONTE NTIONS OF THE AO THAT ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 5 ASSESSEE COULD HAVE TAKEN THE PREMISES ON RENT BY S AYING THAT PAYEES WOULD HAVE TO PAY MUNICIPAL TAXES, WHICH IS QUITE S UBSTANTIAL IN SURAT. FURTHER ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE TO INVEST SUBSTANTIAL S UMS OF MONEY TO DEVELOP THE FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH IS NORMALLY REQUIRED FOR AN AUTOMOBILE SHOWROOM AND SERVICE-CENTRE. THUS BY PAY ING COMMISSION ASSESSEE HAS USED THE PREMISES OF THE SISTER CONCER NS, WHICH WERE STRATEGICALLY LOCATED AND ALSO USED THEIR INFRASTRU CTURE. THUS BY USE OF PREMISES OF FIVE PARTIES WAS BASICALLY TO EXPAND TH E ASSESSEES BUSINESS AND TO BEAT COMPETITION FROM TWO OTHER DEALERS OF T HE SAME PRODUCT. THE ASSESSEE HAD AVOIDED TO EMPLOY MORE PERSONS BY USIN G THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF SISTER CONCERNS. THE SISTER CONCERNS WERE ENGAGE D IN THE AUTOMOBILE BUSINESS. THEY HAD INFRASTRUCTURE, THEY WERE STRATE GICALLY LOCATED IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF SURAT AND SUBURBS. GETTING INTO A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH THEM ENABLED THE ASSESSEE TO REACH OUT TO A GR EATER SPREAD OF THE POPULATION. HOWEVER, LD. CIT(A) DID MENTION THAT AO HAD NOT EXAMINED WHETHER COMMISSION WAS PAID AT ARMS-LENGTH PRICES. REGARDING FOURTH OBJECTION OF THE AO, LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT IT IS IN CORRECT TO HOLD THAT M/S SIDDHI VINAYAK AGENCIES (P) LTD. HAS DECLARED LOSSE S. IN FACT IT HAD EARNED NET PROFIT BEFORE DEPRECIATION AND INTEREST. FINALLY ROUNDING OF THE DISCUSSION, HE HAS HELD AS UNDER :- 5.6 ROUNDING UP THE DISCUSSION ABOVE, IT MUST BE O BSERVED THAT THE ALLOWANCE OR DISALLOWANCE OF COMMISSION PAYMENTS DE PENDS PURELY ON THE FACTS OF EACH CASE. IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE , IT WAS CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT SERVICES WERE INDEED RENDERED BY T HE FIVE PARTIES WHO WERE ALSO SISTER CONCERNS OF THE ASSESSEE. SUCH SER VICES HAD RESULTED IN NOT ONLY AN INCREASE IN THE TURNOVER, BUT ALSO IN A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE NET PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE, AS COMPARED TO THE PRECEDING YEARS. THE PARTIES WHO RENDERED THE SERVICES HAD PREVIOUS EXPE RIENCE IN THE SAME LINE OF BUSINESS. TAX WAS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE FROM T HE PAYMENTS MADE AND THE RECIPIENTS HAD ALSO DISCLOSED SUCH RECEIPTS AS INCOME. EVEN THOUGH ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 6 SUCH PARTIES WERE SISTER CONCERNS, THE TRANSACTIONS WERE KEPT AT ARMS- LENGTH AND THE RATE(S) OF COMMISSION PAID WERE AS P ER PREVAILING MARKET PRACTICE. THEREFORE, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 40A(2)(B) WAS NOT ATTRACTED IN THIS CASE. CONSEQUEN TLY, THERE WERE ABSOLUTELY NO GROUND FOR DISALLOWING THE COMMISSION PAYMENTS TOTALLYING RS.44,18,750/-. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE AD DITION. 5. BEFORE US, LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT AO HAS RAISED T HE ISSUE THAT PAYMENTS MADE TO SISTER CONCERNS WERE EXCESSIVE AND DISALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 40A(2)(B). THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE T O SUBMIT ANY EVIDENCE THAT THOSE PARTIES HAVE RENDERED ANY SERVICES TO TH E ASSESSEE EXCEPT MAKING BALD CLAIM. THE ASSESSEE HAS SIMPLY UTILIZED THE PREMISES OF SISTER CONCERNS FOR SALE OF ITS PRODUCTS AND FOR THIS PURP OSES HUGE AMOUNTS CANNOT BE PAID AND EVEN IF PAID, CANNOT BE ALLOWED. THE CLAIM OF RENT IS ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 31 AND CLAIM OF COMMISSION IS TO BE ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 37. FOR ALLOWING CLAIM OF COMMISSION ASSESSEE HAS NECESSARILY TO SHOW AS TO WHAT SERVICES THE RECIPIE NTS OF COMMISSION HAVE RENDERED. THIS IS IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT PAYMENT IS NOT DOUBTED. SINCE THE COMMISSION IS PAID TO SISTER CONCERNS ONUS IS O N THE ASSESSEE THAT NECESSARY EVIDENCE FOR SERVICES RENDERED IS SUBMITT ED TO THE AO AND FURTHER THAT PAYMENT IS MADE AT ARM-LENGTH PRICES. LD. CIT(A) HAS SIMPLY ALLOWED THE CLAIM ON THE GROUND THAT PAYMENTS ARE G ENUINE. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. AR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BEFORE US WHICH CONTAINED THE SAM E ARGUMENTS AS WERE TAKEN UP BEFORE LD. CIT(A). IN BRIEF, ARGUMENTS ARE THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE ARE GENUINE, ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED OF THE SERVI CES OF COMMISSION AGENTS, THESE AGENTS ARE IN AUTOMOBILE BUSINESS, TH EY HAVE THEIR PREMISES AND INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES, ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO EXPAND HIS BUSINESS BY ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 7 UTILIZING THE SERVICES OF SISTER CONCERNS, WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM INCREASED TURNOVER THIS YEAR WHICH IS AT RS.96.46 CRORES. HE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE FOLLOWING CHART :- PARTICULARS 31.3.2006 31.3.2005 31.3.2004 31.3.200 3 TURNOVER 96,46,34,728 74,77,18,086 62,51,08,766 55,65,81,410 NET PROFIT BEFORE APPROPRIATION (RS.) 74,44,623 54,74,821 35,36,505 37,65,188 LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS SAVED MONEY BY N OT EMPLOYING MORE PERSONS FOR CARRYING OUT VARIOUS MARKETING AND SERV ICE-ACTIVITIES, OUTSOURCING IS PRESENT BUSINESS STRATEGY AND ACCORD INGLY HAS UTILIZED THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF SISTER CONCERNS, IT HAS SAVED ON SALARY PAYMENTS, PF OF THE EMPLOYEES AND IF THEY WERE TO BE EMPLOYED BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE TRANSACTIONS WERE AT ARM-LENGTH PRICES AND AS PER P REVAILING MARKET RATES. TAX WAS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE AND FURTHER THAT IN A SI MILAR CASE OF SISTER CONCERN IN DCIT, CIRCLE-2, SURAT VS. M/S DHRU MOTOR S, SURAT ITA NO.3122/AHD/2007 FOR ASST. YEAR 2004-05, MATTER HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE AHMEDABAD TRIBUNAL. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE MAIN REASON FOR DISALLOWANCE OF COMM ISSION PAYMENT IS THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH EVIDENCE OF SER VICES RENDERED BY THE FIVE PARTIES AND THERE IS NO DETAILED AGREEMENT BET WEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THESE FIVE PARTIES OR IF THERE WAS ANY, IT WAS NOT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO. IT IS UNDISPUTED FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAS UTILIZED TH E PREMISES OF SISTER CONCERNS FOR SELLING ITS PRODUCTS. IT SEEMS THAT IT HAS ALSO UTILIZED THE STAFF OF THE SISTER CONCERNS. BUT WHETHER PAYMENT OF COMM ISSION TO THIS EXTENT ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 8 IS COMMENSURATE WITH WHAT ASSESSEE HAS GOT IN RETUR N, HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED BY THE TWO AUTHORITIES. IT IS NOT A CASE T HAT AN AGREEMENT EXISTED FOR PROVIDING SERVICES OR PARTIES HAVE BEEN APPOINT ED AS SELLING AGENTS FOR THE ASSESSEE AND COMMISSION IS BEING PAID FOR EFFEC TING SALES FOR THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT. ALL THE WORK RELATING TO MARKETING IS BEING CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE COMP ANY. IT IS NOT CLEAR AS TO WHAT IS BEING DONE BY THE EMPLOYEES OF THE SISTE R CONCERNS FOR THE ASSESSEE. HOW MANY EMPLOYEES, HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED BY THE SISTER CONCERNS FOR THE ASSESSEE AND WHAT ARE THE WORK ASS IGNED TO THEM. WHAT WORK THEY ARE RENDERING IN RESPECT OF MARKETING AND WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE IN ITS SUPPORT. WHETHER DETAILS HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO THE PRINCIPAL, I.E. HERO HONDA MOTORS (P) LTD. ARE THEY DECLARED AS SUB-DEAL ERS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY? IF THEY ARE SUB-DEALERS WHETHER NECESSARY AGREEMENTS EXISTED AND WHETHER THERE WAS ANY TRIPATRIATE AGREEMENT WIT H SUB-AGENTS/SUB- DEALERS AND HERO HONDA MOTORS (P) LTD. FURTHER WHAT WOULD BE THE MARKET RENT OF THE FURNISHED PREMISES TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND WHETHER THE COMMISSION PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IS COMM ENSURATE WITH THE RENT OF SUCH FURNISHED/UNFURNISHED PREMISES OF THE SISTER CONCERNS USED BY THE ASSESSEE. ALL THESE ASPECTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED IN DETAIL, FACTS ARE TO BE COLLECTED BY THE AO, EVIDENCES ARE TO BE PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF SERVICES RENDERED, AGENTS AR E ALSO REQUIRED TO BE EXAMINED SO AS TO KNOW WHAT IS THEIR STATUS, MARKET DETAILS ARE TO BE COLLECTED SO AS TO SHOW THAT WHAT IS PAID, IS COMME NSURATE WITH THE PREVAILING MARKET RATES OF WHAT ASSESSEE HAS GOT. W E ARE UNABLE TO AGREE WITH THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HIS CASE IS CO VERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S DHRU MOTORS (SUPRA) . REASONS ARE THAT THERE ARE CLEAR FINDING IN THAT CASE THAT SERVICES ARE RENDERED BY THE AGENTS BUT IN THE PRESENT CASE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF WHA T SERVICES ARE ITA NOS.3123/AHD/2007, ASST. YEAR 2004-05 ITA NO.2424/AHD/2008, ASST. YEAR 2005-06 ITA NO.2167/AHD/2009, ASST. YEAR 2006-07 9 RENDERED. THEREFORE, FOR DETAILED EXAMINATION, WE R ESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH. 8. SINCE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE ISSUE I NVOLVED IN OTHER TWO ASST. YEARS, ARE SIMILAR, WE ALSO RESTORE THE SAME TO THE AO FOR DECIDING AFRESH. 9. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE THREE APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (T.K. SHARMA) (D.C.AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD, DATED : 5/2/2010 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 5/2/2010