ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s Teledata Informatics Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 2427/CHNY/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4068 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 12 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2003-2004
• Appeal Filed On: 19-11-2007
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS VIJAYA PRABHA
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 37(1); 10B; 64

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI , .. , BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU R.L.REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2003-04 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER- OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-III(2), CHENNAI-600 034. VS. M/S.TELEDATA INFORMATICS- LTD., 2AB GEE GEE EMERALD, 151, VILLAGE ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI-600 034. [PAN: AAACT 2976 K ] ( # /APPELLANT) ( $%# /RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY : MRS.VIJAYA PRABHA, JCIT ASSESSEE BY : MR.R.VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADV. ' /DATE OF HEARING : 19.02.2020 ' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26.02.2020 / O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS A MATTER REMANDED BACK BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS VIDE ORDER DATED 09.04.2019 IN TCA NO.981 OF 2009. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: THE APPELLANT IS A COMPANY DULY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF COMPANIES ACT, 1956, WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUS INESS OF DEVELOPMENT AND EXPORT OF SOFTWARE. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR T HE AY 2003-04 WAS FILED ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 2 -: ON 01.12.2003 SHOWING A LOSS OF ` 6,70,90,209/-. AGAINST THE SAID RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASST . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-III (2), CHENNAI-34, HER EINAFTER CALLED AS THE AO) VIDE ORDER DATED 29.03.2006 PASSED U/S.14 3(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, AT A TOTAL INCOME OF ` 6,35,53,935/-. WHILE DOING SO, THE AO MADE SEVERAL DISALLOWANCES WHICH INCLUDES, INTER ALIA, FOLLOWING ADDITIONS WITH WHICH WE ARE CONCERNED: 1. NOTIONAL LOSS DUE TO FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION O F ` 24,54,725/-. 2. RESTRICTING THE DEDUCTION U/S.10B IN RESPECT OF EXP ORT OF SALE PROCEEDS NOT RECEIVED WITHIN THE DUE DATE. 3. RE-CALCULATION OF THE BUSINESS PROFIT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S.10B OF THE ACT BY ALLOCATING THE COMMON EXPENDITURE BETWEEN THE STP A ND NON-STP DIVISIONS. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT ORDER, A N APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A), WHO VIDE IMPUGNED O RDER DATED 02.08.2007 IN APPEAL NO.CIT(A)-VIII/CHE/280/06-07 ALLOWED THE LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF THE EXCHANGE RATE FLUCTUATION, AS REGARD S, TO THE RE-CALCULATION OF PROFIT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S.10B OF THE ACT , THE LD.CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF CIT VS. SUNDARAM CLAYTON LTD., REPORTED IN 281 ITR 425 AND ALSO IN THE CASE OF IT VS. MM FORGINGS LTD., REPORTED IN 257 ITR 60 AND AL SO THE HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ABAD FISHERIES LT D., REPORTED IN 258 ITR 641 HELD THAT THE EXPORT TURNOVER IN RESPECT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS WERE NOT RECEIVED WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD, SHOULD BE RE DUCED FROM BOTH EXPORT TURNOVER AS WELL AS THE TOTAL TURNOVER. SIMILARLY, AS REGARDS TO THE ALLOCATION OF DEPRECIATION BETWEEN THE STP UNITS AN D NON-STP UNITS, THE COMMISSIONER HELD THAT THE DEPRECIATION ON THE IMPO RTED SOFTWARE, WHICH ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 3 -: WAS EXCLUSIVELY USED IN THE DOMESTIC SALES CANNOT B E ALLOCATED TO STP UNITS AND ACCORDINGLY, DIRECTED THE AO TO EXCLUDE T HE DEPRECIATION ON THE COST OF THE IMPORTED SOFTWARE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CA LCULATING THE ELIGIBLE PROFITS FOR DEDUCTION U/S.10B OF THE ACT. THUS, TH E LD.CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED. 4. THE REVENUE CHALLENGED THE CORRECTNESS OF THE OR DER OF THE LD.CIT(A) BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.2427/CHNY/ 2007. 5. THIS TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 14.08.2008 WHILE CONFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN REDUCING THE VALUE OF EXPORT TURNOVER IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE SALE PROCEEDS WERE NOT RECEIVE D IN CONVERTIBLE FOREIGN EXCHANGE WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD CONFIRMING TH E ACTION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN DIRECTING TO REDUCE THE SAME FROM EXPO RT TURNOVER AND TOTAL TURNOVER, REVERSED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN RESPECT OF REDUCING THE DEPRECIATION ON COST OF IMPORTED SOFTWARE, WHICH IS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN USED FOR DOMESTIC SALE PURPOSE, WHILE CALCULATING T HE ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR DEDUCTION U/S.10B BY HOLDING THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAD IGNORED THE FINDINGS OF THE AO THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT OBJECT ED BEFORE THE AO. AS REGARDS TO THE DISALLOWANCE LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION, THE TRIBUNAL REVERSED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND RESTORED THE ADDITION BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V ONGC RE PORTED IN (2008) 301 ITR 415 CHALLENGING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 4 -: MATTER BEFORE THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT. THE HO NBLE HIGH COURT FRAMED THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS OF LAW VIDE ORDER DA TED 09.04.2019 IN TCA NO.981 OF 2009: ''1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE EXPENSES BETWEEN THE STP AND NON-S TP DIVISIONS SHOULD BE DISTRIBUTED ON TURNOVER BASIS ? 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE DEPRECIATION ON SOFTWARE USED IN D OMESTIC SALES SHOULD BE SET OFF AGAINST THE EXPORT PROFITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DED UCTION U/S.10B ? 3. WHETHER THE TRIBUNAL FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT S ECTION 10B PROVIDES FOR DEDUCTION OF SUCH PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED BY AN UNDERTAKING FROM TH E EXPORT OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE AND THEREFORE THE SETTING OFF OF DEPRECIATION ON SOFTWA RE USED IN DOMESTIC SALES AGAINST EXPORT PROFITS WOULD NOT RESULT IN PROFITS DERIVED FROM EX PORTS BUT REDUCE THE PROFITS ON ACCOUNT OF INAPPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENT ?'' 6. THUS, THE HONBLE HIGH COURT RESTORED THE ENTIRE MATTER FILED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THAT IS HOW; THE MATTER HAD ARISEN BEFORE US IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. 7. THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION RATE IS ONLY NOTIONAL. FURTHER, HE SUB MITTED THAT THE LOSS SHOULD BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION S OF RULE 115 OF IT RULES, 1962. AS REGARDS TO, THE EXCLUSION OF DEPREC IATION ON THE COST OF IMPORTED SOFTWARE, SHE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION BEFORE THE AO AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE IS BARRED FROM AGITATING THE SAME BEFORE THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES . 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, MR. R.VIJAYARAGHAVAN, SUBMITTED THAT THE SALE PROCEEDS WHICH WERE NOT RECEIVED IN AND CONVERTIBLE FOREIGN EXCHANGE WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 5 -: SHOULD BE REDUCED FROM BOTH EXPORT TURNOVER AND TOT AL TURNOVER BY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENTS: CIT VS. ABAD FISHERIES LTD., REPORTED IN 258 ITR 64 1 CIT VS. M/S.MAARS SOFTWARE INTERNATIONAL LTD IN TCA NO.390 OF 2009 DATED 05.12.2018. 9. AS REGARDS TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS ON ACCOUN T OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE FLUCTUATION, THE LD.COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ONGC WAS REVERSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, WHICH WAS REPORTED IN (2010) 322 ITR 0180 REGARDING THE EXCLUSION OF DEPRECIATION FROM THE EL IGIBLE PROFITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF CALCULATING ELIGIBLE PROFITS FOR DEDUCTI ON U/S.10B. HE SUBMITTED THAT NO NEW MATERIAL ON IMPORTED SOFTWARE WAS CONSI DERED BY THE LD.CIT(A), THE AO ALSO AGREED ON ALLOWABILITY IN PR INCIPLE IN THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS, HOWEVER, THE AO ONLY OBJECTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT OBJECTED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING S. 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. 11. GROUND NOS.1 & 5 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE. 12. GROUND NO.2 CHALLENGES THE DECISION OF THE LD.C IT(A) DISALLOWING THE LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF THE EXCHANGE RATE FLUCTUATION IN RESPECT OF SALE PROCEEDS HOLDING TO BE A NOTIONAL. THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 6 -: UTTARAKHAND HIGH COURT WAS REVERSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF OIL & NATURAL GAS CORPN. LTD. VS. CIT R EPORTED IN (2010) 322 ITR 0180 BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 9.THUS, THE QUESTIONS SURVIVING FOR DETERMINATION A RE :- (I) THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED THEIR ACCOUNTS ON MERCANTILE SY STEM OF ACCOUNTING AND THERE WAS NO FINDING BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE CORR ECTNESS OR COMPLETENESS OF THE ACCOUNT AND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD COMPLIED WITH THE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS, LAID DOWN BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, CAN THE 'LOSS' SUFF ERED BY IT ON ACCOUNT OF FLUCTUATION IN THE RATE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE AS ON T HE DATE OF BALANCE-SHEET BE ALLOWED AS EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 37(1) OF THE A CT NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT THE LIABILITY HAD NOT BEEN ACTUALLY DISCHARGED IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE FLUCTUATION IN THE RATE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE HAD OCC URRED AND (II) WHETHER ON ACCOUNT OF FLUCTUATION IN THE RATE OF EXCHANGE AT T HE END OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO ADJUST THE ACTUAL COST OF I MPORTED ASSETS ACQUIRED IN FOREIGN CURRENCY? 10.HAVING CAREFULLY PERUSED THE DECISION OF THIS CO URT IN WOODWARD'S CASE (SUPRA), WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT BOTH THE ISSUES STAND CO NCLUDED BY THE SAID DECISION. DEALING WITH THE SAID ISSUES EXTENSIVELY, SPEAKING FOR THE BENCH, S.H. KAPADIA, J. SUMMARISED THE FOLLOWING FACTORS WHICH SHOULD BE TA KEN INTO ACCOUNT IN ORDER TO FIND OUT IF AN EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF FLUCTUATIO N IN THE FOREIGN CURRENCY RATES, WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING, IS DEDUCTIBLE: (I) WHETHER THE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING FOLLOWED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS THE MERCANTILE SYSTEM, WHICH BRINGS IN THE DEBITS OF THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE FOR WHICH A LEGAL LIABILITY HAS BEEN INCURRED EVEN BEFORE IT IS ACTUA LLY DISBURSED AND CREDITS, WHAT IS DUE, IMMEDIATELY IT BECOMES DUE EVEN BEFORE IT IS A CTUALLY RECEIVED; (II) WHETHER THE SAME SYSTEM IS FOLLOWED BY THE ASS ESSEE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AND IF THERE WAS A CHANGE IN THE SYSTEM, WHETHER TH E CHANGE WAS BONA FIDE; (III) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN THE SAME TREAT MENT TO LOSSES CLAIMED TO HAVE ACCRUED AND TO THE GAINS THAT MAY ACCRUE TO IT; (IV) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CONSISTENT AND D EFINITE IN MAKING ENTRIES IN THE ACCOUNT BOOKS IN RESPECT OF LOSSES AND GAINS; (V) WHETHER THE METHOD ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR MAKING ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS BOTH IN RESPECT OF LOSSES AND GAINS IS AS PER NATIO NALLY ACCEPTED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS; (VI) WHETHER THE SYSTEM ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSEE IS FAIR AND REASONABLE OR IS ADOPTED ONLY WITH A VIEW TO REDUCING THE INCIDENCE OF TAXATION. APPLYING THESE FACTORS ON THE FACTS OF THAT CASE, I T WAS HELD THAT THE 'LOSS' SUFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE, MAINTAINING ACCOUNTS REGU LARLY ON MERCANTILE SYSTEM AND FOLLOWING ACCOUNTING STANDARDS PRESCRIBED BY TH E INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA (ICAI), ON ACCOUNT OF FLUCTUAT ION IN THE RATE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE AS ON THE DATE OF BALANCE-SHEET WAS AN ITE M OF EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 37(1) OF THE ACT, NOTWITHSTANDING THAT THE LIABILITY HAD NOT BEEN DISCHARGED IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE FLUCTUATION IN THE RATE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE OCCURRED. ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 7 -: 11.WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE RATIO OF THE SAID DECISION, WITH WHICH WE ARE IN RESPECTFUL AGREEMENT, SQUARELY APPLIES TO THE FACTS AT HAND AND, THEREFORE, THE LOSS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF FLUCTUAT ION IN THE RATE OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE AS ON THE DATE OF BALANCE-SHEET IS ALLOWAB LE AS EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 37(1) OF THE ACT. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, THE ISSUE STANDS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE REVENUE. THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD.DR THAT THE CALCULATION SHOU LD BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 115. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE AO HAD NOT DOUBTED THE CORRECTNES S OF THE COMPUTATION OF THE LOSS, THE AO DISALLOWED ON THE PRINCIPLE THAT I T IS A NOTIONAL LOSS. UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, GROUND NO.2 STAN DS DISMISSED. 13. GROUND NO.3 CHALLENGES THE DECISION OF THE LD.C IT(A) IN DIRECTING THE AO TO DEDUCT THE EXPORT SALE PROCEEDS NOT RECEI VED WITHIN THE STIPULATED PERIOD FROM BOTH THE EXPORT TURNOVER AS WELL AS THE TOTAL TURNOVER. THUS, THE DECISION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS I NCONSONANCE WITH THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE O F CIT V. HCL TECHNOLOGIES LTD. REPORTED IN 404 ITR 719 AND ALSO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T V. M/S.MAARS SOFTWARE INTERNATIONAL LTD., WHEREIN THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER: 22. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE SEEKS TO DISTIN GUISH THE ABOVE JUDGMENT STATING THAT THE RATIONALE THEREOF WOULD BE APPLICA BLE ONLY TO THE ITEMS OF EXCLUSION AT ISSUE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT AND CAN NOT BE EXTENDED TO THE QUESTION OF UNREALISED SALE PROCEEDS, WHICH IS THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT CASE. 23. WE SEE NO VALID DISTINCTION AS SOUGHT TO BE POI NTED OUT BEFORE US. THE COMPONENTS OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER/DENOMINATOR IN THE FORMULA WOULD BE THE ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 8 -: QUANTUM OF EXPORT TURNOVER/NUMERATOR PLUS PROCEEDS FROM DOMESTIC SALES. THUS WHAT IS 'EXPORT TURNOVER' FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE NU MERATOR WOULD HAVE TO BE THE 'EXPORT TURNOVER' FOR THE PURPOSE OF DENOMINATOR AS WELL AND 'EXPORT TURNOVER' CANNOT ASSUME TWO DIFFERENT CHARACTERISTICS FOR TWO PARTS OF THE SAME FORMULA. 14. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE LEGAL POSITION AND FA CTS, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) . ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.3 STANDS DISMISSED 15. GROUND NO.4 CHALLENGES THE DECISION OF THE LD.C IT(A) TO EXCLUDE THE DEPRECIATION ON THE COST OF THE IMPORTED SOFTWARE F ROM THE ELIGIBLE PROFITS FOR THE DEDUCTION U/S.10A OF THE ACT. THE PRINCIPL E IS WELL SETTLED THAT WHAT CAN BE ALLOCATED BETWEEN THE STP UNIT AND THE NON-STP UNITS IS ONLY INDIRECT EXPENDITURE. THE EXPENDITURE WHICH CAN BE DIRECTLY BE IDENTIFIED WITH A PARTICULAR UNIT CANNOT BE APPORTIONED BETWEE N THE TWO UNITS. ADMITTEDLY, THE AO APPORTIONED THE DEPRECIATION BET WEEN THE STP UNITS AND THE NON-STP UNITS, BUT THE CONTENTION OF THE AS SESSEE IS THAT THE DEPRECIATION ON IMPORTED SOFTWARE CANNOT BE APPORTI ONED TO STP UNIT, BECAUSE IT WAS EXCLUSIVELY USED IN THE DOMESTIC SAL ES, IS REQUIRED TO BE ADJUDICATED WITH REFERENCE TO THE EVIDENCE ON RECOR D AS IT IS A QUESTION OF FACT. BUT, IT APPEARS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAD NOT G ONE INTO THE EVIDENCE WHETHER THE IMPORTED SOFTWARE WAS USED EXCLUSIVELY IN THE DOMESTIC SALES OR NOT. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE CONS IDERED OPINION THAT THE MATTER SHOULD GO BACK TO THE AO TO ADJUDICATE THE I SSUE IN THE LIGHT OF THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS: WHETHER THE IMPORTED SOFTWARE WAS USED EXCLUSIVELY IN THE DOMESTIC SALES? IF SO, TO EXCLUDE THE SAME FROM THE ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR DEDUCTION ITA NO.2427/CHNY/2007 :- 9 -: U/S.10A OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.4 STAND S PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 16. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 26 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . / . . 2 ) ( DUVVURU R.L.REDDY ) 4 /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) 4 /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED: 26 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. TLN ' $67 87 /COPY TO: 1. # /APPELLANT 4. 9 /CIT 2. $%# /RESPONDENT 5. 7 $ /DR 3. 9 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF