Sh. Ram Baboo Agarwal, Mathura V. A.C.I.T.-3, Mathura

ITA 245/AGR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 24520314 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 12-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KK MISHRA
• Assessee Lawyers: NAVIN GARGH
• Keywords: Business income; Income from undisclosed sources; Search and seizure; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 131

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.L. GEHLOT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 ASSTT. YEAR : 2007-08 RAM BABOO AGARWAL, VS. A.C.I.T.-3, MATHURA. GALI DURGA CHAND, CHOWK BAZAR, MATHURA. (PAN: AAWPA 0554 B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI NAVIN GARGH, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.K. MISHRA, JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 12.12.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER : 28.12.2012 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, AGRA DATED 28.12.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08, CHALLENGING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,71,000/- U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEES SOURCE OF INCOME WAS INTEREST FROM VARIOUS PARTIES UNDER HIS BUSINESS OF MONEY LENDING IN THE NAME OF M/S. RAJNIKANT & BROTHERS. THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO RU NNING ANOTHER PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN IN THE NAME OF M/S. YASHODHARA JEWELLERS, E NGAGED IN SILVER AND GOLD ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 2 ORNAMENTS BUSINESS. THE AO ON EXAMINATION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FOUND NUMBER OF CASH CREDITS APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT FROM 20 PERSONS. THE DETAILS OF THE SAME ARE NOTED AT PAGE 1 & 2 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R WITH AMOUNTS ADVANCED BY THEM. IN RESPECT OF THESE CASH CREDITS, CONFIRMATOR Y LETTERS WERE FILED. THE CONFIRMATORY LETTERS WERE IN THE NAMES OF INDIVIDUA LS, BUT THOSE CONFIRMATORY LETTERS WERE NOT HAVING ANY PROOF WITH REGARD TO ID ENTIFICATION OF THESE CREDITORS. ALL THE TRANSACTIONS ARE IN CASH. THE GENUINENESS O F THE TRANSACTION COULD NOT BE SUBJECTED TO VERIFICATION. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRO DUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE ALLEGED CREDITORS AND NO EV IDENCE WAS FURNISHED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION IN THE MATTER. T HESE FACTS WERE CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER SHEET DATED 13.09.2009, ASKING THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THESE CASH CREDITS TOTALING TO RS.3,71,000/- SH OULD NOT BE TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT. THE ASSESSEE IN EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT HE IS DOING THE SILVER ORNAMENTS BUSINE SS AND SOME PERSONS HAVE GIVEN ADVANCE FOR PURCHASING THE SILVER ORNAMENTS ON THEI R DISCRETION AS PER SUITABLE RATES. THE NAMES ARE MENTIONED IN THE CASH BOOK, BU T DUE TO CONTINUOUS INCREASE IN PRICE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PURCHASED THE GOODS AS PER THEIR REQUIREMENTS AND ULTIMATELY, THE ASSESSEE HAS RETURNED THE AMOUNT TO ALL THE PARTIES. COPY OF THE ACCOUNT WAS FILED. ALL ARE ORDINARY PERSONS AND NOT ASSESSED TO TAX. IT WAS A GENUINE BUSINESS TRANSACTION. THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 3 ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROVE IDENT ITY OF ANY OF THE PERSONS. NO EVIDENCE WAS FILED TO PROVE THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS AND THUS, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. AD DITION OF RS.3,71,000/- WAS MADE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO DISM ISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY SUPP ORTING EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF THE IDENTITY OF THESE CREDITORS AS WELL AS FAILED TO ES TABLISH THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS. THE APPEAL WAS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE I S IN BUSINESS OF SILVER ORNAMENTS AND THOSE 20 CREDITORS HAVE GIVEN ADVANCE FOR PURCH ASING THE SILVER ORNAMENTS AS PER SUITABLE RATES. THE ASSESSEE FILED CONFIRMATION LETTERS AND ALL THE TRANSACTIONS WERE ROUTED IN CASH. THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO. THEREFORE, ON FILING THE CONFIRMATION AND CAPITAL A CCOUNT OF THE CREDITORS, ONUS UPON THE ASSESSEE U/S. 68 IS DISCHARGED. HE HAS ADM ITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 ARE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE. HE HAS ALSO ADMITTED THAT RATE OF SILVER ORNAMENTS AS PER MARKET PRACTICE HAVE TO BE TAKEN O N THE DAY WHEN ADVANCE HAS BEEN GIVEN. THE AO AFTER FILING OF THE CONFIRMATION S DID NOT GIVE FURTHER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE HIS CASE. THE AO DID NOT ISSUE ANY SUMMONS AGAINST ANY OF THE CREDITORS. HE HAS RELIED UPON FO LLOWING DECISIONS : ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 4 (I). TOLARAM DAGA VS. CIT, 59 ITR 632 (II). CIT VS. DAULAT RAM RAWATMULL, 87 ITR 349 (SC ) (III). JHAVERBHAI BIHARI LAL & CO. VS. CIT, 154 IT R 591 (PAT.) (IV). ADDL.CIT VS. HANUMAN AGARWAL, 151 ITR 150 (P AT.) (V). MUNNALAL MURLIDHAR VS. CIT, 791 ITR 540 (ALLD .) (VI). NATU RAM PREMCHAND VS. CIT, 49 ITR 561 (ALLD .) (VII). CIT VS. ORISSA CORPORATION PVT. LTD., 159 I TR 78 (SC) (VIII). COLONISERS VS. A.C.I.T., 41 ITD 57 (HYDERA BAD BENCH) (IX). ITO VS. METRO CYCLE OF INDIA, 88 TAXMAN 193 (CHANDIGARH BENCH) (X). CIT VS. K.M.N. NAIDU, 211 ITR 451 (MAD.) HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH HIS CASE BEFORE THE AO. ON THE OTHER THAN, THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE MATERIAL AND ON RECORD AND DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS R ECEIVED LARGE NUMBER OF CASH CREDITS FROM 20 PERSONS, WHICH WAS ENTERED INTO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. ALL THE AMOUNTS ARE RECEIVED IN CASH. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THUS ADMITTED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT ARE APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. FOR PROVING THE INGREDIENTS O F SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT, THE BURDEN IS UPON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY O F THE CREDITORS, THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION . HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED ANY OF THE ABOVE CONDITIONS U/S. 68 OF THE I T ACT. THE ASSESSEE FILED MERE ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 5 CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM THE CREDITORS WITHOUT FIL ING SUPPORTING EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS, THEIR CREDITWORTHINE SS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THE AO VIDE ORDER SHEET DATED 13.09.20 09 ON FILING THE CONFIRMATIONS BY THE ASSESSEE GAVE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSES SEE AS TO WHY THE ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT BE NOT MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAI NED CASH CREDITS. INSPITE OF MATERIAL CONFRONTED TO THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE D ID NOT FILE ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AO IN SUPPORT OF THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS TO PR OVE ALL THE ABOVE THREE INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT. HONBLE CA LCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BHARTI PVT. LTD. VS. CIT, 111 ITR 951 HELD AS UNDER : IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE INCOM E-TAX OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN RS.20,000 AS LOAN IN ITS BOOKS TAKEN FROM TWO PARTIES. THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED CONFIRMATORY LETTERS FROM THOSE PARTIES BEFORE THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER IN SUPPORT OF THE TWO LOANS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER SERVED NOTICES UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, ON THE ALLEGED CREDITORS AND SINCE THOSE NOTICES CAME BACK UNSERVE D, THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER TREATED THE LOAN AS ASSESSEES INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES. THE APPELLATE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER DISMI SSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE C OULD NOT EVEN ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE PARTIES. ON FURTHER A PPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT MERE FILING OF CON FIRMATORY LETTERS DID NOT DISCHARGE THE ONUS THAT LAY ON THE ASSESSEE AND THERE WAS NO MATERIAL ON THE RECORD TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS: HELD, THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAD TAKEN ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS INTO CONSIDERATION AND THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE LOANS REPRESENTED THE ASSESSEES INCOME FROM UNDISC LOSED SOURCES WAS NOT PERVERSE OR UNREASONABLE. ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 6 4.1 THE HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS UNITED COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CO. (P) LTD., 187 ITR 596 HELD AS UN DER: THE PRIMARY ONUS LIES ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF CREDITS IN ITS ACCOUNT. IT IS NECESSARY F OR THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE PRIMA FACIE THE IDENTITY OF HIS CREDITORS, TH E CAPACITY OF SUCH CREDITORS TO ADVANCE THE MONEY AND LASTLY THE GENUI NENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. ONLY WHEN THESE THINGS ARE PROVED BY THE ASSESSEE PRIMA FACIE AND ONLY AFTER THE ASSESSEE HAS ADDUCED EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THE AFORESAID FACTS DOES THE ONUS SHIFT O N TO THE DEPARTMENT. IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO ESTABLISH THE IDENTITY OF THE C REDITORS. MERE PRODUCTION OF THE CONFIRMATION LETTERS BEFORE THE I NCOME-TAX OFFICER WOULD NOT BY ITSELF PROVE THAT THE LOANS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED FROM THOSE LOAN CREDITORS OR THAT THEY HAVE CREDIT-WORTHINESS. HELD, THAT, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE TRIBUNAL MISDI RECTED ITSELF IN HOLDING THAT THE TRANSACTIONS WERE GENUINE SIMPLY B ECAUSE SOME OF THE TRANSACTIONS WERE MADE BY CHEQUES. THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PROVE THE CREDIT-WORTHINESS OF THE ALLEGED LENDERS. A NUM BER OF OTHER ASSESSEES HAD ALSO ADMITTED THAT LOANS OBTAINED FRO M THESE BANKERS AGAINST HUNDIS WERE NOT GENUINE AND SUCH HUNDI LOAN S REALLY REPRESENTED THEIR OWN CONCEALED INCOME. THE ASSESSE E HAD NOT DISCHARGED ITS BURDEN OF PROVING THAT THE LOANS IN QUESTION WERE GENUINE. 4.2 CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF ABOVE DECISIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO ESTABLISH GENU INE CREDITS IN THE MATTER. APART FROM THE ABOVE FINDINGS, WE MAY ALSO NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COPIES OF CONFIRMATION LETTERS IN THE PAPER BOOK, IN SOME OF WHICH THE ALLEGED CREDITORS HAVE STATED THAT THE AMOUNTS IN CASH HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PURCHASING SILVER, BUT BECAUSE OF THE RATES OF SILVER HAVE INC REASED, THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN TAKEN BACK. ALMOST SAME NARRATION IS GIVEN IN THE A LLEGED CONFIRMATION LETTERS. ALL ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 7 THESE CONFIRMATION LETTERS ARE CONTRARY TO THE EXPL ANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO THAT HE IS DOING T HE BUSINESS OF SILVER ORNAMENTS. EVEN IN THE COPIES OF SILVER JEWELLERY ACCOUNT, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MENTIONED ANYTHING IF THE ASSESSEE HAS PURCHASED ANY SILVER O N RECEIVING THE ADVANCE FROM THESE CREDITORS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE A LSO ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF ARGUMENTS THAT AS PER MARKET PRACTICE, RATES OF SIL VER/SILVER ORNAMENTS HAVE TO BE TAKEN OF THE DATE WHEN ADVANCE HAS BEEN GIVEN. THER EFORE, THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF WITHDRAWING FROM THE TRANSACTION ON INCREASE OF THE VALUE OF SILVER. THEREFORE, THERE IS SERIOUS DOUBT ABOUT THE CONFIRMATION FILED BY THE ALLEGED CREDITORS. IN SUCH A SITUATION, IT IS THE DUTY OF THE ASSESSEE TO ESTA BLISH THE IDENTITY OF THESE CREDITORS AND THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS THROUGH DOCUMENTARY EVID ENCE IN ORDER TO PROVE GENUINE TRANSACTION IN THE MATTER. BUT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DO SO. THEREFORE, THE ONUS UPON THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN DISCHARGED AT ALL. THE AS SESSEE HAS BEEN GIVEN OPPORTUNITY BY THE AO VIDE SEPARATE ORDER SHEET DAT ED 13.09.2009 TO EXPLAIN THIS ISSUE AND TO PROVE ITS CASE U/S. 68 OF THE IT ACT, BUT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AO IN RESPECT OF HIS CLAIM. THEREFORE, IT IS NOT THE CASE OF DENIAL OF ANY OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT ESTABLISHED ON RECORD IF THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE ANY REQUEST TO THE AO FOR SUMMONING OF ANY OF THE CREDITORS, THEREFORE, THE AO IS NOT BOUND TO ISSUE ANY SUMMON TO THE CREDITORS. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHARGED IN ANY WAY TH E ONUS UPON HIM TO PROVE THE ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 8 GENUINENESS OF THE CREDITS IN THE MATTER, THEREFORE , IT IS NOT THE DUTY OF THE AO TO ISSUE SUO MOTU SUMMONS TO THE CREDITORS TO PROVE TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO ARGUED THAT THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE AO, THEREFORE, THE ENTRIES OF CASH CREDITS S HOULD ALSO BE ACCEPTED BY THE AO. WE ARE AFRAID TO ACCEPT SUCH CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 68 ARE DEEMING PROVISIONS TO CONSIDER THE CASH CREDITS ENTERED INTO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND IT HAS NO REL ATION WITH THE ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. DEVI PRASAD VI SHWANATH PRASAD, 72 ITR 194, IN WHICH IT WAS HELD THERE IS NOTHING IN LAW WHICH PREVENTS THE INCOME- TAX OFFICER IN AN APPROPRIATE CASE IN TAXING BOTH THE CASH CRED IT, THE NATURE AND SOURCE OF WHICH IS NOT SATISFACTORILY EXPLAINED, AN D THE BUSINESS INCOME ESTIMATED BY HIM UNDER SECTION 13 OF THE IND IAN INCOME-TAX ACT, 1922, AFTER REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS UNRELIABLE. THEREFORE, THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, IT IS CLEAR THAT IT IS A CASE OF NO EVIDENCE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS , THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THEREFORE, NONE OF THE DECISIONS CITED BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE APPLICABLE TO THE FACT S OF THE PRESENT CASE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO REQUESTED TO CITE ANY CASE LAW WHERE ON MERE ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 9 FILING OF THE CONFIRMATION, ADDITIONS HAVE BEEN DEL ETED U/S. 68, BUT THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CITE ANY RELE VANT CASE LAW TO SUPPORT HIS CONTENTION. WE MAY ALSO NOTE HERE THAT EVEN BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) OR BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED ANY EVIDEN CE TO PROVE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS, THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS O F THE TRANSACTION IN THE MATTER. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE ON RECORD TO ESTABLISH THE INGREDIENTS OF SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT, IT IS DIFFICULT TO INTERF ERE WITH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF DURGA P RASAD MORE, 82 ITR 540 AND SUMATI DAYAL, 214 ITR 801 HELD THAT THE COURTS AND TRIBUNAL HAVE TO JUDGE THE EVIDENCES BEFORE THEM BY APPLYING THE TEST OF HUMAN PROBABILITIES AFTER CONSIDERING THE SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ADDUCED ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS, THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANS ACTION IN THE MATTER AND WHATEVER CONFIRMATIONS WERE FILED WERE CONTRADICTOR Y TO THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE. THE SILVER IS NOT A RARE COMMODITY FOR W HICH ADVANCE SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR PURCHASE AND PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE DID NOT DEAL IN SILVER BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE DEALS ONLY IN SILVER JEWELLERY . EVERYTHING IS AFTERTHOUGHT STORY MADE UP TO COVER THE UNACCOUNTED MONEY. THEREFORE, IT WOULD LEAD TO IRRESISTIBLE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FABRICATED ALL THE CONFIRMATIONS AND IT WAS THE UNACCOUNTED MONEY OF THE ASSESSEE ONLY WHICH IS ENT ERED INTO THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ITA NO. 245/AGRA/2012 10 UNDER THE GARB OF CASH CREDITS GIVEN BY 20 PERSONS. THUS, THE ASSESSEE MISERABLY FAILED TO PROVE HIS CASE. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRM ITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW ARE, THEREFORE, CONFIRMED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (A.L. GEHLOT) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AKS/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A), CONCERNED BY ORDER 4. CIT, CONCERNED 5. DR, ITAT, AGRA 6. GUARD FILE SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY TRUE COPY