Century Tiles Ltd., Sabarkantha V. The ACIT.,S.K.Circle, Himatnagar

ITA 2570/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1206 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 09-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P B PARMAR
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Principle of natural justice; Reason to believe
• Section: 145; 148

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 2570/AHD/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 CENTURY TILES LIMITED, AT & PO GADHODA, SABAR DAIRY TALOD ROAD, TA. HIMATNAGAR .. APPELLANT PAN : AACCC 2531 M VS ACIT, SABARKANTHA CIRCLE, HIMATNAGAR .. RESPONDENT ./ ITA NO. 2748/AHD/2012 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 ACIT, SABARKANTHA CIRCLE, HIMATNAGAR .. RESPONDENT VS CENTURY TILES LIMITED, AT & PO GADHODA, SABAR DAIRY TALOD ROAD, TA. HIMATNAGAR .. APPELLANT PAN : AACCC 2531 M ASSESSEE(S) BY SHRI P. B. PARMAR, AR REVENUE BY MS. SANYOGITA NAGPAL, SR DR / DATE OF HEARING 01/12/2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 03/12/2015 / O R D E R PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER: ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 2 - THESE CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS)-VIII, AHMEDABAD DATED 24.09.2012 FOR ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ITA NO. 2570/AHD/2012 : AY 2005-06 APPEAL BY ASSE SSEE 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANT'S GRO UND OF APPEAL CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE ISSUE D U/S. 148 OF THE ACT AS REGARDS RE-OPENING THE ASSESSMENT . ON THE BASIS OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE NOTICE I SSUED U/S. 148 OF THE ACT AND THE CONSEQUENTIAL RE-ASSESS MENT PROCEEDINGS ARE INVALID. THE SAME BE HELD SO NOW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN DISMISSING THE APPELLANT'S GRO UND OF APPEAL CHALLENGING THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS U/S, 145 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. ON THE BASIS OF FA CTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED C1T(A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE ACTION OF A,O. IN REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS IS NOT TENABLEIN THE EYES OF LAW. THE SAME BE HELD SO NOW. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE F ACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE SUPPRESSION OF SALES OF RS.86,47,890/- IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. NO SU CH SALES HAVE BEEN SUPPRESSED AS ALLEGED OR FOR THE RE ASONS AS ALLEGED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE F ACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF NET PROFITS @ 15.48 ON THE FIGURE OF SUPPRESSION OF SALES OF RS. 86,47, 890/- SO ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 3 - ESTIMATED IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELL ANT HAS EARNED NO SUCH NET PROFIT. 5. ALTERNATIVELY AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE RATE OF NET PROFITS IS HIGHLY EXAGGERATED AND EXCESSIVE. 6. BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE PASSED THE ORDER S WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACT AND THAT THE Y FURTHER ERRED IN GROSSLY IGNORING VARIOUS SUBMISSIO NS, EXPLANATIONS AND INFORMATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT FROM TIME TO TIME WHICH OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED BEFORE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THIS ACTION OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IS IN CLEAR BREACH OF LAW AND PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND THEREFORE DES ERVES TO BE QUASHED. 7. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING ACTION OF THE ID. AO IN LEVYING INTEREST U/S 234A/B/C OF THE ACT. 8. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING ACTION OF THE ID- AO IN INITIATI NG PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 2748/AHD/2012 : AY 2005-06 APPEAL BY REVE NUE 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.21,20,463/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF G P ON UNACCOUNTED PRODUCTION. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A LIMITED COMPANY AND ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING CERAMICS GIAZES TILES. ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 4 - INVESTIGATIONS CONDUCTED BY THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE INTELLIGENCE, AHMEDABAD ZONAL UNIT HAVE REVE ALED THAT THE ASSESSEE - MANUFACTURER OF CERAMICS FLOOR TILES WAS UNDER VALUING THEIR TILES. THEY DECLARED ONLY 70% OF THE ACTUAL MRP IN THE INVOICE AND COLLECTED THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNTS IN CASH. THE ESTIMATED DUTY EVASION WAS TO THE TUNE OF RS.75 LAC S. THE CASE WAS INVESTIGATED FROM THE INCOME TAX POINT OF VIEW AND TOTAL CONCEALMENT TO THE TUNE OF RS.27,88,12,509/- WAS WO RKED OUT ON THE BASIS OF ANNEXURE D-1, D-2, D-3 AND D-4 TO T HE REPORT BY THE DGCEI, AHMEDABAD. 3. MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AU THORITY WHO, HAVING CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, CONFIRMED THE SUPPRESSION OF SALES TO THE TUNE OF RS.86,47,890/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. BOTH THE PARTIES ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE US ON THE GROUNDS RAISED ABOVE . LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT SIMILAR ISSUE CAME IN A GROUP CASE I.E. ACIT VS. SANTRO TILES LIMITED & OTHERS BEFORE THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL VIDE ITA NOS. 1277 TO 1280/AHD/2012 FOR AYS 2005-06 TO 2008-09 AN D SUBMITTED THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUE WAS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER, BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 5 - 4. MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, WHEREIN CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSING O FFICER HAD ADOPTED @ 40% ON SUPPRESSION OF SALE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HIMSELF NOT ED IN ASSESSMENT ORDER VIDE PAGE NO.24 OF ASSESSMENT ORDE R IS AS UNDER: 'THE DGCEI HAS MADE VERY RELEVANT OBSERVATION IN PARA NO.29.3 PAGE 177 OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. AFTER THE DETAILED ENQUIRY AND EXAMINATION OF THE VARIOUS AGENCIES INVOLVED IN CERAMIC TILES INDUSTRIES, THEY HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ASSESSEE ESTABLISHED A SYNDICATE WITH THE NETWORK OF DEDICATED TRANSPORTERS AND DEALERS TO CAMOUFLAGE PART OF THEIR UNDERVALUATION. INVESTIGATION FURTHER REVEALED THAT THE DEALERS WER E ALSO NOT DECLARING VARIOUS INCIDENTAL AND ANCILLARY EXPENSES AS THE SAME WERE MET WITH FROM THE CASH AMOUNT COLLECTED BY THE DEALERS FROM THEIR BUYERS OVER AND ABOVE THE VALUE DECLARED IN THE SALE BILLS . THE TILE MANUFACTURERS WERE PURCHASING RAW MATERIALS EITHER WITHOUT BILL OR AT REDUCED RATES. THIS WAS DONE PARTICULARLY SO AS TO KEEP MANUFACTURING COSTS ON PAPER AT LOWER SIDE SO AS TO MATCH THE DEFLATED MRP. IT HAS ALSO BEEN CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT THE TILE MANUFACTURERS WERE OBTAINING FREIGHT AND TRANSPORT BILLS AT A LOWER RATE AND THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT PAYABLE TO THE SUPPLIER OF RAW MATERIALS AND TRANSPORTERS WERE PAID OUT OF THE CAS H SO COLLECTED FROM THE DEALERS/DISTRIBUTORS. IT IS THEREFORE VERY APPARENT THAT EVEN THE DGCEI HAS ACCEPTED & ACKNOWLEDGED THE FACT THAT NOT ONLY MRP IS BEING REDUCED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLEGED EXCISE DUTY BUT ALSO COMPLETE EXPENSES/COSTS WITH REFERENCE TO THE PURCHASE OF RAW MATERIAL AND OTHER INCIDENTAL MANUFACTURING EXPENSES HAVE BEEN CORRESPONDINGLY SHOWN AT A LESSER AMOUNT. THIS ONLY GOES TO SHOW THAT IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE THE ENTIRE EXPENSES HAVE BEEN RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE ALLEGED SUPPRESSION OF SALES IS NO T ACCOUNTED FOR THEREBY RESULTING IN THE ENTIRE ALLEG ED SUPPRESSION OF RECEIPTS AS INCOME. PART OF THE ALLE GED SUPPRESSION OF RECEIPTS HAVE BEEN USED FOR THE ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 6 - PURPOSE OF MAKING CASH PAYMENTS FOR THE VARIOUS EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES. HOWEVER, SINCE SOME OF THE EXPENSES RELATABLE TO THE UNACCOUNTED RECEIPTS ARE ACCOUNTED IN REGULAR BOOKS AND SOME ARE NOT, THE GP TO BE ADOPTED FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING PROFITS ON THE UNACCOUNTED RECEIPTS NEEDS TO BE SUITABLY ADJUSTED. THEREFORE, GP ONLY ON UNACCOUNTED CASH RECEIVED AT THE RATE OF 22.40% TOTALING RS.45,12,406/- CANNOT BE TAXED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS CONCEALED INCOME. IT IS A CASE WHERE MAJORITY OF RAW MATERIAL AND OTHER MANUFACTURING EXPENSES ACCOUNTING FOR 60-65% OF MANUFACTURING COST AND ARE RECORDED IN BOOKS. THE GP RATE, TO BE ADOPTED FOR COMPUTING PROFITS GENERATED TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY OUT OF IT S UNACCOUNTED RECEIPTS, HAS TO BE HIGHER THAN THE NORMAL GP IN LIGHT OF THE FACTS THAT EXPENSES LIKE A PORTION OF THE RAW MATERIAL COST, ENTIRE ELECTRICIT Y AND FUEL COSTS AND A PORTION OF THE LABOUR COSTS HA VE ALREADY BEEN CLAIMED IN THE NORMAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. SINCE THERE IS NO FIRM BASIS FOR ARRIVING AT A PROPER ASCERTAINMENT OF SUCH GP IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE IS UNABLE TO FURNISH DETAILS OF ALL UNACCOUNTED EXPENSES INCURRED BY IT, ALTHOUGH EVIDENCE OF SUCH EXPENSES HAS BEEN NOTED BY THE DGCEI IN THEIR REPORT, A RATIONALE ESTIMATE IS MADE IN RELATION TO THE GP TO BE ADOPTED IN RESPECT OF T HE UNACCOUNTED RECEIPTS OF THE ASSESSES. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS, GP RATE OF 40% SEEMS REASONABLE IN THIS CASE AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS APPLIED ON UNACCOUNTED CASH RECEIVED RS.2,01,44,670/- AND RS.80,57,868/- IS TAXED AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME EARNED ON ACCOUNT OF SUPPRESSION OF MRP. FROM THE ABOVE, CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS RESORTED TO LARGE SCALE SUPPRESSION OF SALE THOUGH VARIOUS MODUS OPERANDI. THIS SUPPRESSION WAS ALSO ACCEPTED BY ENGAGED PARTIES. ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED THE CONTENTION THAT THE QUANTUM OF SUPPRESSION OF SALES SHOULD BE BASED ON EX-FACTORY RATE AND HAS ACCORDIN GLY MODIFIED THE QUANTUM, DETERMINED BY DGCEI, ON THE BASIS OF MRP. THE STAND OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN THAT I T WAS ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 7 - AT BEST PROVISIONAL SINCE THE ISSUES RAISED BY DIRE CTORATE GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE INTELLIGENCE (HEREIN AFTE R REFERRED AS DGCEI) WAS NOT FINALLY ADJUDICATED. A S SUCH, FIGURES ADOPTED BY ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO BE SUBJEC TED TO CONSEQUENTIAL MODIFICATION. THE DGCEI HAD OBSERVED THAT RAW MATERIALS WERE PURCHASED WITHOUT BILLS OR AT RE DUCED RATES AND FREIGHT AND TRANSPORT BILLS WERE OBTAINED AT A LOWER RATE. IN THIS BACKGROUND, LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT ADDITION ON ACCOUNT O F SUPPRESSION OF SALES HAS ORIGIN IN INVESTIGATION CO NDUCTED BY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE INTELLIGEN CE, AHMEDABAD ZONAL UNIT HAS REVEALED THAT M/S. SANTRO TILES LIMITED, HIMATNAGAR, MANUFACTURING OF CERAMIC S FLOOR TILES WERE UNDERVALUING THEIR TILES. THEY WER E DECLARING ONLY 70% OF ACTUAL MRP IN THE INVOICE AND COLLECTING THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNTS IN CASH. ESTIMA TED DUTY EVASION WAS TO THE TUNE OF RS.75 LACS. CASE WA S INVESTIGATED FROM INCOME TAX POINT OF VIEW BY THE ADIT(INV)-II(2), AHMEDABAD AND TOTAL CONCEALMENT TO THE TUNE OF RS.43,88,57,612/- WAS WORKED OUT ON THE BAS IS OF ANNEXURES D-1, D-1, D-3 AND D-4 TO THE REPORT BY TH E DGCEI, AHMEDABAD IN FOUR ASSESSMENT YEARS. STATEMEN T RECORDED BY DGCEI, AHMEDABAD, DATED 06.09.2008 SHRI PRAKASHBHAI DAHYABHAI PATEL, DIRECTOR OF M/S. SANTR O TILES LIMITED HAS STATED THAT DUE TO MARKET COMPULS ION AND GENERAL TRADE PRACTICE, THEY HAD BEEN SUPPRESSI NG MRP AND PAYING LESS CENTRAL EXCISE DUTY. HE FURTHER STATED THAT THEY HAVE REVISED THEIR MRPS OF ALL THE GRADES OF CERAMICS FLOOR TILES WITH EFFECT FROM 24.02.2008 AND ONWARDS. FROM THE ABOVE FACTS AS MENTIONED IN SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUE BY DGCEI DATED 04.07.2009 WHICH HAS BEEN DULY SERVED UPON ASSESSEE, IT WAS FOUND CLEAR IN THE EXCISE PROCEEDING THAT SANTRO TILES LIMITED WAS SUPPRESSING MRP CONTINUES FROM 01.06.2004 TO 31.03.2008 SPREADING OVER FOUR FINANCIAL YEARS I.E. 2004- 05 TO 2007-08. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT WAS FO UND IN THIS CASE AS WELL THAT BY NOT DECLARING SUCH AMO UNT OF UNACCOUNTED SALE PRICE WHICH WAS COLLECTED BY COMPA NY IN CASH FROM VARIOUS DEALERS/DISTRIBUTORS ADMITTED BY THE DIRECTOR AS WELL COMPANY HAS NOT SHOWN FULL AMOUNT OF SALES IN REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE SALE PRICE W ORTH RS.7,94,25,558/- IN A.Y. 2005-06, RS.11,04,17,079/- IN A.Y. 2006-07, RS.10,21,40,223 IN A.Y. 2007-08 HAVE BEEN ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 8 - UNDER STATED IN TRADING ACCOUNT. THIS HAS RESULTED INTO ESCAPING OF INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.7,94,25,558/ -, RS.11,04,17,079/-, RS.10,21,40,223/- & RS.14,68,74,752/- FOR A.Y. 2005-06, 06-07, 07-08 & 08- 09 RESPECTIVELY. ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD REVENUE AUTHORITIES WERE OF THE OPINION AND HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX OF MORE THAN RS.1 LAC HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR THE YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION DUE TO FAILURE OF ASSESSEE TO DISCLOS E FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIALS FACTS NECESSARY FRO ASSESSM ENT. THEREFORE, PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED U/S.148 AND CONSEQUENTIAL ADDITIONS WERE MADE. IN SUM AND SUBSTANCE, THE STAND OF LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESEN TATIVE IS THAT PROCEEDING WHICH INITIATED AT THE STRENGTH OF INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY DGCEI, AHMEDABAD ARE BAS IS FOR ADDITION IN INCOME TAX PROCEEDING AS WELL. IT W AS SUBMITTED THAT PROCEEDING WITH REGARDS TO EVASION O F EXERCISE WAS PENDING BEFORE CONCERN TRIBUNAL AND WH ICH WILL HAVE BEARING ON THE ISSUE AT HAND. SO, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, MATTER SHOULD BE RESTORED TO CIT(A) WIT H DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE SAME AS PER FACT AND LAW IN LIGHT OF FINAL OUTCOME IN THE EXCISE PROCEEDING AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. FINDING FORCE IN THE CONTENTION OF ASSESSEE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO HIM WITH DIRECTION TO DECIDE THE SAME AS PER FACT AND L AW INCLUDING FINAL OUTCOME IN EXCISE CASE, WHICH WAS INITIATED AT THE STRENGTH ON INVESTIGATION BY DGCEI , AHMADABAD AND HAS BEARING ON THE ISSUE OF ADDITIONS IN INCOME TAX PROCEEDING AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. SINCE WE ARE RESTORING THE MATTER TO CIT(A) WITH PRELIMINARY ISS UE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, SO, WE ARE REFRAINING TO COMMENT O N MERIT OF ISSUE AT HAND. 4. NOTHING CONTRARY WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. FACTS BEING SIMILAR, FOLLOWING THE SAM E REASONING AS MENTIONED IN THE AFORESAID CASE OF SANTRO TILES LIMITED FOR AYS 2005-06 TO 2008-09 AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, WE RESTO RE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH THE DIREC TION TO DECIDE ITA NOS. 2570 & 2748/AHD /2012 ASSESSEE - CENTURY TILES LIMITED AY 2005-06 - 9 - THE SAME AS PER FACT AND LAW IN LIGHT OF FINAL OUTC OME IN THE EXCISE PROCEEDING AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, WHICH IS THE BASIS FOR MAKING ADDITION OF INCOME-TAX PROCEEDINGS. SINCE W E ARE RESTORING THE MATTER TO CIT(A) WITH PRELIMINARY ISS UE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, SO WE ARE REFRAINING TO COMMENT ON MERIT OF ISSUE AT HAND. 5. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL AS WELL AS REVE NUES APPEAL, BOTH ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 3RD OF DECEMBER, 2 015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( RAJES H KUMAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV ) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 03/12/2015 *BT / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '# / THE APPELLANT 2. $%'# / THE RESPONDENT. 3. && ' / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ( ) / THE CIT(A), 5. ()* $++ , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. *, / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ! , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD