DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Emmsons International, New Delhi

ITA 2642/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 264220114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 31-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PARWINDER KAUR
• Assessee Lawyers: SURESH K GUPTA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Business income; Cost of acquisition
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH B, NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI G. C. GUPTA, HONBLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.S. KAPOOR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2642 /DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1), VS. M/S. EMMSONS INTERNATIONAL LTD., NEW DELHI 2637, 1 ST FLOOR, NAYA BAZAR, NEW DELHI 110 006 GIR / PAN:AAACE0442K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. PARWINDER KAUR, SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SURESH K GUPTA, CA DATE OF HEARING :19.02.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.02.2015 ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR, AM: THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 27.03.2012. THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF REVENUE IS THE A CTION OF LD. CIT(A) BY WHICH HE HAD DELETED AN ADDITION OF RS.43,31,685/- WHICH WAS MADE BY A.O. ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN DECLARED BY A SSESSEE AS BUSINESS INCOME. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF VARIOUS COMMODITIES AND THE CASE OF ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS, THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED SHORT TERM CAPITAL G AIN OF RS.43,31,685/-. ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 2 FROM THE DETAILS OF SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES FIL ED BY ASSESSEE, THE A.O. HELD THAT ASSESSEE WAS HOLDING SHARES FOR A VERY BR IEF PERIOD AND ULTIMATELY THE OBJECTIVE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT TO EARN CAPIT AL GAIN BUT TO EARN BUSINESS INCOME. THEREFORE, HE TREATED THE SHORT TERM CAPIT AL GAIN DECLARED BY ASSESSEE AS BUSINESS INCOME. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESS EE FILED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS. LD. CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND PASSED A DETAILED AND EXHAUST IVE ORDER AND ALLOWED RELEIF TO THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 6.3 DECISION I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT, OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMEN TS RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT IN THIS REGARD. THE APPELLANT IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES LIKE EXPORT OF RICE, SU GAR, ACID, RESIN AND COTTON AND ALSO IMPORT OF COAL AND IRON ORE. ITS TOTAL TUR NOVER FROM THE SAID BUSINESS IS AROUND RS. 365 CRORES DURING THE YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION. IT ALSO MAKES OCCASIONAL INVESTMENTS IN SHARES AND SEC URITIES. DURING THE YEAR THE APPELLANT HAS MADE SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES OF M/S STERLING BIOTECH AND M/S STERLING INTERNATIONAL 'ENTERPRISES LTD., M /S ARIHANT FOUNDATION, M/S VISHAL EXPORTS AND M/S DECCAN CHRONICLE. IT IS SEEN THAT IT HAS PURCHASED SHARES OF STERLING BIOTECH FROM JUNE-2006 TO FEBRUARY-2007 AND SOLD THESE SHARES FROM JUNE-2006 TO MARCH 2007. SIM ILARLY, APPELLANT PURCHASED SHARES OF M/S STERLING INTERNATIONAL ENTE RPRISES LTD. IN THE MONTH OF DECEMBER AND SAME WERE SOLD IN THE MONTH OF FEBR UARY-MARCH-2007. THE SALE AND PURCHASE WAS AS UNDER:- S. NAME OF THE NO. OF SHARES NO. OF AMOUNT IN VOLVED HOLDING NO COMPANY PURCHASED SHARES SOLD PERIOD PURCHASE SALE --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- ------ 1 M/S STERLING 286699 286699 38987413 4,38,76, 678 8 DAYS TO BIOTECH 126 DAYS 2 M/S STERLING 60590 60590 46,20,749 38,90,383 70 DAYS INTERNATIONAL 106 DAYS ENTERPRISES LTD. 3 M/SDCHL 2500 2500 12,32,550 14,41,494 13 DA YS ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 3 4 M/S ARIHANT 1450 1450 7,46,408 7,56,774 O DAYS FOUNDATION 5 VISHAL 100000 100000 3,10,612 2,34,087 14 D AYS EXPORTS FROM THE ABOVE TABLE IT IS SEEN THAT APPELLANT HAS DEALT IN THE SHARES OF FIVE COMPANIES DURING THE YEAR. IT HAS PURCHASED SHARES OF M/S STERLING BIOTECH FROM JUNE-2006 TO FEBRUARY-2007 AND SOLD IN THE PER IOD JUNE-2006 TO MARCH 2007. THE HOLDING PERIOD OF THE SHARES RANGES FROM 8 DAYS TO 126 DAYS. SIMILARLY THE APPELLANT HAS PURCHASED SHARES OF M/S STERLING INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES LTD. IN THE MONTH OF DECE MBER 2006 AND SAME WERE SOLD IN MONTH OF DECEMBER-FEBRUARY- MARCH-2007 . THE HOLDING PERIOD OF THESE SHARES RANGES FROM 70 DAYS TO 106 D AYS. THE SHARES OF DECCAN CHRONICLE HERALD WERE PURCHASED ON S' OCTOBE R AND SOLD ON 18 TH OCTOBER 2007. THE HOLDING PERIOD WAS 13 DAYS. THE A PPELLANT HAS ALSO PURCHASED SHARES OF VISHAL EXPORTS AND HOLDING PERI OD WAS 14 DAYS. IN THE CASE OF ARIHANT FOUNDATION THE HOLDING PERIOD WAS Z ERO. THE SHARES PURCHASED DURING THE F.Y. 2006-07 HAVE B EEN SHOWN BY THE APPELLANT AS INVESTMENT IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AN D BALANCE SHEET. IT IS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT THAT THESE SHARES WERE PUR CHASED FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES AND SAME HAVE BEEN SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD 'I NVESTMENT PORTFOLIO' SEPARATELY. IT IS SEEN FROM THE INVESTMENT SCHEDULE THAT THESE SHARES HAVE BEEN SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD INVESTMENT. THERE IS NO FREQUENT PURCHASE AND SALES OF SHARES III OTHER COMPANIES EXCEPT THE PURC HASE AND SALES DONE IN THE SHARES OF M/S STERLING BIOTECH AND M/S STERLING INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES LTD. THE SHARES OF THESE COMPANIES WERE PURCHASED AND SOLD IN SMALL LOTS AFTER RETAINING THE SAME FOR SOME TIME. IT IS SEEN THAT ALL TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE AND. SALES ARE DELIVERY BA SED TRANSACTIONS. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO SHOWN INVESTMENTS IN SHARES IN I TS BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2007 TO THE TUNE OF RS. 3,18,83,659/- IN THE SHARES OF NINE COMPANIES. THESE INVESTMENTS HAVE BEEN REFLECTED AT COST PRICE IN THE BALANCE SHEET. HAD THE APPELLANT ENGAGED IN THE TRADING OF SHARES, THE VALUATION OF THE SAME WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE LOWER OF THE MARKET VALUE OR COST WHICH IS NOT THE CASE HERE. IT IS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT THAT INVESTMENT IN T HE SHARES WAS DONE OCCASIONALLY IN FEW SCRIPTS JUST TO MAXIMIZE THE WE ALTH AND TO PARK THE SURPLUS FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE APPELLANT. THE APP ELLANT HAS CLAIMED THAT THERE WERE NO BORROWED FUNDS UTILIZED BY THE APPELL ANT IN MAKING THE INVESTMENTS. ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 4 THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED THAT HIS ASSESSMENTS FOR A.Y.'S 2005-06, 2006-07 AND A.Y.'S 2008-09, 2009-10 HAVE BEEN DONE U/S 143( 3) OF THE IT ACT AND THE SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN DECLARED BY THE APPELLANT HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ALL THESE YEARS. THE APPELLANT HAS FILED THE CHART OF THE SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN DECLARED AT PAGE 33 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND HAS SHOWN THAT CAPITAL GAIN / LOSS FROM SALE OF INVESTMENT WAS AS UNDER:- A.Y. CAPITAL GAIN CAPITAL GAIN INVESTMENT IN R EMARK DECLARED (RS.) ACCEPTED OR SHARES (RS.) NOT (RS) --------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------- ------ 2005-06 15,33,077/- 15,33,077/- 94,25,800/- ASS ESSED U/S 143(3) 2006-07 15,57,425/- 15,57,425/- 8,73,73000/- AS SESSED U/S 143(3) 2007-08 43,31,685/- NOT ACCEPTED 3,18,83,660/- CAPITAL GAIN TREATED AS BUSINESS INCOME 2008-09 (- )30,38,412/- (-)30,38,412/- 2,17,28,740/ - ASSESSED U/S 143(3). LOSS ON CAPITAL GAIN ALLOWED TO BE CARRIED FORWARD. 2009-10 (-)14,98,970/- (-) 14,98,970/- 2,95,42,170/ - ASSESSED U/S 143(3). LOSS ON CAPITAL GAIN ALLOWED TO BE CARRIED FORWARDS; THE ABOVE TABLE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT APPELLANT' S INVESTMENT IN SHARES WAS ACCEPTED AS INVESTMENT AND CAPITAL GAIN DECLARED FR OM SUCH INVESTMENT WAS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN ALL THESE YEAR S EXCEPT A.Y. 2007- 08. THE FACTS OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE ARE SIMILAR I N ALL THESE YEARS AND THERE IS NO MATERIAL CHANGE. THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED THAT IT HAS PAID STT ON T HESE SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS THE AR O F THE APPELLANT HAS DRAWN MY ATTENTION TO PARA 5.4 OF THE ASSESSMENT OR DER WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THAT THE APPELLANT' S MAIN BUSINESS IS TRADING IN SHARES. THIS OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER IS FACTUALLY ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 5 INCORRECT. AS STATED ABOVE THE APPELLANT IS ENGAGED IN EXPORT AND IMPORT OF FOOD GRAINS, SUGAR, COALS AND ACID ETC AND IT HAS A TURNOVER OF RS. 365 CRORE DURING THE YEAR FROM SUCH EXPORT AND IMPORT. THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO MENTIONED THAT SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES IS CONNE CTED WITH THE MAIN BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT WHICH IS NOT CORRECT. IN PARA 5.9 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THAT DURI NG THE YEAR APPELLANT HAS PURCHASED SHARES OF RS. 4246.26 LACS AND SOLD SHARE S OF RS. 4616.10 LACS. THIS OBSERVATION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS FACTUA LLY INCORRECT. THE APPELLANT DURING THE YEAR INVESTE RS. 4.58 CRORE AND SOLD SHA RES OF RS. 5.01 CRORES DURING THE YEAR. THIS INFORMATION IS 1 E 0 E PAPER BOOK SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE APP ELLANT SUBMITTED THAT ALL TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN DELIVERY BASED AND WERE SETT LED BY WAY OF PAYMENT. THE TRANSACTION OF INVESTMENT AND SALE WERE DONE TH ROUGH MIS INTEGRATED MASTER SECURITIES PVT. LTD. A REGISTERED BROKER WIT H SEBI. THE STATEMENT OF THE BROKER IS FILED AT PAGE-63, 64 AND 65 OF THE PA PER BOOK WHICH PROVES THAT ALL TRANSACTIONS WERE SETTLED THROUGH PAYMENT AND D ELIVERY OF THE SHARES WERE TAKEN. ON GOING THROUGH THE BALANCE SHEETS OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING OF 31 ST MARCH 2007 THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN SHARES OF DIFFE RENT COMPANIES INCLUDING SHARES OF M/S STERLING BIOTECH AND MIS STERLING INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES LTD. UNDER THE HEAD INVES TMENTS AND THE SAME WERE TREATED AS CAPITAL ASSETS IN THE BALANCE SHEET. IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE THE SHARES IN EARLIER YEARS HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN STOCK IN TRADE AND IN CURRENT YEAR THEY HAVE BEEN CONVERTED INTO INVESTMENTS. NO SUCH INFORMATION HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO SUPPO RT HIS CASE. THE APPELLANT HAS FILED BALANCE SHEET AND COPY OF D-MA T ACCOUNT, AS PER WHICH THE SHARES HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE D-MAT ACCOUNT AS ON 31 ST MARCH 2007. THE HOLDING OF THE SHARES ON WHICH SHORT TERM CAPIT AL HAS BEEN CLAIMED RANGES FROM 8 DAYS TO 126 DAYS. IT IS CLAIMED BY TH E APPELLANT THAT INVESTMENT WAS MADE IN THE SHARES WITH THE INTENTIO NS TO HOLD THE SAME FOR LONG TERM APPRECIATION AND FOR EARNING DIVIDENDS. H OWEVER THE INVESTMENTS WAS OFFLOADED BECAUSE OF APPRECIATION AND MAXIMIZIN G THE WEALTH. IT IS ALSO CONTENDED BY THE APPELLANT THAT PERIOD OF HOLDING O F SHARES AND NON RECEIPT OF DIVIDEND INCOME IS NOT A DECISIVE FACTOR FOR TRE ATMENT OF PARTICULARS TRANSACTION AS INVESTMENT OR TRADING TRANSACTION. I T IS FURTHER CONTENDED BY THE APPELLANT THAT EXCEPT IN FEW CASES THE HOLDING PERIOD RANGES MORE THAN ONE MONTH TO THREE MONTH. I AM IN FULL AGREEMENT WI TH THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT THAT PERIOD OF HOLDING OF SHARES AND NON RECEIPT OF DIVIDEND INCOME IS NOT A DECISIVE FACTOR FOR TREATMENT OF PA RTICULAR TRANSACTION AS ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 6 INVESTMENT OR TRADING TRANSACTION. ONE HAS TO SEE T HE INTENTION OF THE PERSON WHO IS DOING SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES. THE CIRCU LAR NO.4 OF 2007 ISSUED BY THE CBDT ALSO DOES NOT PRESCRIBED ANY TIME LIMIT OF HOLDING OF SHARES WHERE SHARES ARE PURCHASED FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES. IT IS OBSERVED FROM THE DETAILS FILED BY THE APPELL ANT THAT IT HAS MADE INVESTMENT IN THE SHARES OF STERLING BIOTECH AND ST ERLING INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISES, DECCAN CHRONICLE, VISHAL EXPORT AND AR IHANT FOUNDATION DURING THE YEAR. HOWEVER THESE SHARES WERE OFFLOADE D AFTER HOLDING FOR SOME TIME TO MAXIMIZE THE WEALTH. THE SALE AND PURCHASE WERE DONE ONLY IN THE SHARES OF 5 COMPANIES DURING THE YEAR. HAD THE APPELLANT ENGAGED IN THE TRADING OF SHARES, THE FREQUENCY OF SALE AND PURCHASE WOULD HAVE BEEN VERY HIGH AND IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN LIMITED TO THE SHARES OF FIVE COMPANIES. HOWEVER TH AT ELEMENT IS NOT EVIDENT IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT. THE CIRCULAR NO.4 OF 2007 HAS CLEARLY MENTIONED THA T A PERSON CAN HAVE TWO PORT- FOLIO, ONE FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES AND ANOTHE R FOR TRADING PURPOSES. IN THIS CIRCULAR NO TIME LIMIT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED FOR HOLDING A SHARE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE SHARES WERE HELD FOR INVESTME NT OR STOCK IN TRADE. THESE THINGS HAVE TO BE DETERMINED BY INTENTION OF THE PERSON WHO IS DOING INVESTMENT OR PURCHASE OF SHARES. IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT, THE CIRCUMSTANCES CLEARLY SUGGEST THAT HE HAD PURCHASED SHARES ONLY FOR INVESTMENT PURPOSES AND N OT FOR TRADING PURPOSES. IN THE ENTIRE YEAR HE HAS DEALT IN THE SHARES OF FI VE COMPANIES AND HOLDING PERIOD RANGES FROM 8 DAYS TO 126 DAYS AND THE MAIN BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT WAS EXPORT & IMPORT OF FOOD GRAMS. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS STATED ABOVE, IT IS CLEARLY ES TABLISHED THAT SHARES PURCHASED BY THE APPELLANT WERE FOR INVESTMENT PURP OSES AND CAPITAL GAIN RECEIVED ON SUCH SALES IS LIABLE TO BE TAXED UNDER THE HEAD SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. HENCE THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF TREATING THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS BUSINESS INCOME WAS NOT JUSTIF IED. I THEREFORE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TREAT THE SURPLUS RECEIVED ON SALE AND PURCHASE OF SHARES AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS DECLARED BY TH E APPELLANT IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME. AS A RESULT THIS GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE AP PELLANT IS ALLOWED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS ALSO DIRECTED TO DELETE THE BU SINESS INCOME FROM THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, AS THE INCOME OF THE SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 43,31,685/-IS ALREAD Y INCLUDED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND THE SAME IS PART OF THE R ETURNED INCOME OF RS. 1,35,99,860/-. ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 7 3. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. LD. D.R. INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PAGE 2 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. HAD OBSERVED THAT THE ASSES SEE WAS MAKING HUGE SALE PURCHASE OF SHARES AND WAS SELLING THEM AT A VERY S HORT INTERVAL; THEREFORE HE HAD RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITION. 5. LD. A.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT THE AS SESSEE WAS CLASSIFYING THE SHARES IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS INVESTMENT AND T HESE WERE BEING VALUED AT COST OF ACQUISITION AND MOREOVER, IN EARLIER YEARS WHERE ASSESSMENTS WERE COMPLETED U/S 143(3), THE INCOME FROM SALE PURCHASE OF SHARES WERE HELD TO BE CAPITAL GAIN. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT EVEN IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS, WHERE THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3), THE LOSS I NCURRED BY ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO BE CAPITAL LOSS AND IN SUPPORT OF HIS ARGUM ENT, LD. A.R. INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 26 OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER WHERE LD . CIT(A) HAS NOTED DOWN THE TREATMENT OF SUCH GAIN AS CAPITAL GAIN. L D. A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT NO BORROWED FUNDS WERE USED AND HE HEAVILY REL IED UPON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 6. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE THROUG H THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF AGRO PRODUCTS AND ITS TOTAL TURNOVER FROM THE SAID BUSIN ESS IS AROUND RS.365 CRORES. WE FURTHER FIND FROM THE FACTS NOTED IN LD . CIT(A)S ORDER THAT ASSESSEE HAD CARRIED OUT TRANSACTION IN 5 SCRIPTS A ND HOLDING PERIOD OF WHICH RANGED FROM 8 DAYS TO 126 DAYS. MOREOVER, IT IS OB SERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLASSIFIED THE INVESTMENT IN THE BALANCE SHEET AS INVESTMENT. WE FIND THAT IN PREVIOUS YEARS AND IN SUCCEEDING YEARS, THE INCOME OF ASSESSEE FROM SIMILAR ACTIVITIES HAS BEEN HELD TO BE ON ACCOUNT O F CAPITAL GAIN AND NOT ON ITA NO.2642/DEL/2012 8 ACCOUNT OF BUSINESS INCOME. LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A DETAILED AND EXHAUSTIVE ORDER IN WHICH WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRM ITY. 7. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. 8. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH FEB., 2015. SD./- SD./- ( G. C. GUPTA) (T.S. KAPOOR ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 25 TH FEB., 2015 SP COPY FORWARDED TO:- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT (A)-, NEW DELHI. 5. THE DR, ITAT, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN, KHAN MARKET, NEW DEL HI. TRUE COPY. BY ORDER (ITAT, NEW DELHI). S.NO. DETAILS DATE INITIALS DESIGNATION 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 20/2 SR. PS/PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 23,24/2 SR. PS/PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER AM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS 25/2 SR. PS/PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 25/2 SR. PS/PS 7 FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK 25/2 SR. PS/PS 8 DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO HEAD CLERK 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO A.R. 10 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER