Gujarat Metal Cast Industries Ltd., Baroda V. The DY.CIT., Circle-1(1), Baroda

ITA 266/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 26620514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-05-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 13-05-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B L YADAV
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Revenue expenditure
• Section: 115JB

Judgement Text

, , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2459/AHD/2010 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BARODA VS M/S. GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD., 2, PANCHRANTA BUILDING, GROUND FLOOR, SUBHANPURA, ROAD, BARODA PAN : AAACG 8433 G ITA NO.266/AHD/2011 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06 M/S. GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD., PAN : AAACG 8433 G DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BARODA / // / (APPELLANT) / // / (RESPONDENT/CROSS- OBJECTOR) REVENUE BY : SHRI B.L. YADAV, SR. DR ASSESSEE(S) BY : SHRI TUSHAR P. HEMANI, AR !'# $ %& !'# $ %& !'# $ %& !'# $ %& / DATE OF HEARING : 13/05/2015 '( $ %& / // / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 15/05/2015 )* )* )* )*/ // / O R D E R PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT: ITA NO. 266/AHD/2011 IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I , BARODA DATED 16.11.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ITA NO .2459/AHD/2010 IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I, BARODA DATED 21.04.2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 2 2007-08. CO NO.176/AHD/2011 IS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN ITS APPEAL BY THE REVE NUE IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF RS.2,47,05,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO THE BOOK PROFIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 115JB IN RESPECT OF WAIV ER OF INTEREST BY THE BANK. 3. IN THE CROSS-OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS DISPUTE D ITS LIABILITY TO BE ASSESSED U/S 115JB(2) IN THE LIGHT OF EXPLANATION-1 , CLAUSE (VII) OF SECTION 115JB. THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DELA YED BY 317 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATI ON OF DELAY WHICH IS DULY SUPPORTED BY THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI CHANDRAKANT R. PATEL, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE AFFIDAVIT, IT IS M ENTIONED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSES THAT SINCE THE CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO COMPUTATION U/S 115JB, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PREFER APPEAL OR CROSS-OBJECTIONS. HOWEVER, WHEN THE NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL IS SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE, THE ASSESSEE ENGAGED THE COUNSEL FOR APPEARING BEFORE THE ITAT, THE COUNSEL ADVISED TO FILE THE CROSS-OBJECTION AND THEREAFTER, THE CROSS-OBJECTION WAS IMMEDIATELY FILED. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL, WHO APPEARED AT THE TIME OF HEA RING BEFORE US, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A LAYMAN AND HE IS N OT AWARE ABOUT THE INTRICACY OF PROVISIONS OF INCOME-TAX ACT. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE POINT RAISED IN THE CROSS-OBJECTION WAS ALSO RAISED BEFOR E THE CIT(A) AND THE CIT(A) ADJUDICATED THE SAME AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. T HEREFORE, EVEN WITHOUT CROSS-OBJECTION, THE ASSESSEE CAN RAISE THIS ISSUE IN VIEW OF RULE 27 OF THE ITAT RULES. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT FOR ADJUDICAT ING THIS GROUND, NO INVESTIGATION IN TO THE FACTS IS REQUIRED BECAU SE ALL THE FACTS ARE ALREADY ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 3 ON RECORD AND THE GROUND IS ONLY WITH REGARD TO LEG AL INTERPRETATION OF CLAUSE (VII) IN EXPLANATION-1 OF SECTION 115JB. HE ALSO STATED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE CROSS-OBJECTION IS NOT ON ACCOUNT OF ANY MALAFIDE INTENTION OR LETHARGY ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. HE, THEREFORE , REQUESTED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY AND ADMISSION OF CROSS-OBJECTI ON. 5. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHE R HAND, OPPOSED THE CONDONATION OF DELAY AND THE ADMISSION OF CROSS-OBJ ECTION. 6. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF BO TH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING FOR THE FIRST TIME ON 03.06.2011. HOWEVER, ON THIS DATE THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTION AND HEARING WAS ADJOURNED TO 29.07 .2011. THUS, FIRST EFFECTIVE HEARING TOOK PLACE ON 29.07.2011. THE CR OSS-OBJECTION IS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 27.07.2011. THUS, THE CROSS-OBJE CTION WAS FURNISHED EVEN BEFORE THE FIRST DATE OF EFFECTIVE HEARING. THESE FACTS SUPPORT THE AVERMENT MADE IN THE AFFIDAVIT OF SHRI CHANDRAKANT R. PATEL, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE. THAT AFTER THE RECEIPT OF HEARING OF NOTI CE, WHEN THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE COUNSEL, HE ADVISED TO FILE THE CROS S-OBJECTION. MOREOVER, THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE CROSS-OBJECTION IS ALREADY CONSIDERED BY THE CIT(A) AND ADJUDICATED UPON. BY CROSS-OBJECTION, THE ASSES SEE IS RAISING ONLY A PURE LEGAL ISSUE. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THESE FACT S AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE TO CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADMIT THE CROSS-OBJECTION. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONDONE THE DELAY OF 317 DAYS IN FILING OF THE CROS S-OBJECTION AND ADMIT THE CROSS-OBJECTION FOR HEARING. CO NO.176/AHD/2011 - CROSS-OBJECTION BY ASSESSEE 7. THE FIRST GROUND OF THE CROSS-OBJECTION READS AS UNDER:- ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 4 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON THE FACT S OF THE CASE IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF LD. AO IN HOLDING THAT PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (VII) TO THE EXPLANATION 1 OF S.115JB(2) OF THE ACT ARE NOT APPL ICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AND THUS NOT ALLOWING TO REDUC E AN AMOUNT OF PROFIT OF SICK INDUSTRIAL APPELLANT COMPANY FROM THE NET PROF IT TO DETERMINE BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JB OF THE ACT AS PER CLAUSE (VII) TO THE EXP LANATION 1 OF S.115JB(2) OF 8. THE OTHER GROUND IS ONLY IN SUPPORT OF GROUND NO .1 9. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, IT IS SUBMITTE D BY THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SICK UNIT AND DURING THE ACC OUNTING YEAR RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE NET WORTH OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY EXCEEDED THE ACCUMULATED LOSSES. T HAT EXPLANATION-1, CLAUSE (VII) PROVIDES FOR EXCLUSION OF PROFIT OF SI CK INDUSTRIAL COMPANY WHILE COMPUTING BOOK PROFIT. THE EXEMPTION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH THE COMPANY BECOMES SICK INDUSTRIAL U NIT AND IS AVAILABLE UP TO THE YEAR DURING WHICH THE NET WORTH OF THE COMPA NY EXCEEDS THE ACCUMULATED LOSSES. HE, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT F OR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE NET PROFIT OF THE SICK UNIT IS T O BE EXCLUDED. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, HE RELIED UPON THE FOLLOWING DECIS IONS OF THE ITAT. I. DCIT VS. STEELCO GUJARAT LIMITED- ITA NO.178 & 349/ AHD/2007 II. VISWABHARATHI TEXTILES P. LTD. VS. CIT ITA NO.778 /MDS/2011 III. ACIT VS. M/S. PRAGA TOOLS LTD ITA NO.288/HYD/2011 10. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTH ER HAND, RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND HE STATED T HAT THE EXEMPTION AS PER EXPLANATION 1, CLAUSE (VII) WOULD END IN THE YEAR I N WHICH NET WORTH OF THE COMPANY EXCEEDED THE ACCUMULATED LOSSES. ADMITTEDL Y, DURING THE ACCOUNTING YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION, THE NET ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 5 WORTH OF THE COMPANY EXCEEDED THE ACCUMULATED LOSSE S; AND THEREFORE, EXCLUSION PERMITTED BY EXPLANATION-1, CLAUSE (VII) WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE. 11. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF B OTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. IN THE CASE OF STEELCO GUJARAT LIMITED (SUPRA), THE ITAT A BENCH, AHMEDABAD HAS CONSIDER ED THE IDENTICAL ISSUE AND HELD AS UNDER:- 7. THAT FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT AS ON 31 -03-2003 THE NET WORTH OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY EXCEEDED THE ACCUMULATED LOSSE S. AS PER EXPLANATION-1, CLAUSE (VII) WHILE COMPUTING THE BOOK PROFIT, FOLLO WING AMOUNT IS TO BE REDUCED. (VII) THE AMOUNT OF PROFITS OF SICK INDUSTRIAL COMP ANY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR COMMENCING ON AND FROM THE ASSESSME NT YEAR RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH THE SAID COM PANY HAS BECOME A SICK INDUSTRIAL COMPANY UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SE CTION 17 OF THE SICK INDUSTRIAL COMPANIES (SPECIAL PROVISION) ACT, 1985 (1 TO 1986) AND ENDING WITH THE ASSESSMENT YEAR DURING WHICH THE EN TIRE NET WORTH OF SUCH COMPANY BECOMES EQUAL TO OR EXCEEDS THE ACCUMU LATED LOSSES. 8. FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE AMOUNT OF PROFIT OF THE SICK INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING IS TO BE REDUCED WHILE COMPUTING BOOK P ROFIT. THE REDUCTION IS TO BE ALLOWED FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE SAID COMPANY BECOMES A SICK INDUSTRIAL COMPANY AND SUCH EXEMPTION WILL END WITH THE ASSESS MENT YEAR IN WHICH THE NET WORTH OF THE COMPANY EXCEEDS THE ACCUMULATE D LOSSES. IT MEANS EXEMPTION WOULD BE AVAILABLE UPTO THE YEAR IN WHICH THE NET WORTH EXCEEDS THE ACCUMULATED LOSSES, BUT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE F OR SUBSEQUENT YEARS. THUS, THE YEAR IN WHICH THE NET WORTH EXCEEDS THE ACCUMUL ATED LOSSES, WILL BE LAST YEAR OF EXEMPTION UNDER CLAUSE (VII). 9. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE HOLD THAT FOR THE YEAR UNDE R CONSIDERATION, THE AMOUNT OF PROFIT OF SICK INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING IS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE BOOK PROFIT. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT ENTIRE PROFI T OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS FROM SICK INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING. WE, ACCORDINGLY A LLOW GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL. ONCE IT IS HELD THAT THE PROFIT OF THE SICK INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING IS NOT CHARGEABLE TO TAX U/S 115(JB), T HE BOOK PROFIT (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-2004) OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WOULD BE NI L BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 6 COMPANY IS HAVING ONLY ONE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING W HICH IS A SICK UNIT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, GROUND RAISED IN REVENUE'S APPEA L AS WELL AS GROUND NOS.2,3 AND 4 OF THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL, WHICH ARE W ITH REGARD TO THE COMPUTATION OF THE BOOK PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE, HAV E BECOME INFRUCTUOUS, ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. 12. SIMILAR VIEW IS TAKEN BY THE ITAT HYDERABAD BEN CH IN THE CASE OF M/S. PRAGA TOOLS LTD (SUPRA). NO CONTRARY DECISION IS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AB OVE TWO DECISIONS OF THE ITAT, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE PROFIT OF THE SICK INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING IS TO BE REDUCED FROM THE BOOK PROFIT, BEGINNING WI TH THE YEAR IN WHICH THE COMPANY BECOMES A SICK INDUSTRIAL COMPANY AND SUCH EXEMPTION WOULD BE AVAILABLE TILL THE YEAR IN WHICH FOR THE FIRST TIME THE NET WORTH OF THE COMPANY EXCEEDS THE ACCUMULATED LOSSES. ACCORDINGLY , FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, THE NET PROFIT OF THE SICK INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING IS TO BE REDUCED WHILE COMPU TING THE BOOK PROFIT. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-COMPUTE THE B OOK PROFIT ACCORDINGLY. THUS, THE CROSS-OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D. ITA NO. 2459/AHD/2010 - REVENUES APPEAL (AY : 2007 -08) 13. IN THE LIGHT OF OUR DECISION ON THE CROSS-OBJEC TION OF THE ASSESSEE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS, BECAU SE IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE THE DISPUTE WAS ONLY FOR COMPUTATION OF THE BOOK PROFIT OF THE SICK UNIT IN RESPECT OF WHICH SOME INTEREST WAS WAIVED. THE QUESTION WAS WHETHER WHILE COMPUTING THE BOOK PROFIT THE INTERES T WAIVED IS TO BE EXCLUDED OR IS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE BOOK PROFIT. S INCE WE HAVE HELD THAT THE ENTIRE BOOK PROFIT OF THE SICK UNIT IS TO BE EXCLUD ED IN VIEW OF EXPLANATION-1, CLAUSE (VII), THE CONTROVERSY WITH REGARD TO QUANTU M OF BOOK PROFIT OF THE SICK UNIT HAS BECOME ACADEMIC AND INFRUCTUOUS. ACC ORDINGLY, THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED BEING INFRUCTUOUS. ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 7 ITA NO.266/AHD/2011 ASSESSEES APPEAL (AY : 2005- 06) 14. THE GROUND NO.1 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL READS AS UNDER:- 1. CONFIRMATION OF PART ADDITION OF RS.77,81,667/ - OUT OF RS.2,50,14,190/-, BEING INTEREST WAIVER. 15. OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS APP EAL ARE ONLY ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF ABOVE GROUND. 16. AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, IT IS SUBMITT ED BY THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF RS.2,50 ,14,190/- ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT IT WAS INTEREST WAIVED BY THE STAT E BANK OF SAURASHTRA AND STATE BANK OF INDORE; THE DETAILS OF WHICH IS GIVEN AT PAGE NO.10 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SAME IS REPRODUCED BELOW F OR READY REFERENCE. A) INTEREST WAIVED BY STATE BANK OF SAURASHTRA: I) INTEREST DEBITED TO P&L ACCOUNT RS. 40,72,561/- II) INTEREST DEBITED TO DEFERRED REVENUE EXPENDITURE RS.1,27,82,606/- III) INTEREST CLAIMED AS ALLOWABLE RS. 77,81,667/- B) INTEREST WAIVED BY STATE BANK OF INDORE RS. 3,77,356/- ---------------- RS.2,50,14,190/- =========== 17. HE STATED THAT THE CIT(A) SUSTAINED ADDITION ON LY IN RESPECT OF RS.77,81,667/- AND DELETED THE BALANCE ADDITION. HE ALSO STATED THAT TO THE BEST OF HIS KNOWLEDGE, THE REVENUE HAS NOT FILED AN Y APPEAL AGAINST PART DELETION OF THE ADDITION BY THE CIT(A). WITH RESPEC T TO RS.77,81,667/-, HE SUBMITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSES SEE AS DEDUCTION AND IT WAS NOT WAIVED. HE ALSO REFERRED TO HIS WRITTEN SU BMISSION WHICH IS ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 8 REPRODUCED AT PAGE NOS. 8 & 9 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORD ER AND THE RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER:- BESIDES, OUT OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF INTEREST PAYAB LE AS PER SETTLEMENT WHICH CAME TO RS.93,86,166/- AS AMOUNT OF RS.77,81,667/- WAS ONLY CLAIMED AND THE BALANCE OF RS.16,04,499/- (RS.93,86,166 RS.77 ,81,667) HAS BEEN CLAIMED AS DEDUCTION, AS LATER ON THE WHOLE OF THE AMOUNT OF RS.93,86,166/- WAS CONVERTED BY THE BANK AS REFUNDABLE LOAN. 18. HE POINTED OUT THAT AS PER THE SETTLEMENT WITH THE BANK, THE SUM OF RS.93,86,166/-, WHICH WAS INTEREST DUE, WAS CONVERT ED INTO LOAN BY THE BANK. THUS, THERE WAS NO WAIVER OF INTEREST BUT IT WAS ONLY CONVERSION OF INTEREST INTO THE BANK LOAN. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WRONGLY INTERPRETED IT TO BE WAIVER OF INTEREST. 19. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OT HER HAND, STATED THAT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD REQUIRE VERIFI CATION AT THE END OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E HAD NO OBJECTION FOR SETTING ASIDE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER FOR THE VERIFICATION WHETHER THERE WAS WAIVER OF INTEREST T O THE EXTENT OF RS.77,81,667/- . 20. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND ARG UMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW WITH REGARD TO ADDITION OF RS.77,81,667/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT IT WAS THE INTEREST WAIVED BY STAT E BANK OF SAURASHTRA. WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY WHETHER I T IS WAIVER OF INTEREST OR ITS CONVERSION OF INTEREST INTO LOAN. CONVERSION OF INTEREST INTO LOAN DOES NOT AMOUNT TO WAIVER OF INTEREST BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THE INTEREST IS TO BE PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ONLY BENEFIT ASSESSEE GETS ON CON VERSION OF INTEREST INTO LOAN IS MORE TIME FOR THE PAYMENT. THE ASSESSING OF FICER WILL RE-ADJUDICATE ITA NOS.2459/AHD/2010, 266/AHD/2011 & CO NO.176/AHD/2011 GUJARAT METAL CAST INDUSTRIES LTD 9 THE ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, KEEPING IN VIEW O UR OBSERVATION ABOVE. NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT HE WILL ALLOW ADEQUATE OPP ORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE WHILE RE-ADJUDICATING THIS ISSUE. 21. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES CROSS-OBJECTION I S ALLOWED, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS DEEMED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURP OSES AND THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 15 TH MAY, 2015 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.D. AGRAWAL) VICE-PRESIDENT AHMEDABAD; DATED 15/05/2015 BIJU T., PS )* $ %+ ,)+% )* $ %+ ,)+% )* $ %+ ,)+% )* $ %+ ,)+%/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. !-- % '. / CONCERNED CIT 4. '. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. +12 % , , / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 2 3# / GUARD FILE . )*'! )*'! )*'! )*'! / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY 4 44 4/ // /! -5 ! -5 ! -5 ! -5 ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD