The ACIT-CC-1, Baroda V. M/s. S.K.Finance & Investment Co., Anand

ITA 2678/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6471 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 12-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHAVNESH KULSHRESTHA
• Keywords: Income from undisclosed sources; Document seized; Onus to prove; Revised return; Documents seized
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 148; 132; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND A. K. GARODIA , AM) ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 A. Y.: 2006-07 THE A. C. I. T, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, BARODA, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, RACE COURSE CIRCLE, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT COMPANY, SARDARGUNJ ROAD, ANAND PA NO. AAJFS 2689 A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI BHAVNESH KULSHRESTHA, SR.DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI ASEEM THAKKAR, AR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-IV , AHMEDABAD DATED 18-03-2009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07, C HALLENGING THE CANCELLATION OF PENALTY U/S 271 (1) ( C ) OF THE IT ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED IMPOSITION OF PENALTY ON THE BASIS OF RS.20 LACS DECLARED AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE RE TURN OF INCOME FILED AFTER SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE IT ACT CONDUCTED ON 19-1-2006 BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). IT WAS CONTENDED BEFORE THE LEA RNED CIT(A) THAT WHERE RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE ISSUED U/S 153A OF THE IT ACT HAS BEEN ACCEPTED AND ASSESSED AS SUCH, NO P ENALTY CAN BE IMPOSED. THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT PENAL TY MAY BE CANCELLED. THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE SUBMI SSION OF THE ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 2 ASSESSEE CANCELLED THE PENALTY. HIS FINDINGS ARE RE PRODUCED AS UNDER: 2.1 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE CONTENTIONS OF LD. COUNSEL AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE RECORDS. ON PER USAL OF ASSESSMENT ORDER IT HAS BEEN NOTICED THAT IN THE RETURN FILED U/S 153A THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED RS.20,00,0 00/- AS UNACCOUNTED INCOME IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED AFTER SEARCH U/S 132 CONDUCTED ON 19.01.2006 AS AGAINST INCOME SHOWN IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED U/S 139(1 ). BASED ON SUCH RETURNS, THE ASSESSMENT WAS ALSO COMPLETED U/S. 153A(A) R. W. S. 143(3) ACCEPTING TH E INCOME RETURNED. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE C ASE OF CIT VS. SURESHCHANDRA MITTAL (251 ITR 009) HAS H ELD THAT IN THIS CASE, REVISED RETURN SHOWING HIGHER IN COME AFTER SEARCH WAS FILED TO PURCHASE PEACE AND AVOID LITIGATION. THE TRIBUNAL HELD THAT BURDEN OF PROVIN G CONCEALMENT IS NOT DISCHARGED AND PENALTY CANNOT BE LEVIED. THE APEX COURT UPHELD ABOVE FINDINGS OF ITA T. HOWEVER, THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN UNION OF INDI A V/S. DHAMENDRA TEXTILES PROCESSORS (2008) HAS HELD THAT THE PENALTY U/S 271 (1) ( C ) IS CIVIL LIABILITY AN D THE WILLFUL CONCEALMENT IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT FOR ATT RACTING CIVIL LIABILITY AS IS THE CASE IN THE MATTER OF PRO SECUTION U/S 276C. IT HAS FURTHER BEEN HELD THAT THE MENS REA IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL INGREDIENT FOR IMPOSING PENALTY UNDER THI S SECTION. HOWEVER, HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS NOT HEL D THAT IN ALL CASES WHERE ADDITION IS CONFIRMED, THE PENALTY SHALL MECHANICALLY FOLLOW. THE RATIO DECIDENDI OF T HE JUDGMENT IS CONFINED TO TREATING THE WILLFUL CONCEA LMENT AS NOT VITAL FOR IMPOSING PENALTY U/S 271 (1) ( C ). H OWEVER, IT MAY NOT BE CORRECT TO INFER THAT BECAUSE THE LIABIL ITY IS CIVIL LIABILITY, IT CEASE TO BE PENAL IN CHARACTER. THERE IS NO CONTRADICTION IN A LIABILITY BEING A CIVIL LIABILIT Y AND SAME LIABILITY BEING A PENAL LIABILITY THOUGH A CIVIL LI ABILITY CANNOT CERTAINLY BE A CRIMINAL LIABILITY AS WELL. THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED BY ASSESSEE U/S 153A AFTER SEARCH HAVING BEEN ACCEPTED IN ITS ENTIR ETY WITHOUT DETAILED DISCUSSION OF THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS . AN ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 3 ASSESSEES STATUTORY OBLIGATION U/S 139(1) IS TO GI VE CORRECT AND COMPLETE INFORMATION WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME COMPLIED WITH, THEN THERE IS NO CONTRAVENTIO N WHICH CAN ATTRACT PENALTY. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ASSE SSEE CONCEALED THE INCOME COMES TO AN END WHEN THE CORRESPONDING AMOUNT WAS OFFERED FOR TAXATION WHEN ALL THE NECESSARY PARTICULARS ARE DECLARED BY THE ASSES SEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED U/S 153A. IN A CASE WHER E ALL THE NECESSARY PARTICULARS ARE DECLARED BY THE ASSES SEE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS CONCEALED HIS INCOME OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE A. O. HAS NOT DISCHARGED THE BURDEN TO PROVE THE CONCEALMENT OF INCOME, WHICH WAS LEVIED PURELY ON THE BASIS OF ADDITIONAL INCOME DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN FILED U/S 153A BY THE ASSESSEE IN GOOD FAITH . THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT HAD MADE DISCLOSURE AFTER THE SEARCH CANNOT BE TREATED AS CONCEALMENT. IT CANNOT BE SAID TO BE THE AMOUNT OF TAX SOUGHT TO BE EVADED BECAUSE THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DECLARED IN THE RETURN FILED U/S 153A ONLY. KEEPING IN VIEW OF ABOV E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AS WELL AS THE CASES (SUPRA), THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 271 (1) (C) IS HER EBY DELETED. HENCE, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. 3. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE AO A ND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCLOSED RS.20 LACS IN THE RETUR N OF INCOME AFTER THE SEARCH IS CONDUCTED. THEREFORE, PENALTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN LEVIED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISI ON OF THE HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS AJAY DAL MILL 263 ITR 66 IN WHICH IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: HELD, THAT THE TRIBUNAL COMMITTED AN ERROR IN TAKI NG NOTE OF THE DATE AS JANUARY 14, 1977, FOR DISCREPAN CY IN ACCOUNT, ETC., FOR IT WAS SEPTEMBER 18, 1976. IN REPLY TO A NOTICE RETURN HAD BEEN FILED ON OCTOBER 15, 1976. THEREFORE, IT COULD NOT BE HELD TO BE A CASE OF ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 4 FILING THE REVISED RETURN VOLUNTARILY. THE EXPLANAT ION TO SECTION 271 (1) (C) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961, WAS APPLICABLE IN THE INSTANT CASE AND THE BURDEN OF PR OOF WAS ON THE ASSESSEE. THE TRIBUNAL HAD WRONGLY SHIFTED THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO THE REVENUE. THE TRIBUNAL WAS NOT CORRECT IN CANCELING THE PENALTY. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORIT IES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THAT THE SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF J. K. SECURITIES GROUP AND IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 19-1-2006, THEREFORE, THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESS MENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL I.E. 2006-07 HAVE NOT ENDED BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE ENDED ON 31-3-2006. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE DISCLOSURE OF RS.20 LACS IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 26-12-2 006 AND SUCH RETURN WAS FILED U/S 139 (1) OF THE IT ACT (PB-1) O N INCOME OF RS.13,43,953/-. NO OTHER RETURN IS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE. THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT IS ALSO FILED ON RECORD IN SUPPORT OF THE SAME. HE HAS SUBMITTED THA T SINCE RETURN OF INCOME IS ACCEPTED AT RS.13,43,953/-, THEREFORE, TH ERE IS NO CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FILING OF INACCURATE PARTI CULARS OF INCOME. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSMENT IS COMPLETED U/S 1 43(3) OF THE IT ACT AND NOT U/S 153A OF THE IT ACT. THEREFORE, PENA LTY HAS BEEN RIGHTLY CANCELLED IN THE MATTER. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. PENALTY U/S 271 (1) ( C ) OF T HE IT ACT IS LEVIABLE IF THE AO OR THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) OR THE COMMISS IONER IN THE COURSE OF ANY PROCEEDINGS UNDER THIS ACT IS SATISFI ED THAT ANY PERSON ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 5 HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME OR FURN ISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF SUCH INCOME. THE PARTICULARS OF INCO ME CAN BE DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED UNDER VARIO US PROVISIONS OF LAW AS PRESCRIBED. IT IS ADMITTED FACT THAT SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED ON 19-1-2006 IN THE CASE OF J. K. SECURITIES GROUP OF CASES AND IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, T HEREFORE, THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL I.E. AY 2006-07 HAVE NOT ENDED AND IT WOULD HAVE ENDED ON 3 1-3-2006. THUS, NO RETURN WAS DUE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH FOR A SSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL 2006-07.THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAV E BEEN CONDUCTED BY THE AO AND THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT HAS BEEN PASSED ON 31-12-2007. ACCORDING TO SECTION 153A (1) (A) OF THE IT ACT WHERE SEARCH IS INITIATED U/S 132 OF THE IT ACT AFTER 31-5-2003, THE AO SHALL ISSUE NOTICE TO SUCH PERSON REQUIRING HIM TO FURNISH WITHIN SUCH TIME AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED IN THE NOTICE, THE R ETURN OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (B), IN THE PRESCRIBE FORM AN D VERIFIED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER AND STATING FORTH SUCH OTHER PART ICULARS AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED AND THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL SO FAR AS MAY BE APPLIED ACCORDINGLY AS IF SUCH RETURNS WERE REQUIRE D TO BE FURNISHED U/S 139 OF THE IT ACT. AS PER SUB CLAUSE (B), THE A O SHALL ASSESS OR REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME OF SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS I MMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE ASSESSMENT RELEVANT TO THE PREVIOUS Y EAR IN WHICH SUCH SEARCH WAS CONDUCTED OR REQUISITION WAS MADE. THE A O, THEREFORE, PROCEEDED TO PASS ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS YEAR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL 2006-07 HAS NOT ENDED. THE ASSESS EE FILED COPY ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 6 OF THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE RETURN OF INCOME WHICH SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCLOSED UNDI SCLOSED INCOME OF RS.20 LACS PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UND ER APPEAL ENDED ON 31-3-2006 (PB-6) AND NET PROFIT WAS COMPUTED AT RS.13,69,503/- AND AFTER DEDUCTIONS THE NET TAXABLE INCOME IS COMP UTED AT RS.13,43,953/- AND THE RETURN OF INCOME IS FILED U/ S 139 (1) OF THE IT ACT ON THE SAME AMOUNT ON 26-12-2006(PB-1) BY PAYIN G TAX THEREON, WHICH IS ACCEPTED AS IT IS BY THE AO. NO FURTHER DE TAILS HAVE BEEN GIVEN AS TO HOW THIS UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS.20 LA CS HAS BEEN COMPUTED. THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE ADDIT ION ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED ADVANCES IN A SUM OF RS. 3,1 0,000/- AND THE BASIS WAS THAT IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN THE PREMI SES OF M/S. J.K. SECURITIES PVT. LTD. NUMEROUS PROMISSORY NOTES WERE FOUND TO SHOW THAT ADVANCE OF MONEY WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO V ARIOUS PERSONS IN THE COURSE OF FINANCING BUSINESS. THE DE TAILS PROVIDED THAT LESSER AMOUNT IS SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AS AGAINST AMOUNT NOTED IN THE PROMISSORY NOTES. THE ASSESSEE FILED A FFIDAVITS OF SOME OF THE PERSONS AND SOME OF THE PERSONS WERE ALSO PR ODUCED WHO HAVE EXECUTED PROMISSORY NOTES TO SHOW THAT IN MOS T OF THE CASES THE PROMISSORY NOTES WERE SIGNED BUT LOAN WAS NOT A DVANCED AND IN MANY CASES PROMISSORY NOTES WERE SIGNED FOR MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF LOAN BUT LESSER AMOUNT WAS ADVANCED. THE AO HOWEVER , HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE ADVANCED LOAN OUT OF UNACCOUNTED INCOM E WHICH WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN THE ASSESS MENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL RS.3.10 LACS WAS CONSIDERED AS UNACCOUNTED A DVANCE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED AN AMOUNT OF RS.20 LACS IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE IT ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 7 ACT, THEREFORE, THE AO CONSIDERED THE AMOUNT OF RS. 3.10 LACS AS INCLUDED IN THE AMOUNT OF RS.20 LACS. THEREFORE, NO SEPARATE ADDITION WAS MADE. ULTIMATELY, RETURN OF INCOME WAS ACCEPTED AS IT IS. THESE FACTS WOULD SHOW THAT NO BASIS IS ALSO EXPLAINED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE DECLARED UNDISCLOSED I NCOME OF RS.20 LACS. THE WHOLE OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WOULD REVEA L THAT THE AO ON THE BASIS OF SEIZED PAPERS COMPUTED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.3.10 LACS WHICH WAS FOUND TO BE INCL UDED IN THE SURRENDERED AMOUNT OF RS. 20 LACS. SINCE RETURN OF INCOME IS FILED U/S 139 (1) OF THE IT ACT BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS YEAR DID NOT END ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, THEREFORE, IT WAS THE REGULAR R ETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEA L IN WHICH COMPLETE INCOME INCLUDING UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS DI SCLOSED. NO OTHER MATERIAL IS FILED ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT ASS ESSEE FILED ANY OTHER RETURN OF INCOME EXCEPT DATED 26-12-2006. THE AO HA S NOT POINTED OUT AS TO HOW THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTIC ULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME IN TH E RETURN OF INCOME FILED ON 26-12-2006 WHICH IS THE BASIS OF LEVY OF THE PENALTY. THE AO IN THE PENALTY ORDER ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE F ILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139 (1) DECLARING INCOME AT RS.13,43,953 /-. 5.1 THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ONKAR SARAN SONS 195 ITR 1 HELD AS UNDER: HELD, AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT, TH AT, EVEN IN A CASE WHERE A RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 INVOLVED AN ELEMENT OF CONCEALMENT, THE LAW APPLICABLE WOULD BE THE LAW AS IT STOOD AT THE TIME WHEN THE ORIGINAL RETURN WAS F ILED ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 8 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN QUESTION AND NOT THE LAW AS IT STOOD ON THE DATE ON WHICH THE RETURN WAS FIL ED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148. 5.2 THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF BRIJ M OHAN VS CIT 120 ITR 1 HELD AS UNDER: THE CONCEALMENT OF THE PARTICULARS OF HIS INCOME WAS EFFECTED BY THE ASSESSEE WHEN HE FILED A RETURN OF TOTAL INCOME ON APRIL 24, 1968. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS THE SUBSTITUTED CL. (III), BROUGHT IN BY THE FINANC E ACT, 1968, WHICH GOVERNS THE CASE. THAT CLAUSE CAME INTO EFFECT FROM APRIL 1, 1968. 5.3 THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF C IT VS MAHENDRA C. SHAH 299 ITR 305 HELD THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE, ADMITTEDLY THE ASSESSMENT YEAR BEING 1988-89 AND TH E SEARCH HAVING TAKEN PLACE ON JULY 3, 1987, THE RETURN OF I NCOME WAS NOT DUE BEFORE JULY 31, 1988. SO FAR AS THE VALUE OF DI AMONDS WAS CONCERNED, THE ASSESSEE, HAVING MADE A DECLARATION UNDER SECTION 132(4) AND PAID TAXES THEREON, HAD FULFILLE D ALL THE CONDITIONS FOR AVAILING OF THE BENEFIT OF IMMUNITY FROM LEVY OF PENALTY AS PROVIDED UNDER EXPLANATION 5 TO SECTION 271 (1) ( C ). CANCELLATION OF THE PENALTY WAS VALID. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CONCEALED ANY PARTIC ULARS OF INCOME AND ALSO HAS NOT FILED ANY INACCURATE PARTICULARS O F INCOME. THE DECISION CITED BY THE LEARNED DR IS CLEARLY DISTING UISHABLE ON FACTS. CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTA NCES, WE DO NOT FIND IT TO BE A CASE OF CONCEALMENT OF INCOME OR FILING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS, THER EFORE, JUSTIFIED IN ITA NO.2678/AHD/2009 THE ACIT, CENT. CIR-1, BARODA VS M/S. S. K. FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. 9 CANCELING THE PENALTY. ACCORDINGLY, DEPARTMENT APPE AL HAS NO MERIT. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08-06-2011 SD/- SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 08-06-2011 LAKSHMIKANT/ LAKSHMIKANT/ LAKSHMIKANT/ LAKSHMIKANT/- -- - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD