Jodhpur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., JODHPUR V. ITO-TDS-1, JODHPUR

ITA 287/JODH/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4888 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DEEPAK SEHGALCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: ANIL BHANSALI
• Section: 194C; 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELALTE TRIBUNAL: JODHPUR BENCH : JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA NO. 287 TO 291/JODH/2013 (A.Y. 2005-06 TO 2009-10) JODHPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. VS. ITO-TDS-1, NEW POWER HOUSE, JODHPUR. JODHPUR. PAN NO. AAACJ8578R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANIL BHANSALI. DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI DEEPAK SEHGAL-CIT- DR. DATE OF HEARING : 16/09/2013. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : /09/2013. O R D E R PER BENCH : THIS IS A BUNCH OF FIVE APPEALS, FILED BY THE SAME ASSESSEE PERTAINING TO A.YS. 2005-06 TO 2009-10 IN WHICH EXA CTLY IDENTICAL ISSUE IS INVOLVED AND ARE DIRECTED AGAINST A COMMON ORDER DATED 12/03/2013 OF LD. CIT(A). THEREFORE, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIEN CE AND BREVITY WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DECIDE THEM ALL BY A COMMON ORDER . 2 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE COMMON FACTS LEADING TO THES E APPEALS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE DISTRIB UTION OF POWER IN THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY PURCHA SES POWER FROM THE GENERATING COMPANY NAMELY THE RAJASTHAN RAJYA V IDHYUT UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. (RVPN) AND SELLS IT TO THE CONSUMERS. TH E POWER FROM THE GENERATION POINT TO THE CONSUMERS IS TRANSMITTED TH ROUGH THE TRANSMISSION NETWORK OF RVPN. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAS ENTERED INTO A TRANSMISSION SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH RVPN FOR TH E TRANSMISSION OF POWER. THE JODHPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., THE AS SESSEE (HEREINAFTER REFERRED AS JD.V.V.N.L.) IS A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 ON 19-06-2000 AS A 100% GOVE RNMENT COMPANY IN CONSONANCE WITH A MANDATE PRESCRIBED UNDER THE R AJASTHAN POWER SECTOR REFORMS ACT, 1999 WHEREIN ROLE OF RAJASTHAN STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD WAS UNBUNDLED TO REFORM THE FUNCTIONING OF TH E BOARD TO INTRODUCE EFFICIENCY IN POWER GENERATION, TRANSMISS ION AND DISTRIBUTION. ACCORDINGLY THE ERSTWHILE RAJASTHAN S TATE ELECTRICITY BOARD WAS UNBUNDLED INTO FOLLOWING FIVE GOVERNMENT COMPANIES UNDER THE RAJASTHAN POWER SECTOR REFORMS ACT 1999 AS PER THE SCHEME NOTIFIED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF RAJASTHAN ON 19-07-20 00: I. RAJASTHAN RAJYA UTPADAN NIGAM LTD (GENERATING CO.) II. RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARN NIGAM LTD (TRAN SMISSION CO. 3 III. JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD ( DISTR IBUTION COMPANY) IV. AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD ( DISTRIBUTION C OMPANY) V. JODHPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD (DISTRIBUTION C OMPANY) 2.1 ON UNBUNDLING OF THE ERSTWHILE BOARD, THE ASSET S AND LIABILITIES AS VESTING IN THE STATE GOVERNMENT WERE TRANSFERRED TO THESE GENERATION, TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION COMPANIES WHERE UNDER EACH WAS ENTRUSTED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITIES TO CAR RY OUT THE IDENTIFIED AND ASSIGNED FUNCTIONS. THE ROLE OF EACH IS INDEPEN DENT AND NO ONE ACTS FOR THE OTHER BUT ON ARMS LENGTH TRANSACTION B ETWEEN THEM. IN FURTHER COURSE OF EVENTS, THE PARLIAMENT ENACTED TH E ELECTRICITY ACT 2003. THE LONGER TITLE TO THE ENACTMENT ENVISAGED T HE ELECTRICITY ACT TO BE INTRODUCED ' TO CONSOLIDATED THE LAWS RELATIN G TO THE GENERATION, TRANSMISSION, DISTRIBUTION, TRADING AND USE OF ELEC TRICITY AND GENERALLY FOR TAKING MEASURES CONDUCTIVE TO DEVELOPMENT OF EL ECTRICITY INDUSTRY, PROMOTING COMPETITION THEREIN, PROTECTING INTEREST OF CONSUMERS AND SUPPLY THE ELECTRICITY TO ALL AREAS, RATIONALIZATIO N OF ELECTRICITY TARIFF ETC. 2.2 THE STATEMENT OF OBJECTS AND REASONS APPENDED T O THE ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003 PROVIDED INTER ALIA AS UNDER: 4 '1.3 OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, HOWEVER, THE PERFORMANC E OF STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDS HAS DETERIORATED SUBSTANTIALLY O N ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS FACTORS. FOR INSTANCE, THOUGH POWER TO FIX TARIFFS VESTS WITH THE STATE ELECTRICITY BOARDS, THEY HAVE GENERA LLY BEEN UNABLE TO TAKE DECISIONS ON TARIFFS IN A PROFESSION AL AND INDEPENDENT MANNER AND TARIFFS DETERMINATION IN PRA CTICE HAS BEEN DONE BY THE STATE GOVERNMENTS. CROSS-SUBSIDIES HAVE REACHED UNSUSTAINABLE LEVELS. ACCORDINGLY, IT BECAM E NECESSARY TO ENACT A NEW LEGISLATION FOR REGULATING THE ELECT RICITY SUPPLY INDUSTRY IN THE COUNTRY, WHICH WOULD REPLACE THE EX ISTING LAWS, PRESERVE ITS CORE FEATURES OTHER THAN THOSE RELATIN G TO THE MANDATORY EXISTENCE OF THE STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD AND THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT AND THE ST ATE ELECTRICITY BOARD WITH RESPECT TO REGULATION LICENSEES. 2.3 SECTION 39 PRESCRIBES THE FUNCTION TO BE UNDERT AKEN BY THE STU AND ALSO LIMITS THE SCOPE OF ITS ACTIVITIES AND PRE SCRIBES THE MANNER IN WHICH THE FUNCTIONS ARE TO BE PERFORMED. THE CHARGE S AT WHICH TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY HAS TO BE MADE ARE ALSO FIXED BY STATE COMMISSION, FURTHER, SECTION 40 PRESCRIBES THE VARI OUS DUTIES WHICH A TRANSMISSION LICENSEE IS REQUIRED TO PERFORM WHERE IN THE SECOND AND FIFTH PROVISO TO SECTION 14 DECLARES THE STUS AS DE EMED 'TRANSMISSION 5 LICENSEE'S UNDER THE ELECTRICITY ACT. BESIDES THE FUNCTION OF GENERATION, TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION OF ELECTR ICITY, THE ELECTRICITY ACT CONCEIVES AN ADDITIONAL COORDINATIVE FUNCTION T O BE PERFORMED. IT IS TOWARDS THIS EXERCISE OF COORDINATION OF GENERATION TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES AND ALSO TO FACILITATE VOLU NTARY INTER-CONNECTION THEREIN THAT THE ACT CALLS FORTH FOR THE CENTRAL AN D STATE GOVERNMENTS TO ESTABLISH NATIONAL AND REGIONAL LOAD DISPATCH CE NTERS RESPECTIVELY. WHILE SECTION 26 OF THE ACT PROVIDES FOR THE ESTABL ISHMENT OF THE NATIONAL LOAD DISPATCH CENTRAL TOWARDS THE OPTIMAL SCHEDULING AND DISPATCH OF ELECTRICITY. SECTION 31 MANDATES THE ST ATE GOVERNMENTS TO ESTABLISH A STATE LOAD DISPATCH CENTRE FOR DISCHARG ING THE SPECIFIED FUNCTIONS. THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE A.O. IN THIS CA SE WERE AS UNDER: 1. THE PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO RVPN IS A PAYMENT OF TECHNICAL SERVICE LIABLE FOR DEDUCTION O F TAX AT SOURCE U/S 194J INTER ALIA FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON S. 2. THE TITLE OF THE AGREEMENT ITSELF SPEAKS THAT WHATEVER WORK IS BEING DONE BY THE RVPN FOR THE ASS ESSEE IS SERVICE. 3. TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY IS A TECHNICAL SERVI CE IN ITSELF AS IT REQUIRES CONSTANT INVOLVEMENT OF TECHN ICAL SYSTEM CONSISTING OF SOPHISTICATED INSTRUMENTS AND 6 TECHNICAL ABILITY AND KNOWLEDGE TO OPERATE AND MANA GE THE SYSTEM. ALL THESE REQUIRE HELP OF SCIENCE AND TECH NOLOGY AND TECHNICALLY COMPETENT MANPOWER SUCH AS QUALIFIE D ENGINEERS, ETC. 2.4 THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY RVPN REQUIRED TEC HNICAL SUPPORT AND SERVICES OF TECHNICALLY QUALIFIED STAFF AND THEREFO RE TECHNICAL SERVICES U/S 194J. RVPN HAS NOT ONLY BUILT THE SYSTEM BUT HA S TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE THE SYSTEM IN A EFFICIENT, CO-ORDINATED AND ECONOMICAL MANNER AND THEREFORE THEY ARE PROVIDING TECHNICAL SERVICES FALLING U/S 194J, THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT FOUN D TENABLE AS MENTIONED ON PAGE 10 TO 14 OF THE ORDER. THE A.O. O BSERVED THAT THE CASE LAW RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE REPORTED IN 251ITR 53 ARE DISTINGUISHABLE ON FACTS. ALTERNATIVE IT IS FALLIN G U/S 194C IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF ASSOCIATED CEMENT COMPANY LTD. AND CBDT CIRCULAR NO 681 DATED 8.3.1994. 2.5 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE STATED FACTS, THE AO RAISE D A DEMAND U/S 201(1) FOR F Y 2008-09 AND INTEREST U/S 201(1 A) FO R THE F Y 2004-05 TO 2008-09 FROM THE DUE DATE OF PAYMENT OF TDS TO THE DATE OF ORDER. SUBMITTED THAT 'WITH REFERENCE TO ABOVE, BEFORE GIV ING OUR PARA WISE SUBMISSION TO THE REPLY OF THE ITO, (TDS), IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO 7 UNDERSTAND WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF STATE LOAD DISPA TCH CENTRE. FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2004-05, THE COMMISSION SPECIFIE D SLDC CHARGES OF 139.25 LAKHS PER MONTH RECOVERABLE FROM DISCOMS IN THE RATIO OF ALLOTTED TRANSMISSION CAPACITY. ACCORDINGLY, THE AS SESSEE HAS PAID TRANSMISSION/ WHEELING/ SLDC CHARGES TO RAJASTHAN V IDHYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD. FOR TRANSMISSION OF ELECTRICITY THROUGH ITS TRANSMISSION LINE FROM THE GENERATION POINT TO ITS DISTRIBUTION POINT . 2.7 TRANSMISSION UTILITY - SECTION 39 OF THE ELECTR ICITY ACT, 2003 PROVIDES THAT THE STATE GOVERNMENT MAY NOTIFY A GOV ERNMENT COMPANY AS A STATE TRANSMISSION UTILITY. IN PURSUAN CE TO THIS THE STATE GOVERNMENT HAS NOTIFIED RVPN TO BE A STATE TRANSMIS SION UTILITY. AS PER THIS SECTION, THE FUNCTION OF THE STATE TRANSMI SSION UTILITY IS TO ENSURE DEVELOPMENT OF ANY EFFICIENT, COORDINATED AN D ECONOMICAL SYSTEM OF INTRA-STATE TRANSMISSION LINES FOR SMOOTH FLOW OF ELECTRICITY FROM GENERATING STATION TO LOAD CENTERS. AS A PART OF ITS DUTY IT IS ALSO TO MAINTAIN AND OPERATE THE SYSTEM IN AN EFFICIENT, CO-ORDINATE AND ECONOMICAL MANNER. THE A.O. HELD THE ASSESSEE LIABL E FOR THE AMOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS U/S 194J AND INTEREST U/S 2 01(1A) OF THE ACT. 8 2.8 IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT SEC TION 194J IS APPLICABLE WHERE ANY TECHNICAL SKILL, KNOWLEDGE OR INTELLECT IS IMPARTED TO OTHERS FOR A FEE. IF FOR DISCHARGING ONES' OWN F UNCTION, QUALIFIED TECHNICIANS AND ENGINEERS ARE EMPLOYED AND THEY ARE DEPLOYED TO MONITOR ITS OWN TECHNICAL SYSTEM AND FOR USER OF SU CH SYSTEM, ANY PAYMENT IS MADE BY THE USER OF SYSTEM, IT IS NOT A PAYMENT OF FEE FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES AS ENVISAGED U/S 194J. IN FACT A S EXPLAINED ABOVE, SLDC CHARGES PAID BY THE ASSESSEE IS STATUTORY PAYM ENT AND IF THE ASSESSEE OR THE TRANSMISSION COMPANY OR THE GENERAT ING COMPANY DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTION OF STATE LOAD DISPATC H CENTRE, THEY CAN BE IMPOSED WITH A LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 33(5) OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT, 2003. THIS ITSELF SHOWS THAT STATE LOAD DISPATCH CE NTRE DO NOT PROVIDE ANY SERVICE TO OTHER, RATHER AS A STATUTORY BODY, I T MANDATORILY REQUIRES THE GENERATING COMPANY TO PROVIDE THE AVAI LABILITY OF POWER, THE DISTRIBUTION COMPANY ABOUT THE REQUIREMENT OF T HE POWER AND THE TRANSMISSION COMPANY ABOUT THE AVAILABILITY OF TRAN SMISSION LINE SO THAT IT CAN REGULATE THE OPTIMUM SCHEDULING AND DISPATCH OF ELECTRICITY WITHIN THE STATE. THE VARIOUS CLAUSES IN THE TRANSM ISSION SERVICE AGREEMENT ONLY PROVIDES FOR COMPLIANCE OF THE GRID CODE AND SLDC DIRECTIONS WHICH IS BINDING BOTH ON THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS RVPN. THUS WHEN ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED WITH GENERATION TO DI STRIBUTION OF 9 ELECTRICITY ARE TO COMPLY WITH DIRECTION OF STATE L OAD DISPATCH CENTRE AND REGULATORY COMMISSION ENSURING INTEGRATED GRID OPERATION AND FOR ACHIEVING THE MAXIMUM ECONOMY AND EFFICIENCY IN THE OPERATION OF THE POWER SYSTEM IN THE STATE, THE QUESTION OF ANY PERS ON GIVEN SERVICE TO ANOTHER DOES NOT ARISE. AS A TRANSMISSION LICENSEE, THE RVPN IS TO COMPLY WITH THE TECHNICAL STANDARD OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TRANSMISSION LINES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GRIDS STA NDARD AS MAY BE SPECIFIED BY THE AUTHORITY. THE OPERATION AND MAINT ENANCE OF TRANSMISSION LINES BY RVPNL AND THE USER OF THESE L INES BY ASSESSEE FOR TRANSMITTING ENERGY DOES NOT RESULT INTO ANY TECHNI CAL SERVICES BEING RENDERED TO THE ASSESSEE. BY THE OPERATION AND MAIN TENANCE OF ITS OWN SYSTEM BY RVPN, NO SERVICES ARE RENDERED TO THE ASS ESSEE. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A.O. THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER AGGRIEVED. 4. BEFORE US, BOTH PARTIES HAVE REITERATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS AS WERE TAKEN BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LD. AR SHRI ANIL BHANSALI HAS RELIED ON A DECISION OF THE JAIPUR BENCH OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF JAIPUR VIDYUT NIGAM LTD. VS. DCIT IN ITA NO. 132/JP/2009 FOR A.Y. 2006-07. 10 5. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE HAS FI LED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE JAIPUR BENCH AND THAT APPE AL IS STILL PENDING BUT NO STAY HAS BEEN GRANTED AGAINST THE OPERATION OF THAT ORDER. ON THE OTHER HAND THE ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST AAR IS PENDING AND THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS NOT STAYED TH E OPERATION OF THAT ORDER. BOTH ABOVE FACTS STAND SUBSTANTIATED BEFORE US. AFTER THAT, THE SCENARIO THAT EMERGES IS THAT THE JAIPUR BENCH ORDE R (SUPRA) HAS A BINDING EFFECT. THE HELD AND RELEVANT PORTION OF TH AT ORDER IS AS UNDER :- ASSESSEE, AN ELECTRICITY DISTRIBUTION COMPANY, WAS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE U/S 194J FROM THE PA YMENT OF TRANSMISSION/SLDC CHARGES TO THE TRANSMISSION CO MPANY RVPN AS THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF TRANSMISSI ON LINE BY RVPN AND THE USER OF THEIR LINES BY THE ASS ESSEE FROM TRANSMITTING ENERGY DOES NOT RESULT IN ANY TEC HNICAL SERVICE BEING RENDERED TO THE ASSESSEE, APART FROM THE FACT THAT THE PAYMENT OF TRANSMISSION/WHEELING/SLDC CHAR GE IS REIMBURSEMENT OF THE COST .. 5.1 THE ITAT JAIPUR BENCH FURTHER HELD THAT: THE CHENNAI BENCH OF ITAT IN CASE OF SINGAPORE AIR LINES LTD VS. ITO 7 SOT 84 [CHENNAI] ON THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF INTEREST U/S 201(1A) HAS HELD AS UNDER: 11 THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HELD THAT IF THE REVENUE IS PERMITTED TO LEVY INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT, EVEN IN A CASE WHERE THE PERSON LIABLE TO PAY TAX HAS PAID TH E TAX ON THE DATE DUE FOR THE TAX THE REVENUE WOULD DERIVE U NDUE BENEFIT OR ADVANTAGE BY GETTING INTEREST ON THE AMO UNT OF TAX WHICH HAD ALREADY BEEN PAID ON THE DUE DATE. ACCORDING TO THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT SUCH A POSITION CANNOT BE PERMITTED. THE CBDT HAS ALSO CLARIFIED IN THE C IRCULAR [SUPRA] THAT INTEREST HAS TO BE RECOVERED TILL THE TAXES ARE PAID IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICA TION FOR LEVYING TAX TILL THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 1999. SINCE THE ACTUAL DATE OF PAYMENT OF TAX BY THE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OF INDIA IS NOT AVAILABLE ON THE FILE OF THIS TRIBU NAL, THE A.O. MAY VERIFY THE ACTUAL DATE ON WHICH THE TAXES WERE PAID BY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT OF INDIA AND THEREAFT ER COMPUTE THE INTEREST FROM THE DATE ON WHICH THE DEDUCTION HAS TO BE MADE TIL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAY MENT OF THE RATE APPLICABLE AS PER STATUTORY PROVISION. WE HAVE ALSO OCCASION TO COME ACROSS WITH THE RECENT DECISI ON OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS ELI ULL Y & CO. [INDIA] P. LTD & ORS [2009] 21 DTR [SUPREME COURT] 74 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT AS FAR AS THE PERIOD OF DEFAULT IS CONCERNED, THE PERIOD STARTS FROM THE DA TE OF DEDUCTIBILITY BILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT OF TA X DATE OF PAYMENT BY THE CONCERNED EMPLOYEE CAN BE TREATED AS THE ATE OF ACTUAL PAYMENT. 12 WHEN THE PAYEE HAS PAID MORE TAX THAN THE TAX PAYAB LE BY IT AND REFUND IS DUE TO IT AS A RESULT OF TDS BY TH E ASSESSEE, INTEREST U/S 201(1A) CANNOT BE CHARGED. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND PARTICULARLY IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE NO INTEREST U/S 201[1A] IS LEVIABLE ON THE ASSESSEE. HENCE THIS GROUND IS ALLOWED. 6. THEREFORE, BY RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE T RIBUNAL ORDER, WE HOLD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS ASSESSEES AND IT IS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE QUA THE TRANSMISSION AND WHEELING CHARGES PAID BY I T TO RVPN FOR THE USE OF THEIR TRANSMISSION SYSTEM. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O. HAS WRONGLY HELD THIS ASSESSEE IS A ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT U/S 201 OF THE ACT AND HAS INCORRECTLY IMPOSED INTEREST U/S 201(1A). 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 27 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (N.K.SAINI) [HARI OM MARATH A] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 27 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013. 13 VL/- COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT BY ORDER 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, JODHPUR