DCIT, Jaipur V. ASHOK KUMAR AGARWAL, Jaipur

ITA 303/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 30323114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJ MEHRA
• Keywords: Depreciation; Corroborative evidences
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 THE DCIT CIRCLE- 2 JAIPUR CUKE VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGARWAL 43-D, DANAPANI RESTAURANT WALI GALI, JANPATH, SHYAM NAGAR, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: ABWPA 2699 A VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJ MEHRA, JCIT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15/07/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/09/2015 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR DATED 23-01-2013 FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2008-09 WHEREIN FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED:- WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN :- 1. ALLOWING DEPRECIATION AT HIGHER RATES ON HYDRAU LIC CRANES WHICH IS NOT THE COMMERCIAL VEHICLE AS HELD BY THE AO. 2. ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 50,000/- OUT OF DISALLOWA NCE OF CRANE OPERATING EXPENSES AND WAGES. ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 2 3. GRANTING RELIEF OF RS. 15,220/- ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE AND VEHICLE EXPENSES MADE BY THE AO. 4. ALLOWING RELIEF OF RS. 58,092/- OUT OF DISALLOWA NCES OF CONVEYANCE, TELEPHONE AND ADVERTISEMENT AND GENERAL EXPENSES. 2.1 NONE APPEARED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE TO THE LAST KNOWN ADDRES S OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE BENCH DECIDED TO PROCEED IN THE MATTER EX-PARTE BASED ON THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3.1 THE GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING AL LOWING DEPRECIATION AT HIGHER RATES ON HYDRAULIC CRANE BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS NOT THE COMMERCIAL VEHICLE AS HELD BY THE AO. 3.2 BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE F ILED A RETURN OF INCOME ON 29-09-2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 6,21,96 0/-. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND N OTICE U/S 143(2) DATED 2-09-2009 WAS ISSUED AND DULY SERVED UPON. FURTHER THE NOTICE U/S 142(1) DATED 5-01-2010 WAS ISSUED BY THE AO ASKING FOR THE INFORMATION AND DETAILS RELATING TO THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THE A O OBSERVED IN THIS CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVED INCOME FROM HIRING OF CRA NES AND OTHER EQUIPMENTS IN THE NAME OF M/S. AGARWAL CARRIERS AND LIFTERS AND PARTNERSHIP IN M/S. NAWAL KISHOR & CO. AND M/S. NAR AINI CRANES. THE AO ON PERUSAL OF THE DEPRECIATION CHART OBSERVED TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAD ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 3 CLAIMED DEPRECIATION OF RS. 16,18,069/- ON CRANES @ 30% FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED BY THE AO TO EXPLAIN AS TO WH Y THE CRANES WERE TREATED AS COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES USED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING THEM ON HIRE AND NOT AS PLANT AND MACHINERY. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE CRANES FELL IN THE BLOCK OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE USED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING THEM ON H IRE WHICH WAS ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION @ 30%. THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING TH E REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE HELD THAT THE HYDRAULIC CRANE IS A MACHINE AND THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEPRECIATION @ 15% INSTEAD OF 30% AS C LAIMED IN THE RETURN. THEREFORE, THE AO ALLOWED THE DEPRECIATION ON HYDRA ULIC CRANE @ 15% AND EXCESS DEPRECIATION OF RS. 8,09,034/- WAS DISAL LOWED BY THE AO. 3.3 THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO ALLOWED THE DEPRECIATION @ 30% BY FOLLOWING OBSERVA TIONS AT PARA 4.3 OF HER ORDER. 4.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE A.R. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT THE IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS DECIDED BY THE CIT (A) IN THE C ASE OF PARTNERSHIP FIRM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF M/S . NARAYANI CRANES IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 VIDE HER ORDER DA TED 21- 06-2011, ITA NO. 457/10-11 WHEREIN ALL THE SUBMISSI ONS WERE CONSIDERED AND THE APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN FAVOU R OF THE APPELLANT ON IDENTICAL FACTS. IT WAS HELD IN THE OR DER THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE TRUCK CRAN E WAS USED ON PUBLIC ROAD AND SO IT WAS UNDER THE DEEMING PROVISIONS AS A TRANSPORT VEHICLE VIDE NOTIFICATION DATED 5-11- 2004 S.O. 1248(E). THE ASSESSEE USED THE CRANE FOR COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION BY HIRING IT TO DIFFERENT CLIENTS A ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 4 LIST OF WHOM WAS FURNISHED VIDE LETTER DATED 23-11- 12. THEREFORE, IS FOUND THAT THE MATTER IS COVERED BY T HE ORDER SUPRA AND THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO 30% DEPRECIAT ION ACCORDINGLY. 3.4 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 3.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERI ALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE BENCH OBSERVED THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUED HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THIS BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. NARAYANI CRANES VS. DCIT (ITA NO. 783/JP/2011 DATED 30-01-2014) WHEREIN THIS BENCH HA S ALLOWED DEPRECIATION @ 30% IN THE CASE OF M/S. NARYANI CRAN ES OBSERVING THEREIN AS UNDER:- 6.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ENTIRE RECORD. THE LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE MOBILE CRANES ARE COVERED UNDER THE DEFINITION OF MACHINERY IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS OF CIT VS. SHRIRAM TRANS PORT FINANCE CO. LTD. (2002), 254 ITR 558 (MAD.) AND CIT VS. GOTTAN LIME KHANIJ UDYOG, 170 TAXMAN 442 (RAJ.). THE LD. DR HAS SUPPOR TED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE RELI ED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A).THE CASE OF THE LD. AR IS THAT TH E AO DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE NATURE OF WORK DONE BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM. HE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ABOVE DECISIONS ARE DISTINGUISHA BLE ON FACTS AS BOTH THESE DECISIONS ARE ON SEPARATE ISSUES. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT NUMEROUS PIECES OF EVI DENCES HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM WHICH INCLUDES RTO REGISTRATION WHEREIN THE CRANES ARE REGISTERED UNDER THE HEAD TRUCK CRANE WHICH SHOWS THAT CRANE IS MOUNTED ON VEHICLE. A CERTIFICATE OF THE DISTT. TRANSPORT OFFICER, STATIN G THE CRANE REGISTERED UNDER VEHICLE NO. FOR WHICH FITNESS IS N OT REQUIRED. THE FACTS OF THE CASES RELIED UPON BY THE LD. DR ARE NO T THE SAME AS THAT OF THIS PARTICULAR IN THIRD MEMBER CASE, THE ITAT, PUNE BENCH WHILE DECIDING THE CASE OF SANGHVI MOTORS (P) LTD. VS. DCIT, 110 ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 5 ITD 1 (PUNE) HAS ALLOWED THE HIGHER DEPRECIATION O N SUCH VEHICLES. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SOLITARY GROUND OF THE REVEN UE IS DISMISSED. THUS RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THIS BE NCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. NARAYANI CRANES (SUPRA), WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS SUSTAINED ON THE ISSUE OF ALLOWABIL ITY OF DEPRECIATION @ 30% ON HYDRAULIC CRANES. HENCE, GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4.1 THE GROUND 2 OF THE REVENUE IS REGARDING ALLOW ING RELIEF OF RS. 50,000/- OUT OF DISALLOWANCE OF CRANE OPERATING EXP ENSES AND WAGES. 4.2 THE AO ON PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUN T OF THE ASSESSEE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED RS. 18,60,53 9/- UNDER THE HEAD CRANE OPERATING CHARGES. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE E XPENDITURE FOR WAGES PAYMENT WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN CASH AND NEITHE R SUPPORTING BILLS WERE AVAILABLE NOR ANY WAGES REGISTERED WAS MAINTAI NED TO THIS EFFECT. THE AO OBSERVED THAT SELF MADE VOUCHERS WERE AVAILA BLE WHICH WERE NOT SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION. THUS IN THE ABSENCE OF PRI MARY AND PROPER RECORDS, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED UNDER THIS HEAD COULD NOT BE VERIFIED BY THE AO. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE REPLY BUT THE AO DID NOT FOUND IT TENABLE. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MAINTAINING P ROPER RECORDS FOR WAGES AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES UNDER THE HE AD CRANE OPERATING ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 6 CHARGES. THUS IN THE ABSENCE OF PROPER SUPPORTING B ILLS AND THE FACT THAT PAYMENT WAS SHOWN IN CASH, THE EXPENDITURE COULD NO T BE VERIFIED BY THE AO. CONSIDERING THE FACTS, LUMP SUM ADDITION OF RS. 1.50 LACS WAS MADE BY THE AO UNDER THE HEAD CRANE OPERATING CHARGES. 4.3 THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO PARTLY ALLOWED THIS GROUND BY GRANTING A RELIEF OF RS. 1.0 0 LACS AS UNDER:- 5.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE SUBMISSION OF THE A.R. AND DO NOT CONCUR WITH THE S UBMISSIONS OF THE A.R. GIVEN THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE OBSERV ATIONS OF THE AO REGARDING THE SAME. THE AO HAS OBSERVED THAT NEITHE R WAS THE WAGE REGISTER MAINTAINED NOR DID THE VOUCHERS CONTA IN THE NAMES AND ADDRESS OF THE RECIPIENTS OF THE WAGES. THEREFO RE, IN ABSENCE OF ANY PRIMARY RECORD, SHE COULD NOT POSSIBLE HAVE VER IFIED THESE PAYMENTS. ON PERUSAL OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT OF CRANE OPERATION EXPENSES, IT IS SEEN THAT SOME PAYMENTS FOR REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE DID NOT HAVE SUPPORTING BILLS. THEREFOR E, IT IS HELD THAT THERE WAS A POSSIBILITY OF INFLATING THE WAGES FOR REDUCING THE TAX LIABILITY PARTICULARLY AS THE RECORDS MAINTAINED BY THE APPELLANT WERE NOT SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION. THEREFORE, THE DI SALLOWANCE IN CRANE OPERATING EXPENSES AND WAGES IS RESTRICTED TO RS. 1.00 LAC. 4.4 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 4.5 WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERI ALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIME D RS. 18,60,539/- UNDER THE HEAD CRANE OPERATING EXPENSES. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE PAYMENT OF WAGES IN CASH AND NO SUPPORTING BILLS WERE AVAILABLE. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAINTAIN THE WAGES REGISTER. THE AO ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 7 OBSERVED THAT ONLY SELF MADE VOUCHERS WERE AVAILABL E WHICH WERE NOT SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION. THUS IN THE ABSENCE OF PRO PER RECORDS AND PRIMARY RECORDS THE AO MADE A LUMP SUM ADDITION OF RS. 1.50 LACS WHICH HAS BEEN REDUCED BY THE LD. CIT(A) TO RS. 1.00 LAC BY C ONSIDERING ALL THE ASPECTS IN THIS CASE AND WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN TH E ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. HENCE, GROUND NO. 2 OF THE REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. 5.1 THE GROUND 3 AND 4 OF THE REVENUE ARE WITH REGA RD TO RELIEF OF RS. 15,220,/- ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE AND VEHICLE EXPE NSES MADE BY THE AO AND RELIEF OF RS. 58,092/- OUT OF DISALLOWANCE OF C ONVEYANCE, TELEPHONE, ADVERTISEMENT AND GENERAL EXPENSES. 5.2 NOW WE TAKE UP BOTH GROUNDS I.E.3 AND 4 OF THE REVENUE TOGETHER FOR ADJUDICATION. BRIEF FACTS OF DISALLOWANCE ON AC COUNT OF ADVERTISEMENT AND GENERAL EXPENSES, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS CLAIMED EXPENDITURE OF RS. 34,350/- ON ACCOUNT OF ADVERTIS EMENT EXPENDITURE AND RS. 17,897/- ON ACCOUNT OF GENERAL EXPENSES. THE A O ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO SUBMIT THE SUPPORTING EVIDENCE BUT THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAINTAIN PROPER BILLS AND VOUCHERS FOR SUCH EXP ENSE. THE AO OBSERVED THAT PETTY CASH PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE AN D THE AO OBSERVED THAT SUCH EXPENDITURES WERE UNVERIFIABLE. THE AO DI SALLOWED 20% OF SUCH EXPENDITURE WHICH COMES TO RS. 10,449/- AND AD DED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 8 5.3 AS REGARDS DISALLOWANCE OF CONVEYANCE EXPENDITU RE OF RS. 2,75,019/- (INCLUSIVE OF VEHICLE RUNNING EXPENSES O F RS. 1,50,970/- , REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE OF RS. 66,036/- AND DEPRECI ATION OF RS. 58,013/-), THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE DETAILS BU T ON EXAMINATION OF THE DETAILS THE AO OBSERVED THAT THESE EXPENSES ARE NOT FULLY VOUCHED AND NOT SUPPORTED BY PROPER BILLS AND VOUCHERS. THE AO IN THE ABSENCE OF PRIMARY RECORDS HELD THAT THESE EXPENSES ARE NOT WH OLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO COVER UP POSSIBLE LEAKAGE OF REVENUE, THE AO DISALLOWED 20% OF SUCH EXPENDITURE WHICH COMES TO RS. 55,003/- AND ADDED THE SAME TO T HE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 5.4 AS REGARDS DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHON E EXPENDITURE, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED EXPENDITU RE OF RS. 1,43,402/- . THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS BU T IT WAS NOT NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MAINTAINING PROPER CALL R ECORDS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT IN ABSENCE OF SUCH RECORDS, PERSONAL USAGE OF TELEPHONE CANNOT BE RULED OUT AND HELD THAT SUCH EXPENSES ARE NOT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS. THEREFORE, THE AO DISALLOWED 20% OF SUCH EXPENDITURE WHICH COMES TO RS. 28,680/- AND ADDED THE SAME TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 9 5.5 THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AT PAR A 5.6 OF HER ORDER AS UNDER:- 5.6 I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AR ALONGWITH THE COMPARATIVE CH ART SUBMITTED BY HIM. ON PERUSAL OF THE SAME, IT IS SEEN THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF CONVEYANCE AND TELEPHONE EXPENSES CLAIMED AGAINST T HE TURNOVER HAS INCREASED WHILE THE TURNOVER HAS DECLINED AS COMPARED TO PREVIOUS ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWAN CE OF CONVEYANCE EXPENSE IS RESTRICTED TO 10% OF RS. 2,17 ,006/- DEPRECIATION HAS NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THIS DISALLOW ANCE AS PER THE FINDING OF THE HON'BLE ITAT JAIPUR IN THE CASE OF KAILASH CHAND GUPTA VS. DCIT 35 TW 36 (JP) . THIS RESULTS IN A CO NFIRMATION OF DISALLOWANCE FROM CONVEYANCE EXPENDITURE OF RS. 21, 700/-. SIMILARLY, THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHON E EXPENSES IS RESTRICTED TO 10% O THE CLAIM RESULTING IN A CONFIR MATION OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 14,340/-. REGARDING THE ADVERTI SEMENT AND GENERAL EXPENDITURE, IT IS SEEN THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF EXPENSES HAVE DECLINE SINCE LAST YEAR AND SO AD HOC DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 10,449/- IS NOT SUSTAINED UNDER THE HEAD ADVERTISEMENT AND G ENERAL EXPENSES. 5.6 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 5.7 WE HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION ALL THE ASPECTS WITH REGARD TO CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AS RE FERRED IN THE ABOVE GROUND NO. 3 AND 4 OF THE REVENUE. THE LD. DR HAS NOT CONTROVERTED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). THUS WE CONCUR WITH THE FINDING OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THESE ISSUES WHICH ARE SUSTAINED. THEREFO RE, GROUND NO. 3 AND 4 OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ITA NO. 303/JP/2013 DCIT , CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR VS. SHRI ASHOK KUMAR AGAR WAL 10 6.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/09/20 15. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (T.R. MEENA) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 24 /09/ 2015 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- THE DCIT, CIRCLE- 2, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SHRI ASHOK KMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY ) @ CIT(A) 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO.303/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR