The ACIT, Circle-8, Ahmedabad V. Transformers & Rectifiers (India) Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 3090/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 60317 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-05-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2012
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY MAJUMDAR
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI, A.K.GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2008-09 ACIT, CIRCLE-8, B-209, 2 ND FLOOR, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAVAN, PANJARA POLE, AMBAWADI, AHMEDABAD V/S . M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (INDIA) LTD., S.NO.344-350, OPP. PWD STORE, SARKHEJ BAVLA HIGHWAY, CHANGODAR, TALUKA SANAND, AHMEDABAD- 382210 PAN NO.AACCT8243P (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) /BY APPELLANT SHRI VINOD TANWANI, SR-DR /BY RESPONDENT SHRI SANJAY MAJUMDAR, AR /DATE OF HEARING 10-04-2012 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04-05-2012 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FIELD BY THE REVENUE A GAINST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XIV, AHMED ABAD DATED 13-09- 2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 RAISING THE FO LLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 1) THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-XI V, AHMEDABAD HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN RESTRICTING THE DI SALLOWANCE OF RS.1,02,02,669/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 14A OF THE ACT, TO THE EXTENT OF RS.81,19,544/- ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT CIR-8, ABD V. M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (I) LTD. PAGE 2 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PICKED UP FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED ON 27-12-2010 U/S. 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REF ERRED TO AS THE ACT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSES SMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPAN Y HAD EARNED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS.1,75,92,106/- CLAIMED AS EXEMPT INCOME U/S. 10(33) OF THE ACT. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE INCURRED INTE REST EXPENDITURE OF RS.4,86,11,489/- AND THE AVERAGE INVESTMENT STOOD A T RS.39,73,64,901/-. THEREFORE, FINDING THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY IN RECEIPT OF EXEMPT INCOME THE AO CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE MADE. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY BEFORE THE AO SUB MITTED AS UNDER:- THE COMPANY HAS CLAIMED AN AMOUNT OF RS1,75,92,106 AS EXEMPT INCOME EARNED BY WAY OF DIVIDEND FROM THE INVESTMEN T MADE IN MUTUAL FUNDS. THE SAID INVESTMENT HAS BEEN MADE OUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE MONEY RECEIVED BY THE COMPANY FOR A TE MPORARY PERIOD. THUS THE COMPANY HAD COME OUT WITH ITS MAIDEN PUBLI C ISSUE ON 27DTH DECEMBER, 2007 AND HAS RECEIVED NET PROCEEDS OF RS. 139.27 CR WHICH HAS BEEN PARKED IN THE MUTUAL FUND FOR A TEMPORARY PERIOD AS THE COMPANYS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE PROGRAM FOR THE NEW P ROJECT WAS YET TO TAKE PLACE AND ACCORDINGLY THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN PARK ED TEMPORARILY IN MUTUAL FUNDS. THUS THERE IS A DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN THE PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE WITH THE INVESTMENT IN THE MUTUAL FUND S AND THEREFORE THE AMOUNT EARNED BY THE COMPANY OUT OF THE INVESTMENT MADE IN THE MUTUAL FUND SHOULD BE TREATED AS EXEMPT INCOME WITH OUT APPLYING RULE 8D. A STATEMENT SHOWING DETAILED WORKING OF AMOUNT INVESTED IN THE MUTUAL FUND OUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE IS ENCLOSED AS ENCLOSURE-1 (PAGE NO.1), WHICH JUSTIFIES THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN INVESTED BY THE COMPANY OUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE AND AS THE COMPANY HAS NOT MADE INVESTMENT OUT OF ANY BORR OWED FUND FOR WHICH INTEREST HAS BEEN CHARGED TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE THE QUESTION OF APPLYING RULE 8D DOES NOT ARISE. MORE SO, AS PER RULE 8D IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DO ES NOT SATISFY ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE INVESTMENT MADE BY THE ASSES SEE THEN ONLY RULE 8D HAS TO BE APPLIED. IN OUR CASE NEXUS IS CLE ARLY PROVED BETWEEN THE INVESTMENT AND PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE AND THEREFORE WE ARE SURE THAT YOUR GOOD OFFICE SHALL SATISFY ABOUT THE UTILIZATION OF PUBLIC ISSUE FUND FOR INVESTMENT IN MUTUAL FUNDS FOR A TEM PORARY PERIOD FROM ENCLOSURE-1 ABOVE AND THEREFORE THE QUESTION OF APP LYING RULE 8D DOES NOT ARISE. ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT CIR-8, ABD V. M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (I) LTD. PAGE 3 HOWEVER, A STATEMENT SHOWING WORKING AS PER RULE 8D AS ASKED BY YOU IS ENCLOSED AS ENCOSUE-2 (AGE NO.2) WITHOUT PREJUDICING THE FACT THAT THE RULE 8D IS NOT APPLICABLE INN OUR CASE. THE SAM E IS FURNISHED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS AS ASKED BY YOUR GOOD OFFICE. WE ARE ENCLOSING HEREWITH AN ILLUSTRATIVE APPLICATI ON FORM OF MUTUAL FUND AS ENCLOSURE-3 (PAGE NO.3 TO 44) IN WHICH THE COMPANY HAS INVESTED THE MONEY FOR YOUR PERUSAL HOWEVER, THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT F OUND ACCEPTABLE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE AO APPLYING THE RULE 8D O F THE INCOME TAX RULE, 1962 MADE A DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,02,02.669/- U/S. 1 4A OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF ASSESSIN G OFFICER FILED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) CHALLENGING THE AFOREMENTIONED DI SALLOWANCE OF RS.1,02,02.669/- U/S. 14A OF THE ACT. 3. BEFORE LD. CIT(A) LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT NO CLARIFICATION WAS SOUGHT BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER AND HE APPLIED RULE 8D OF THE I.T. RULE, 1962 ON AD HOC BA SIS HE SUBMITTED THAT RULE 8D CAN BE APPLIED ONLY AFTER THE AO HAS SATISFIED H IMSELF CONVINCINGLY THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS IN FACT INCURRED EXPENDITURE TO EARN T HE EXEMPT INCOME AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT APPLICATION OF RULE 8D IS NOT AUTOMATIC BUT IT DEPE NDS UPON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PARTICULAR CASE AND IF THERE I S EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE ON THE EX EMPT INCOME THE AO CANNOT APPLY RULE 8 D OF THE I.T. RULE, 1962 AND WO RKED OUT THE DISALLOWANCE. IN SUPPORT OF THIS CONTENTION, THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ AND BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. V. DCIT IN ITA NO. 626 & WP 758 OF 2010 DATED 12-08-2010. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER RELIED IN THE CASE OF CIT V. HERO CYCLES 323 ITR 158 (P & H) PASSED BY HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI IN THE CASE OF MINDA INVESTMENT LTD. V. DCIT IN ITA NO.4046/DEL/2009 . THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY ITAT DELHI IN THE CASE OF DCIT V. MAHARASHTRA SEAMLESS LTD. IN ITA ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT CIR-8, ABD V. M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (I) LTD. PAGE 4 NO.4063/DEL/2006 . THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED UPON IN THE CASE OF JINDAL PHOTO LTD. V. DCIT PASSED BY THE ITAT DELHI IN ITA NO. 4539/DEL/2010. LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE RELE VANT CONTENTS OF THE ORDER WHICH REPRODUCED HEREIN BELOW FOR THE SAKE OF CLARI TY:- 2.3 DECISION: I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND T HE SUBMISSIONS GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS NOT INVESTED ANY INTEREST BEARING FUNDS IN THE MUTUAL F UNDS WHICH HAS EARNED EXEMPT INCOME. IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT THAT THE COMPANY HAD COME OUT WITH ITS MAIDEN PUBLIC ISSUE O N 27/12/2007 AND HAS RECEIVED NET PROCEEDS OF RS.139.27 CRORES WHICH HAS BEEN INVESTED IN MUTUAL FUNDS. NO OTHER INTEREST BEARING FUNDS HAVE BEEN INVESTED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE MUTUAL FUND. THE A PPELLANT HAS ALSO SUBMITTED A STATEMENT SHOWING DETAILED WORKING OF A MOUNT INVESTED IN MUTUAL FUND OUT OF THE PROCEEDS OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE . AFTER EXAMINATION OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPEND D ETAILS OF INVESTMENT AND FLOW OF FUNDS, IT IS APPARE4NT THAT THE PROCEED S OF THE PUBLIC ISSUE HAVE BEEN INVESTED IN THE MUTUAL FUNDS BY THE APPEL LANT. THE A.O HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE PLEA OF THE APPELLANT ON THE GROUN D THAT SUCH INVESTMENT REDUCE THE AVAILABILITY OF LIQUID FUNDS WITH THE COMPANY WHICH MANY TIMES CREATE THE NEED FOR THE BORROWED F UNDS. HE HAS FURTHER HELD THAT HAD THE FUNDS NOT BEEN DIVERTED F OR SUCH INVESTMENT THE NEED FOR INTEREST BEARING FUNDS WOULD HAVE BEEN LESSER. THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE AO ARE NOT JUSTIFIED AS IN TH IS CASE, THERE IS A DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN THE NON INTEREST BEARING FUNDS AND TH E INVESTMENT MADE BY THE APPELLANT. NO DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INT EREST U/S. 14A R.W. RULE 8D CAN BE DONE. THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT WITH IN TRODUCTION OF RULE 8D, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NEED NOT ESTABLISH THE NE XUS WITH THE INTEREST BEARING FUND AND THE INVESTMENT MADE TO EARN EXEMPT INCOME. HOWEVER, IN THIS CASE, THE APPELLANT HAS CLEARLY ES TABLISHED THAT NO INTEREST BEARING FUND HAS BEEN INVESTED AND, THEREF ORE, NO DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST U/S. 14A CAN BE MADE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS ALSO RIGHTLY RELIED ON THE DECISIONS OF CIT VS. HERE CYCLES [323 ITR 158, P & H] AND MINDA INVE STMENT LTD. VS. DCIT [ITA NO.4046/DEL/2009], IUTAT, NEW DELHI ORDER DATED 13/10/2010. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS.81,19,5 44/- IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THE A.O HAS ALSO MADE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF AD MINISTRATIVE EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.19,86,825/- BY APPLYING RU LE 8D. THIS EXPENDITURE IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED ON VA RIOUS ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT CIR-8, ABD V. M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (I) LTD. PAGE 5 ADMINISTRATIVE HEADS FOR MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF THE INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE APPELLANT IN MUTUAL FUNDS. THOUGH THE FUNDS FOR INVESTMENT WERE SEPARATE THAT THE ADMINISTRATIV E EXPENDITURE IS BOUND TO BE INTERMIXED AND THE APPELLANT MUST HAVE USED HIS EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE SET UP LIKE EMPLOYEES, OFFICE, DIR ECTORS ETC., FOR MONITORING AND MANAGING THE INVESTMENT. THEREFORE, THE PLEA OF THE APPELLANT THAT IT HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS.19, 86,825/- IS UPHELD. 4. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY ARGUE D THAT THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND RELIED UPON THE ORDER P ASSED BY ASSESSING OFFICER MAY KINDLY BE CONFIRMED. 5. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE O F THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMIT TED THAT ASSESSMENT ORDER PATENTLY ERRONEOUS IN THE LIGHT OF VARIOUS JU DICIAL DECISIONS CITED BY HIM. LD. AR RELIED UPON THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) I N THE CASE OF CIT V. HERO CYCLES 323 ITR 158 AND ALSO THE ORDER PASSED BY ITAT DELH I BENCH IN THE CASE OF MINDA INVESTMENT LTD. V. DCIT IN ITA NO.4046/DEL/2009 . 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS EARNED EXEMPT INCOME AND SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT NO IN TEREST BEARING FUND IS INVESTED INTO MUTUAL FUND WHICH HAS EARNED EXEMPT I NCOME. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY CLEARLY EST ABLISHED THAT NO INTEREST BEARING FUNDS HAS BEEN INVESTED AND THEREFORE NO DI SALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST U/S14A OF THE ACT CAN BE MADE. WE FIND THA T ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAD EARNED DIVID END INCOME OF RS.1,75,92,106/- CLAIMED AS EXEMPT INCOME U/S. 10(3 3) OF THE ACT. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE INCURRED INTEREST EXPEND ITURE OF RS.4,86,11,489/- AND THE AVERAGE INVESTMENT STOOD AT RS.39,73,64,901 . IT IS SETTLED POSITION OF LAW THAT THE RULE 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 WOULD APPLY FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 RULE 8D IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT CIR-8, ABD V. M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (I) LTD. PAGE 6 [ METHOD FOR DETERMINING AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE IN REL ATION TO INCOME NOT INCLUDIBLE IN TOTAL INCOME. 8D (1) WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HAVING REGARD TO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE OF A PREVIOUS YEAR, IS NOT SATISFIED W ITH (A) THE CORRECTNESS OF THE CLAIM OF EXPENDITURE MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE; OR (B) THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE THAT NO EXPENDIT URE HAS BEEN INCURRED, IN RELATION TO INCOME WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE ACT FOR SUCH PREVIOUS YEAR, HE SHA LL DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE IN RELATION TO SUCH INCOME IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-RULE (2). (2) THE EXPENDITURE IN RELATION TO INCOME WHIC H DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME SHALL BE THE AGGREGATE OF FOLLOWIN G AMOUNTS, NAMELY:- (I) THE AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE DIRECTLY RELATING TO INCOME WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF TOTAL INCOME; (II) IN A CASE WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED EXPE NDITURE BY WAY OF INTEREST DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR WHICH IS NOT DIRE CTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR INCOME OR RECEIPT, AN AMOUNT COMP UTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING FORMULA, NAMELY:- A X B C WHERE A = AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE BY WAY OF INTEREST OTHER THAN THE AMOUNT OF INTEREST INCLUDED IN CLAUSE (I) INCURRED DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR; B = THE AVERAGE OF VALUE OF INVESTMENT, INCOME FROM WHICH DOES NOT OR SHALL NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME, AS APPEARING IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF T HE ASSESSEE, ON THE FIRST DAY AND THE LAST DAY OF THE P REVIOUS YEAR; C = THE AVERAGE OF TOTAL ASSETS AS APPEAR ING IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE, ON THE FIRST DAY AND THE LAST DAY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR; (III) AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO ONE-HALF PER CENT OF THE A VERAGE OF THE VALUE OF INVESTMENT, INCOME FROM WHICH DOES NOT OR SHALL NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME, AS APPEARING IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE, ON THE FIRST DAY AND THE LAST DAY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. (3) FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS RULE, THE TOTAL ASSETS SHALL MEAN, TOTAL ASSETS AS APPEARING IN THE BALANCE SHEET EXCLUDING THE INCREASE ON ACCOUNT OF REVALUATION OF ASSETS BUT INCLUDING THE DECREASE ON ACCOUNT OF REVALUATION OF ASSETS.] ITA NO.3090/AHD/2011 A.Y. 2008-09 ACIT CIR-8, ABD V. M/S TRANSFORMERS & RECTIFIERS (I) LTD. PAGE 7 THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS THAT NO INTERE ST BEARING FUND WAS APPLIED IN EARNING OF EXEMPT. IT IS EVIDENT FROM A BARE READING OF RULE 8 D OF THE INCOME TAX RULES THAT AO HAS TO APPLY THE FORMU LA PRESCRIBED UNDER THE SAID RULE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF EXPENDI TURE INCURRED ON EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME. IN VIEW OF THIS MATTER IT WOULD SERV E THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE IF THIS ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSIN G OFFICER FOR FRESH DECISION. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND MATTER IS REMITTED TO THE FILE TO ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THIS ISS UE AFRESH ACCORDINGLY. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO ESTABLISH BEFORE THE ASSESS ING OFFICER THAT THERE IS NO NEXUS BETWEEN THE EXEMPT INCOME AND THE INTEREST EX PENDITURE INCURRED AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO APPLY RULE 8D ACCORDINGLY. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE AT CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (A.K.GARODIA) (KUL BHARAT) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, *DKP - 04/05/2012 ()* + ,- ,- ,- ,- ../ ../ ../ ../ 0/ 0/ 0/ 0/ / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. *.3 , ,4 / CONCERNED CIT 4. , ,4- / CIT (A) 5. /56 ...3, , .3 , ()* / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 69: ;< / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ ,- , /TRUE COPY/ =/ ( > , .3 , ()* +