Income-tax Officer, V. Late Shri Vasantrao S. Pingale, through L/h. Pramod V Pingale & Rajendra V. Pingale, Dhule

ITA 340/PUN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1617 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-03-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT DUA
• Keywords: Business income; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 148

Judgement Text

- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH SMC, PUNE , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM . / ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ' ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 LATE SHRI VASANTRAO S. PINGALE THROUGH L/H 1. SHRI PRAMOD VASANT PINGALE BUNGLOW NO.7, VEDVYAS NAGAR, NEAR AGRAWAL NAGAR, MALEGAON ROAD, DHULE 2. SHRI RAJENDRA VASANT PINGALE C/O HOTEL MODRAJ, OPP. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFFICE, DHULE . / APPELLANT PAN: ANLPP0941M VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), DHULE . RESPONDENT . / ITA NO.340/PN/2015 ' ' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), DHULE . / APPELLANT VS. LATE SHRI VASANTRAO S. PINGALE THROUGH L/H 1. SHRI PRAMOD VASANT PINGALE BUNGLOW NO.7, VEDVYAS NAGAR, NEAR AGRAWAL NAGAR, MALEGAON ROAD, DHULE 2. SHRI RAJENDRA VASANT PINGALE C/O HOTEL MODRAJ, OPP. MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OFFICE, DHULE . RESPONDENT PAN: ANLPP0941M ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 2 ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI AMIT DUA DATE OF HEARING : 27.06.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 30.06.2016 / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVE NUE ARE AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A)-I, NASHIK, BOTH DATED 29. 01.2015 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND 2006-07 AGAINST RESPEC TIVE ORDERS PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. BOTH THE APPEALS RELATING TO SAME ASSESSEE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FO R THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. HOWEVER, REFERENCE IS BEING MADE TO T HE FACTS IN ITA NO.332/PN/2015 TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.332/PN/2015 HAS RAISED TH E FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. IN VIEW OF THE FACTS ON RECORD, THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE VALIDITY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 AND THE CONSEQUENT REASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3). THEREFORE, IT IS PRAYED TO HOLD THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 WAS NOT LEGAL AND VALID & THE CONSEQUENT ASSESSMENT COMPLETED U/S 147 R.W.S. 143(3) WAS ALSO NOT LEGAL AND VALID. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE DE DEP OSITS AGGREGATING TO RS.34,65,797/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF LATE MR. VASANTRAO SONAR AS INCOME OF THE DECEASED. THEREFORE IT IS PRAYED T O DELETE THE ADDITION CONFIRMED OF RS.34,65,797/-. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN RETAINING THE ADDITI ON MADE, FOR CASH DEPOSITS OF RS.7,00,000/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNTS OF L ATE MR. VASANTRAO PINGALE, TO THE INCOME OF THE DECEASED, W ITHOUT GIVING ANY CREDIT FOR THE CASH WITHDRAWALS MADE ON EARLIER OCCASIONS AND ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 3 THE SALE PROCEEDS OF PLOTS REALIZED IN CASH. THEREF ORE, IT IS PRAYED TO CANCEL THE ADDITION RETAINED FOR CASH DEPOSITS OF R S. 7,00,000/-. 4. THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING TH E CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH THE HEIRS OF LATE MR. VASANTRAO PINGALE WERE CAUGHT AFTER THE DEATH OF MR. VASANTRAO PINGALE VIS-A-VIS THE RECORD AVAILABLE AT THEIR DISPOSAL AND THEREFORE ERRED IN TREATING THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS BY CHEQUES IN HIS BANK ACCOUNTS AS HIS INC OME. HE OUGHT TO HAVE APPRECIATED THAT THE DEPOSITS MADE BY CHEQU ES, AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE SIMILAR SUCH RECORD FOR EARLIER YE ARS, WERE OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS OF PLOTS SOLD DURING THE YEAR. TH EREFORE, HE SHOULD HAVE RESTRICTED ADDITION MADE FOR SUCH DEPOS ITS TO THE PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED THEREIN. HENCE, IT IS PRAYED TO RE STRICT THE ADDITION MADE FOR DEPOSITS BY CHEQUES TO THE INCOME ELEMENT EMBEDDED IN SUCH DEPOSITS. 4. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE VALIDITY OF NOTICE ISSUED U/S.148 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO FURTHER AGGRIEVED BY WAY OF GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 AGAINST THE ADDITION O F RS.34,65,797/- ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND RS.7 LA KHS ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. 5. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE, ARE THAT AN ENQU IRY REPORT WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM ITO (INVESTIGATION), NASHIK VI DE LETTER DATED 21-03- 2013. DURING THE COURSE OF ENQUIRY PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE TAX EVASION, STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE WAS RECORDED AND IN THE STATEMENT HE HAD STATED THAT HE HAD DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.34,68, 797/- IN HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTUR AL LAND IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PROD UCE ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF THE CLAIM OF SALE OF AGRICUL TURAL LAND AND HENCE THE ENQUIRY REPORT WAS SENT TO ITO, WARD-3(2), DHULE AS THE JURISDICTION OF THE ASSESSEE PERTAINED TO THIS WARD. THE AO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS A NON-FILER OF RETURN FOR A LONG TIME AND THE INSPECT OR WAS DEPUTED TO MAKE VERIFICATION WHO IN TURN REPORTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HOLDING SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT IN HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE BESID E VARIOUS CASH DEPOSITS WERE ALSO GOT VERIFIED AND GOT REPORTED TH ROUGH THE WARD INSPECTOR. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED AN Y RETURN OF INCOME AND ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 4 IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE SOURCE OF THE DEPOSITS, THE AO HAD REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE ABOVE DEPOSITS OF RS.34,68,797/- HAD ESCAP ED ASSESSMENT AND CONSEQUENTLY REASONS WERE RECORDED U/S.147 OF THE A CT AND NOTICE U/S.148 WAS ISSUED ON 25-03-2012. THE ASSESSEE FILED THE R ETURN ON 25-04-2014 WITH A COMPUTATION SHEET AND ONE ENCLOSURE. IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE DECLARED BUSINESS INCOME OF RS.1,14,00 0/- AND ALSO INCLUDED THE LIST OF 6 PERSONS WITH SURVEY NO., PLOT NO. ARE A OF PLOT, DATE OF SALE OF PLOT, THE VALUE OF EACH PLOT AND DECLARED RECEIPTS OF RS.4,26,000/-, CLAIMED EXPENDITURE OF RS.3,12,000/- AND DECLARED NET PROFI T OF RS.1,14,000/- WHICH WAS EXEMPTED FROM TAX AS THE ASSESSEE WAS SENIOR CI TIZEN. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT OF RS.34 ,68,797/- IN HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK SAVINGS ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE EXP LAINED THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND AND THE DETAILS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND SOLD WERE CALLED, WHICH THE ASSES SEE DID NOT REPLY TO. THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE FOR THE ABO VE AND IN THE ABSENCE OF THE SAME A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE A SSESSEE AS TO WHY THE SAME SHOULD NOT BE ADDED AS HIS INCOME. THE ASSESS EE REQUESTED FOR TIME SINCE HIS CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WAS OUT OF STATION B UT THE AO HELD THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED TO FILE ANY EXPLANATIO N WHATSOEVER OR ANY DOCUMENTARY PROOF WITH REGARD TO SOURCE OF CASH DEP OSIT OF RS.34,68,797/-, THE SAME IS TO BE ADDED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. DURING THE COURSE OF THE APPEALLATE PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE DIED ON 31-08-2014. THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE ASSESSEE FUR NISHED HIS DEATH CERTIFICATE AND ALSO POINTED OUT THAT BEFORE HIS DE ATH HE WAS SUFFERING FROM MULTIPLE SERIOUS AILMENTS AND WAS BED-RIDDEN FOR A LONG TIME. BOTH HIS SONS SHRI PRAMOD PINGALE AND SHRI RAJESH PINGALE WERE ST AYING AWAY FROM THEIR FATHER AND DID NOT HAVE KNOWLEDGE ABOUT HIS BUSINES S TRANSACTIONS. FROM THE AVAILABLE RECORDS, I.E. COPY OF THE BANK STATEM ENT IT WAS EXPLAINED BY ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 5 THEM THAT THERE WAS NO SUCH CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.34,6 8,797/- IN THE SAVINGS BANK WITH HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK. THE AMOUNTS WERE DEPOSITED IN CHEQUE, EXCEPT RS.4,60,000/- ON 04-10-2007 BY CASH AND RS.2 ,40,000/- ON 09-10- 2007 BY CASH WHICH AGGREGATED TO RS.7 LAKHS. FURTH ER, THEY REFERRED TO THE REPORT OF THE AO DATED 20-05-2014 IN WHICH THE SAID FACT WAS CONCEDED BY HIM. THEY ALLEGE THAT THE NOTICE ISSUED ON THIS BA SIS WAS ON AN ERRONEOUS PRESUMPTION AND WAS ISSUED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF M IND, MECHANICALLY ON RECEIPT OF INFORMATION FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING. SUCH A NOTICE BEING ISSUED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND WAS NULL AND VOI D AND HENCE THERE WAS NO MERIT IN THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IT WAS F URTHER EXPLAINED BY THE LEGAL HEIRS THAT IN THE SAID SAVINGS ACCOUNT DURING THE YEAR THERE WAS A DEPOSIT IN CASH OF RS. 7 LAKHS AND BY CHEQUE RS.15, 54,020/-. THE CASH DEPOSIT WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE OUT OF THE CA SH WITHDRAWALS MADE PRIOR TO THE DEPOSIT. 7. THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO OF RECORD ING REASONS FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S.148 OF THE ACT. WITH REGARD TO THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE, VIS--VIS CREDITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT, I. E. BOTH CASH AS WELL AS CHEQUES CIT(A) HAS JUST UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE, FILE DOCUMENTARY PROOF IN SUPPORT OF THE CREDITS BOTH CASH AND CHEQUES IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT. THE CIT(A) FURTHER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO GIVE ANY EXPLANATION FOR THE CREDITS AMOUNTING TO RS.25,45,797/-, I.E. RS.15,54,020/- IN HASTI COOPER ATIVE BANK, DHULE, RS.4,48,000/- IN DHULE DISTRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK AND RS.5,43,777/- IN HDFC BANK. IN THIS REGARD THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE AO. FURTHER, THE CIT(A) HELD THE ADDITION OF RS.54,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PENSION RECEIPTS. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE AF ORESAID ORDER OF THE CIT(A). ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 6 8. DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF ASSESSEE AND BECAUSE OF SMALLNESS OF ISSUE, THE APPEAL IS BEING DECIDED AFTER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. 9. ON THE PERUSAL OF RECORD, THE FIRST ISSUE WHICH NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IS WHETHER THE AO HAD CORRECTLY EXERCISED THE JURIS DICTION U/S.147 R.W.S. 148 OF THE ACT. A PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REFL ECTS THAT THERE WAS AN ENQUIRY BECAUSE OF TAX EVASION PETITION AGAINST THE ASSESSEE AND CERTAIN ENQUIRIES WERE MADE BY ITO (INVESTIGATION). AS PER THE ENQUIRY, THE ALLEGATION WAS THAT A SUM OF RS.34,68,797/- WAS DEP OSITED IN HASTI COOPERATIVE SAVINGS BANK, DHULE. THE ASSESSEE CLAI MED THAT THE DEPOSITS WERE OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF AGRICULTURAL LAND DURI NG THE YEAR. THE SAID REPORT WAS FORWARDED TO THE AO, INCHARGE OF THE ASS ESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAD NEVER FURNISHED ANY RETURN OF INCOME BUT THE AO OBTAINED REPORT THROUGH HIS WARD INSPECTOR WHO IN TURN REPORTED THA T THE JURISDICTION OF THE CASE WAS WITH THE AO AND ALSO THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING SAVINGS ACCOUNT IN HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE. THE AO W AS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING TAXABLE INCOME FOR THE YE AR UNDER CONSIDERATION AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED ANY RE TURN OF INCOME, SO HE HAD REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE ABOVE DEPOSITS OF RS .34,68,797/- HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR A.Y. 2008-09 AND REASONS WER E RECORDED IN THIS REGARD U/S.147 OF THE ACT. 10. THE COURTS HAVE TIME AND AGAIN LAID DOWN PRINCI PLE THAT THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT SHOULD HAVE A LIVE LINK TO THE INFORMATION WITH THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE INFORMAT ION, THE DEPOSITS TOTALING TO RS.34,68,797/- WERE IN THE SAVINGS BANK OF HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE AND IN CASH. THE ADDITION WAS ALSO MADE IN T HE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSITS IN THE SAVINGS BANK WITH HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE U/S.68 OF THE ACT. THE PER USAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 7 ORDER AT PAGE 8 CLEARLY REFLECTS THE SAME. HOWEVER , BEFORE THE CIT(A) WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED WHICH ARE INCORPORAT ED BY THE CIT(A) UNDER PARA 5 AND 6 OF THE APPEAL ORDER AT PAGES 3 TO 5. IN THE SAID EXPLANATION, THE LEGAL HEIRS OF THE ASSESSEE HAVE EXPLAINED THAT THE TOTAL CASH DEPOSITED IN DHULE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT IS ABOUT RS.7 LAKHS A ND NOT RS.34,68,797/-. THE ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDING S CARRIED OUT, WAS SUFFERING FROM SERIOUS AILMENTS AND HAS EXPIRED ON 31-08-2014. THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS WAS COMPLETED ON 30-12-2013. IN THIS REGARD, BOTH THE SONS WERE NOT RESIDING WITH THEIR FATHER AND THE AS SESSEE COULD NOT PUT UP HIS CASE PROPERLY BEFORE THE AO UNDER THE SAID CIRC UMSTANCES. THE SONS WERE ALSO UNAWARE OF THE BUSINESS DEALINGS OF THE A SSESSEE AND THE MATTER BEING OLD, I.E. RELATING TO FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08, THEY COULD ONLY EXPLAIN THE FIGURES FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT AND IT HAS BEEN CLEAR LY POINTED OUT THAT IT WAS WRONG TO ALLEGE THAT THERE WAS CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.3 4,68,797/- IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THE AO HAS MADE ADDITION U/S.68 OF THE AC T ON ACCOUNT OF THE AFORESAID CASH DEPOSIT IN SAVINGS ACCOUNT OF HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE. THE CIT(A) HAS MODIFIED THE ORDER OF THE AO BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO EXPLAIN THE CREDIT ENTRIES O F RS.25,45,797/- IN HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE, RS.15,54,020/- IN DHULE DI STRICT CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK AND RS.4,48,000/- IN HDFC BANK, DH ULE. IN THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT MADE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS.34,65,797/- IN THE HASTI COOPERA TIVE BANK, DHULE DURING THE YEAR, THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO FOR REOPEN ING THE ASSESSMENT LACK JURISDICTION AND CONSEQUENTLY THE NOTICE ISSUE D U/S.148 OF THE ACT IS BAD IN LAW. IN VIEW THEREOF, I ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE RAISED BY GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 ON THE JURISDICTIONAL ISSUE A ND THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE IS SE T ASIDE. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE ON MERITS AS THE R EASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAS BEEN HELD TO BE INVALID AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION. ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 8 11. THE REVENUE IN ITA NO.340/PN/2015 RELATING TO A .Y.2006-07 HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONSIDERING RS.34,00,000/- DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNTS AS AN PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF PLOTS IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. 2. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONSIDERING RS.34,00,000/- AS AN PROCEEDS FROM SALE OF PLOTS. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE ORDER OF AO IN RESPECT OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS.34,00,000/-. 12. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DELETION OF ADD ITION OF RS.34 LAKHS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF PLOTS. THE SAID ASSESSMENT WAS ALSO REOPENED U/S.1 47 OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF TAX EVASION PETITION WHEREIN THERE WAS A LLEGATION OF DEPOSIT OF RS.34,50,000/- IN HASTI COOPERATIVE BANK, DHULE. 13. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACT S OF THE CASE IN A.Y. 2008-09. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN APPEAL AG AINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A). THE APPEAL IS ONLY FILED BY THE REVENUE AG AINST THE ESTIMATION OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE @ 20% ON DEPOSI T OF RS.34 LAKHS RESULTING IN AN ADDITION OF RS.6,80,000/-. 14. IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE DEMISE OF THE ASS ESSEE HAS ALREADY TAKEN PLACE ON 31-08-2014 AND TAKING A LENIENT VIEW THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON MERITS TO BE UPHELD WHERE HE HAS ACCEPTED THE DE POSITS OF RS.34 LALKHS AS THE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON SA LE OF PLOTS AND NET PROFIT WAS ESTIMATED @20% ON THE SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 34 LAKHS RESULTING IN ADDITION OF RS.6,80,000/-. IN VIEW THEREOF, GROUND S OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ITA NO.332/PN/2015 ITA NO.340/PN/2015 9 15. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2016. SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; DATED : 30 TH JUNE, 2016 . SATISH $ %'( )( / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : THE APPELLANT; THE RESPONDENT; ! () THE CIT(A)-I, NASHIK; ! THE CIT- I, NASHIK $ ''(, (, , , / DR SMC, ITAT, PUNE; / / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER $ ' // TRUE COPY // 12 ' ( / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ( , ITAT, PUNE