SATYA NARAYAN SHARMA, Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 38/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9714 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 12-01-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRITHVIRJ MEENAADDL CIT DHK
• Keywords: Rejection of books of accounts; Depreciation

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS [KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YAD AV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 38/JP/15 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI SATYA NARAYAN SHARMA, C-52 PREM COLONY, NEHRU NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AGMPS4714 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 39/JP/15 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 SHRI SATYA NARAYAN SHARMA, C-52 PREM COLONY, NEHRU NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AGMPS4714 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI PRITHVIRJ MEENA(ADDL. CIT ) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 23.02.2017 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/02/2017. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-II, JAIPUR DATED 15.12.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR S 2010-11 & 2011-12. 2. THE FIRST GROUND IN BOTH THE APPEALS RELATES TO REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND INVOKING OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145( 3) OF THE ACT. DURING THE ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 2 COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT HE DID NOT WISH TO PRESS THIS GROUND IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL. IN THE RESULT, THE GROUND NO.1 IN RESPECT OF BOTH THESE YEARS UNDER APPEAL A RE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 3. SIMILARLY, IN RESPECT OF GROUND NO. 3 IN BOTH TH E APPEALS, THE APPELLANT HAS CHALLENGED THE TREATMENT OF VEHICLE HIRING INCO ME AS AN INDEPENDENT STREAM OF REVENUE SEPARATE FROM THE BUSINESS STREAM OF REVENUES. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT HE DID NOT WISH TO PRESS THIS GROUND IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL. IN THE RESULT, THE GROUND NO.3 IN RESPECT OF BOTH THESE YEARS UNDER APPEAL ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 4. NOW COMING TO THE MAIN GROUND OF APPEAL IN AY 20 10-11 (AND A SIMILAR GROUND IN AY 2011-12) WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKE N THE FOLLOWING GROUND OF APPEAL: (2.) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE T HE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN APPLYING PROFIT RATE OF 7% ON THE TOTAL RECEIPT OF RS. 11,38,03,135/- AND THUS SUSTAINING THE TRADING ADD ITION OF RS. 34,44,615/- OUT OF THE TOTAL TRADING ADDITION OF RS . 87,38,586/- MADE BY APPLYING THE PROFIT RATE OF 11.5% BY LD. AO WITHOU T APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE TOTAL RECEIPTS INCLUDE SALES AS WELL AS C ONTRACT RECEIPTS AND NO DOUBTS HAVE BEEN RAISED TOWARDS THE TRADING RESULTS DECLARED ON SALES, AND FURTHER WITHOUT BRING ON RECORD ANY MATERIAL T O SUPPORT THE APPLICATION OF SUCH HIGH RATE OF PROFIT, THUS ADDIT ION OF RS. 34,44,615/- MADE DESERVES TO BE DELETED. (2.1) THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FURTHER ERRED IN NOT CONSI DERING THE PROFIT RATE AS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND HAS APPLIED A PROFIT R ATE OF 7% WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY SPECIFIC DEFECT IN THE TRADING RES ULTS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THUS THE PROFIT RATE DECLARED BY THE A SSESSEE DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED AS SUCH. ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 3 4.1 BRIEFLY THE FACTS PERTAINING TO THIS GROUND OF APPEAL ARE THAT THE AO AFTER INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) OF THE AC T ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT RATE AT 11.5% FOR A.Y. 2010-11 AND 7% FOR A.Y. 201 1-12 RESPECTIVELY. 4.2 BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTE R IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO UPHELD THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS AND APPLIED THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 7% IN RESPECT OF BOTH THE YEARS UNDE R APPEAL, FOLLOWING THE PAST HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE IN A.Y. 2008-09 AND 2009-10 . 4.3 IN THIS REGARD, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT BOTH THE AO AS WELL AS LD. CIT(A) HAVE IGNORED THE FACT THAT IN PRECEDING ASSESSMENT YEARS, ASSESSEE HAD JOB RECEIPTS ONLY AND NO SALES WERE MADE IN THOSE ASSE SSMENT YEARS. HOWEVER, IN THE ASSESSMENT YEARS UNDER APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAS MA DE SALES IN ADDITION TO THE JOB WORK AND THE DEFECTS POINTED OUT FOR INVOKING T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) ARE IN RESPECT TO THE JOB WORK ONLY AND NO D OUBTS WERE CREATED IN RESPECT TO SALES MADE. THE YEARWISE BREAK-UP OF T HE TOTAL RECEIPTS FOR A.Y. 2008-09 TO A.Y. 2011-12 IS TABULATED AS UNDER: ASST. YEAR CONTRACT RECEIPTS (RS) JOB CHARGES RECEIPTS (RS) SALES (RS) 2008-09 2,52,09,524/- 2,09,12,275/- - 2009-10 2,93,16,191/- 5,16,41,6887/- - 2010-11 2,89,95,747/- - 8,48,07,388 2011-12 44,38,952/- - 8,93,49,479 ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 4 FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE ABOVE TABLE, YOUR HONOURS WOULD APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT IN THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAS NO JOB CHARGES AND THE CONTRACT RECEIPTS ALSO REDUCED SUBSTANTIALLY AS AGAINST THE SAME SALES HAVE TAKEN PLACE. SINCE IN THE EARLIER YEARS WHICH HAD MADE BASIS FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE NET PROFIT OF 7% BY LD. CIT(A), THERE WERE NO SALES THU S THE SAME COULD NOT BE APPLIED ON THE SALES COMPONENT FOR WHICH AS IS EVID ENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER NO DISCREPANCY WHATSOEVER WAS FOUND OR BROUG HT ON RECORD. MOREOVER, THE LD. AO AND LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO BRING ON RE CORD ANY REASON AS TO WHY THE NET PROFIT ON THE TRADING ACTIVITY IS NOT ACCEPTABL E AND MERELY FOR THE DISCREPANCIES IN THE CONTRACT/JOB WORK ACTIVITY , E STIMATION IN TRADING ACTIVITY WAS MADE. THE GP DECLARED IN THE TRADING ACTIVITY IS TABULATED AS UNDER: ASST. YEAR SALES GROSS PROFIT GP (%) 2010-11 8,48,07,388 85,43,135.60 10.07% 2011-12 8,93,49,479 19,99,252.11 22.37% FROM THE CHART ABOVE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE G.P. D ECLARED IN RESPECT TO THE TRADING ACTIVITY HAS INCREASED AS COMPARED TO A.Y. 2010-11 WHICH IS THE FIRST YEAR OF THIS NEW ACTIVITY OF TRADING OF GOODS AND A S SUCH BEING PROGRESSIVE RESULTS DECLARED, THE SAME DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED MORE PARTICULARLY WHEN THE SALES AND PURCHASES ARE DULY BACKED BY THE RESPECTI VE BILLS AND VOUCHERS FOR WHICH NO DOUBTS WERE RAISED BY THE LD. AO. REGAR DING CONTRACT ACTIVITY, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR AN D EXECUTED WORKS OF INSTALLATION OF ELECTRIC WIRE/ CABLE FOR JVVNL AT C OMPETITIVE RATES/CHARGES. THE LABOUR RATES WERE INCREASED DUE TO SHIFTING OF MAJO R NUMBER OF LABOURERS TO ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 5 NREGA SCHEME OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. DUE TO HIGHER LABOUR RATES PAYABLE TO LABOURS IN NREGA, THE LOCAL WAGES OF LABOURERS WER E ALSO INCREASE OR RATHER DOUBLED THAN THE RATES ESTIMATED BY ASSESSEE AT THE TIME OF APPLYING FOR CONTRACT. THUS THE PROFIT IN THE CONTRACT ACTIVITY HAD REDUCED. THUS IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THE PROFIT RATE, IF APPLIED, THE SAME BE RESTRICTED TO THE CONTRACT RECEIPTS AND THE INCOME DECLARED ON ACCOUNT OF TRADING ACTIVITY DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED. 4.4 IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TOOK THE SIMI LAR CONTENTIONS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND IT WOULD BE RELEVANT TO REFER TO TH E FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE REJECTING THE SAID CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSE E FOR A.Y. 2010-11 WHICH ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: (3.3) I HAVE PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, ASSESSMENT OR DER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT IS ENG AGED IN ERECTION, TESTING AND COMMISSIONING OF MATERIAL/WORKS FOR ELE CTRIFICATION OF RURAL HOUSEHOLDS IN VILLAGES AND BLOCKS FOR JAIPUR VIDYU T VITRAN NIGAM LTD. THE APPELLANT HAS THREE REVENUE STREAMS IN THIS YEA R VIZ. SALES, CONTRACTS RECEIPTS AND VEHICLE HIRING CHARGES. (VEHICLE HIRIN G CHARGES WILL BE CONSIDERED IN GROUND NO.3). THE REVENUE STREAM PER TAINING TO SALES AND SUPPLY OF MATERIAL IS A NEW STREAM, STARTING FROM THIS YEAR. IT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE APPELLANT THAT ALL THE DEFECTS WHICH HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT BY THE AO IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS PERTAINING TO J OB WORK EXPENSES AND LABOUR CHARGES WHICH RELATE TO CONTRACT RECEIPTS A ND THE A.O. HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY DEFECTS IN SALES OR THE EXPENDITUR E/PURCHASES RELATING TO THESE SALES. THIS CONTENTIONS OF THE APPELLANT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE THE EXPENSES RELATING TO THE BUSINESS OF SUPPLY OF MATERIAL (RELATING TO SALES) AND CONTRACT RECEIPTS CANNOT BE BIFURCATED. THE EXPENSES RELATING TO JOB WORK EXPENSES AND LABOUR CHARGES WOULD PERTA IN TO BOTH THE REVENUE STREAMS. 3.4) THE AO HAS BASED THE ESTIMATE OF NET PROFIT @ 11.5% BEFORE DEPRECIATION AND INTEREST, ON THE BASIS OF THE ORDER OF ITAT, J AIPUR IN THE CASE OF CHOUDHURY & BROTHERS AND THE DECISION O F THE RAJAS THAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S JAIN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. IT HAS BEEN STATED BY THE APPELLANT THAT BOTH THESE CASES ARE OF CIVIL CONTRA CTORS ENGAGED IN CIVIL ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 6 CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS THE APPELLANT IS ENGAGED IN TH E BUSINESS OF ELECTRIFICATION VIZ. ERECTION, TESTING AND COMMISSI ON OF MATERIAL/WORKS FOR ELECTRIFICATION OF RURAL HOUSEHOLDS. THEREFORE TH E TWO CASES, CITED BY THE AO ARE NOT COMPARABLE. IN SUCH A SITUATION, THE PA ST HISTORY OF THE APPELLANT WOULD BE THE BEST INDICATOR. IN A.Y. 200 8-09 AND 2009-10 NET PROFIT RATE BEFORE DEPRECIATION AND INTEREST OF 7% OF THE CONTRACT RECEIPTS AND JOB WORK CHARGES HAD BEEN APPLIED BY T HE AO WHICH HAS BEEN SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(A)-II, JAIPUR IN A.Y. 20 09-10. ON THE BASIS OF THE PAST HISTORY , THE NET PROFIT RATE IS ESTIMATED AT 7% OF THE SALES AND CONTRACT RECEIPTS, BEFORE ALLOWING DEDUCTION FOR D EPRECIATION AND FINANCE CHARGES. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE BALANCE ADDITION. THIS GROUND IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 4.5 SIMILAR FINDINGS HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT (A) FOR A.Y. 2011-12. 4.6 THE LD. DR IS HEARD WHO HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4.7 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. DURING THE YEAR, THE APPELLANT HAS SHOW N REVENUE FROM SALES, CONTRACT RECEIPTS AND VEHICLE HIRING CHARGES AND TH ERE ARE CORRESPONDING EXPENSES IN TERMS OF PURCHASES, GOODS INWARD EXPENS ES, JOB WORK EXPENSES AND LABOUR CHARGES. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS INCU RRED OTHER EXPENSES IN NATURE OF RENT, SALARY, OTHER OFFICE AND ADMINISTRA TIVE OVERHEAD EXPENSES BESIDES INTEREST AND DEPRECIATION. DURING THE COUR SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO ENQUIRED ABOUT THE JOB WORK EXP ENSES AND LABOUR CHARGES AS DEBITED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THERE AFTER, A SHOW CAUSE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSES SEES SUBMISSION, THE AO HAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO JUSTIFY ANY OF THE DISCREPANCIES POINTED IN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSES SEE WAS NOT ACCEPTED AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE HELD NOT RELIABLE AS THE Y DO NOT PRESENT THE REAL PICTURE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 145(3) WERE INVOKED AND THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WERE FINALLY REJECTED. IT IS THEREFORE, SEEN THAT THE BASIS OF REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS RELATES TO THE JOB WORK EXPENSES AND THE LABOUR CHARGES CLAIMED BY THE ASSE SSEE IN RELATION TO THE ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 7 CONTRACT BUSINESS CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE. THE REFORE, ANY ESTIMATION OF PROFIT SHOULD HAVE A REASONABLE AND RATIONALE NEXUS WITH THE DEFECTS NOTICED BY THE AO WHILE REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. I N THE INSTANT CASE, THE BASIS OF REJECTION RELATES TO THE CONTRACT ACTIVITY CARRI ED OUT BY THE APPELLANT, THEREFORE, THE ESTIMATION OF PROFIT SHOULD RELATE T O THE CONTRACT ACTIVITY AND NOT IN RESPECT OF OTHER ACTIVITIES WHICH HAVE NOT BEEN DOUBTED. TO THIS EXTENT, WE AGREE WITH THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LD. AR. NOW IF WE LOOK AT THE PROFIT WHICH HAS BEEN ESTIMAT ED BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A), IT IS NOTED THAT THE A O HAS ESTIMATED THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 11.5% AS AGAINST NET PROFIT OF 3.94% OFFERE D BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. THE LD. CIT(A) THEREAFTER HAS RE DUCED THE NET PROFIT TO 7% FOLLOWING THE PAST HISTORY OF THE ASSESSEE. IT IS HERE THAT THE GENESIS OF THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE LIES. GIVEN THAT BOTH THE PARTIES ARE NOT DISPUTING THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 7% AND THE ONLY DISPUTE RELATES TO THE NATURE AND QUANTUM OF RECEIPTS ON WHICH SUC H NET PROFIT RATE WOULD BE APPLIED. THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION IS THAT THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 7% SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO CONTRACT ACTIVITY AND APPLIED TO CONT RACT RECEIPTS ONLY AND NET PROFIT IN RESPECT OF TRADING/SALES ACTIVITY SHOULD NOT BE DISTURBED. AS WE HAVE NOTED ABOVE, THE REJECTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS REL ATES TO THE CONTRACT ACTIVITY UNDER TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY. IN THE PROFIT A ND LOSS ACCOUNT, THE RECEIPTS FROM BUSINESS HAVE BEEN SHOWN UNDER CONTRACT RECEIP TS AND SALES RECEIPTS BESIDES VEHICLE HIRING EXPENSES WHICH IS ALSO ACKNO WLEDGED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, AS EVIDENT FROM PARA 3.4 OF THE ASSESSME NT ORDER. THE ASSESSEE HAS CARRIED OUT SALES ACTIVITY WHICH HAS BEEN SHOWN AND REFLECTED SEPARATELY IN THE PROFIT/LOSS ACCOUNT AS AN INDEPENDENT STREAM OF PUR CHASE AND SALE ACTIVITY AND CORRESPONDING REVENUES HAVE BEEN OFFERED AS SALES R ECEIPTS. REGARDING THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE LD CIT(A) THAT THE EXPENSES REL ATING TO THE BUSINESS OF ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 8 SUPPLY OF MATERIAL (RELATING TO SALES) AND CONTRACT RECEIPTS CANNOT BE BIFURCATED AND THE EXPENSES RELATING TO JOB WORK EXPENSES AND LABOUR CHARGES WOULD PERTAIN TO BOTH THE REVENUE STREAMS, THE LD AR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID OBSERVATION OF THE LD CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT AS THE SAME IS NOT ARISING OUT OF FACTS ON RECORD. IN OUR VIEW, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION T HE ENTIRETY OF FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ESTIMATION OF NET PR OFIT OF 7% SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO THE CONTRACT ACTIVITY ONLY. AT THE SA ME TIME, GIVEN THAT THERE ARE NO SEGMENTAL PROFIT/LOSS ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF CONT RACT ACTIVITY AND TRADING ACTIVITY AVAILABLE ON RECORD, THE MATTER IS SET-ASI DE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO APPLY NET PROFIT RATE OF 7% IN RESPECT OF CONTRACT ACTIVITY ONLY AFTER EXAMINING THE SEGMENTAL PROFIT/LOSS ACCOUNT. IN THE RESULT, THE GROUND NO. 2 IN BOTH THE YEARS IS ALLOWED WITH ABOVE DIRECTIONS FOR STATISTI CAL PURPOSES. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSES SEEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (KUL BHARAT ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 27/02/2017 VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI SATYA NARAYAN SHARMA, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT II, JAIPUR 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ THE CIT(A) 2, JAIPUR 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 38 & 39/JP/2015) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR. ITA NOS. 38 & 39/JP/15 SHRI SATYA NARAIN SHARMA V. THE ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR 9