The ITO, .,S.K. Ward-1, Himatnagar V. Gladder Ceramics Limited, Sabarkantha

ITA 386/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9484 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-01-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 19-01-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2014
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Deemed dividend

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH (BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA. NO: 386/AHD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) THE I.T.O. S.K.WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR V/S GLADDER CERAMICS LTD. CERAMICS ZONE DALPUR TA: PRANTIJ SABARKANDHA- 383216 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AABCG 7607D APPELLANT BY : SHRI ALOK KUMAR, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI TUSHAR P. HEMANI, A.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 19 -01-201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 -01-2017 PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. WITH THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE CO RRECTNESS OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-VIII, AHMEDABAD DATED 29.11.2013 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2010- 11. ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 2 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE READS AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,19,23,142/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNRECORDED INVESTMENT IN STOCKS U/S.69B, WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE MATERIAL BROUGHT ON RECORD. 2. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN D ELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.97,56,379/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DEEMED DIVIDEND U /S.2(22)(E), WITHOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE MATERIAL BROUGHT ON RECORD. 3. THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELE TING THE ADDITION OF RS.21,315/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE U/S.36(L)(VA) R.W.S 2(24)(X) IN RESPECT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION PAID AFTER THE DUE DATE, WIT HOUT PROPERLY APPRECIATING THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE MATERIAL BROUGHT ON R ECORD. 3. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND TRADING OF TILES. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS ELECTRONICALLY FILED ON 30.09.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 14,68,702/-. THE RETURN WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT AND ACCORDINGLY STATUTORY NOTICES WERE ISSUED AND SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, THE A.O NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENJOYING CASH CREDIT FACILITY FROM DENA BANK AGAINST HYPOTHECATION OF STOCK. ON VERIFICATION OF THE STOC K STATEMENT SUBMITTED TO THE BANK, THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SH OWN EXCESS STOCK TO THE BANK. THE STOCK POSITION IN TWO STATEMENTS CAN BE U NDERSTOOD BY THE FOLLOWING CHART:- ITEM STOCK AS PER AUDIT REPORT STOCK AS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BANK (RS) EXCESS SHOWN (RS) ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 3 STOCK 6,74,70,605/- 7,82,48,771/- 1,07,78,166/- FINISHED GOODS 3,67,29,427/- 4,86,52,569/- 1,19,23, 142/- 5. THE A.O. ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE STOCK SHOWN I N THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WAS AT COST PRICE WHEREAS THE SAME HAS BEEN SHOWN I N THE STATEMENT SUBMITTED TO THE BANK AT MARKET VALUE TO AVAIL HIGH ER DRAWING POWER AND CASH CREDIT FACILITIES. 6. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT IMPRESS THE A.O. WHO WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DENIED THE STATEMENT OF STOCK GIVEN TO THE BANK, THEREFORE, THE STOCK DECLARED TO THE BANK IS THE ACTUAL STOCK AND THE ASSESSEE HAS SUPPRESSED ITS CLOSING S TOCK BY RS. 1,19,23,142/-. THE A.O. MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,19,23,140/-. 7. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) A ND REITERATED ITS CONTENTION. IT WAS STRONGLY SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE SO FAR AS THE QUANTITATIVE DETAILS ARE CONCERNED. IT WAS ONCE AGAIN EXPLAINED TO THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE DIFFERENCE IS ONLY ON ACCOUNT O F VALUATION. THE LD. CIT(A) WAS CONVINCED WITH THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND DR AWING SUPPORT FROM THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF VEERDIP ROLLERS (P) LTD. 323 ITR 341. THE LD CIT(A) DIRECTED THE A. O. TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 4 8. BEFORE US, THE LD. D.R. SIMPLY RELIED UPON THE FIND INGS OF THE A.O. PER CONTRA, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 9. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THERE WAS NO DIFFEREN CE IN THE STOCK SO FAR AS QUANTITY IS CONCERNED AND THE SAME IS CLEAR FROM TH E FOLLOWING CHART:- GLADDER CERAMICS LIMITED. STOCK STATEMENT 201 0 - 11 PARTICULARS OF FINISHED GOODS AS PER BOOKS AS PER BANK QTY. AMOUNT QTY, AMOUNT SIZE : 300X600 SWASTIK SATIN SERIES PREM 119 23179 119 26983 SIZE: 396X396 PLAIN COLOU R SERIES COMM 10 815 10 950 PLAIN COLOUR SERIES PREM 21 2311 21 2693 PLAIN COLOUR SERIES STD 1333 119503 1333 139299 PRINT CLD/SPRINKLE SERIES COMM 166 18264 166 21289 PRINT CLD/SPRINKLE SERIES PRE M 7679 1001342 7679 1823762 PRINT CLD/SPRINKLE SERIES STD 2910 360491 2910 419243 PRINT CLD/SPRINKLE SERIES UTY 7 285 7 332 GLOSSY WH/IV/SP.ANTISKID SERIE COMM 1082 88183 1082 102790 GLOSSY WH/IV/SP.ANTISKID SERIE PREM 2516 9 3384601 25169 6455848 GLOSSY WH/IV/SP.ANTISKID SERIE .STD 7492 915897 7492 1067610 GLOSSY WH/IV/SP.ANTISKID SERIE UTY 308 12551 308 14630 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES COMM 187 18289 187 21318 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES PREM 13181 1879940 13181 2191341 ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 5 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES STD 1963 223978 1963 261079 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES UTY 140 5705 140 6650 SIZE: 400X400 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES COMM 131 14413 131 0 RUSTIK BLK/WDN /GRANITE SERIES PREM 1594 242934 1594 283174 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES STD 212 27645 212 0 RUSTIK BLK/WDN/GRANITE SERIES UTY 45 4034 45 0 SIZE: 498X498 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES COMM 891 87140 891 101574 SWAS TIK ITALIAN SERIES PREM 14811 2486619 14811 2901623 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES STD 2088 280784 2088 328150 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES UTY 90 5061 90 5936 SWASTIK GLOSSY SERIES COMM 568 55550 568 64752 SWASTIK GLOS SY SERIES PREM 22401 3468795 22401 4043381 SWASTIK GLOSSY SERIES STD 2194 309343 2194 361462 SWASTIK GLOSSY SERIES UTY 229 15304 229 17933 SWASTIK VIBRANT SERIES COMM 2943 323804 2943 377440 SWASTIK VIB RANT SERIES PREM 11837 2170610 11837 2525424 SWASTIK VIBRANT SERIES STD 3037 457904 3037 533753 SWASTIK VIBRANT SERIES UTY 5 281 5 330 SIZE: 600X600 SWASTIK SATIN SERIES COMM 3054 510247 3054 59 4767 SWASTIK SATIN SERIES PREM 6963 1 736503 6963 2249049 SWASTIK SATIN SERIES STD 5999 1393418 5999 1933958 SWASTIK SATIN SERIES UTY 116 10305 116 11957 ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 6 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES COMM 1565 267850 1565 312218 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES PREM 726 1 77507 726 275706 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES STD 1149 95516 1149 327465 SWASTIK ITALIAN SERIES UTY 2 334 2 194 SWASTIK GLOSSY SERIES COMM 1222 204166 1222 237985 SW ASTIK GLOSSY SERIES PREM 30001 7628654 30001 14107970 SWASTIK GLOSSY SERIES STD 5347 936928 5347 1396904 SWASTIK GLOSSY SERIES UTY 317 32036 317 37232 SWASTIK TORTOISE SERIES COMM 1399 279345 1399 325617 SWASTIK TORTOISE SERIES PREM 2624 834038 2624 1906992 SWASTIK TORTOISE SERIES STD 2166 644331 2166 833369 SWASTIK TORTOISE SERIES UTY 4 378 4 440 GABON TURTILE SERIES BRONZE 29 4396 29 0 GABON TURTILE S ERIES GOLD 83 27261 83 0 GABON TURTILE SERIES PLATINUM 423 1 60306 423 0 GABON TURTILE SERIES SILVER 93 23496 93 0 TOTAL 188125 32972571 188125 48652570 BROKEN TILES (327 MT X RS.1000) 327000 ADD. EXCISE DUTY 3429856 TOTAL OF FINISHED GOODS 188125 36729427 188125 48652570 10. IT IS ALSO TRUE THAT THE DIFFERENCE IS ONLY ON THE VALUATION OF THE CLOSING STOCK, IT IS COMMON PRACTICE TO GIVE INFLATED VALUA TION TO THE BANK TO AVAIL CASH CREDIT FACILITIES WHICH ARE INVARIABLY GIVEN O N THE HYPOTHECATION OF THE STOCK. THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE BANK OFFICIALS PHYSICALLY VERIFIED STOCK AS ON 31.03.2010. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, ONLY ON ACCOUNT ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 7 OF INFLATED STATEMENTS FURNISHED TO THE BANKING AUT HORITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF AVAILING OF LARGER CREDIT FACILITIES, NO ADDITIO N CAN BE MADE IF THERE APPEARS TO BE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE STOCK SHOWN IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND THE STATEMENT FURNISHED TO THE BANKING AUTHORITIES. MORE SO, WHEN THE STOCK STATEMENT GIVEN TO THE BANK REFLECTS INFLATED VALUE OF THE STOCK OTHERWISE THERE BEING NO DIFFERENCE IN THE QU ANTITY. WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CI T(A). GROUND NO. 1 IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 11. GROUND NO. 2 RELATES TO THE DELETION OF THE ADDITIO N MADE U/S. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. 12. WHILE SCRUTINIZING THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE A.O. F OUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED LOANS FROM AKIK TILES PVT. LTD. AMOUNT ING TO RS. 70,85,670/-,. THE A.O. FURTHER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RECEIVED RS. 80,469/- FROM MARBOLITE GRANITO INDIA LTD. THE A.O. WAS OF T HE FIRM BELIEF THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST IN THESE TWO COMPANIES. THEREFORE, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(22)(E) SQUARELY APPLY. THE A.O. ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO SHOW CAUSE WHY ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF D EEMED DIVIDEND SHOULD NOT BE MADE IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT THE ASSESSEE FILED A DETAILED REPLY STRONGLY OB JECTING THE PROPOSED ACTION OF THE A.O. STATING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE DO NOT APPLY ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE. ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 8 13. THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND ANY FAV OUR WITH THE A.O. WHO MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 97,56,379/- AS DEEMED DIVID END U/S. 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. 14. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) A ND EXPLAINED THAT IT IS AKIK TILES WHO IS HOLDING 23.38% SHAREHOLDING IN TH E ASSESSEE COMPANY AND IT IS THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WHO HAS TAKEN THE LOAN, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF INVOKING SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT. IT WAS FURTHER EXPLAINED THAT THE SUBSTANTIAL SHAREHOLDING REFERRED BY THE A .O. IS NOT IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BUT IS OF SOME GIRISH PATEL. I NSOFAR AS THE SHAREHOLDING IN MARBOLITE GRANITO INDIA LTD IS CONC ERNED, IT WAS EXPLAINED AKIK TILES PVT. LTD. IS HAVING 15.34% SHAREHOLDING IN THE SAID COMPANY AND 23.38% IN THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF APPLYING SECTION 2(22)(E) ON THE FACTS. 15. AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND THE SUBMISSIONS AND THE SHAREHOLDING PATTERN, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED AS UNDER:- 1. LOANS FROM AKIK TILES PVT LTD: - THE FACTS STATED BY THE AO SHOW THAT THE APPELLA NT COMPANY IS NOT A SHAREHOLDER IN AKIK TILES, THEREFORE, THE FIRST LIM B THAT IS LOAN OR ADVANCES TO A SHAREHOLDER IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. FURTHER AKIK TILES IS HAVING 23.38% SHAREHOLDING IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY. SINCE THE LOAN HAS BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE APPELLANT C OMPANY FROM AKIK -TILES THIS CONDITION HAS NO RELEVANCE. NOTHING IS TRIGGERED ON THIS SHAREHOLDING. ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 9 THE AO HAS FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT SHRI GIRISH PAT EL IS HAVING 10.93% SHAREHOLDING IN AKIK TILES AND 20% SHAREHOLDING IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE FACT OF 20% SHAREHOLDING IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY H AS BEEN DISPUTED BY THE APPELLANT AND IT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT THE SHAREH OLDING IS ONLY 19.56%. A PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS FILED SHOW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT IS CORRECT. THE AO HAS HIMSELF MENTIONED THE SHAREHOLDING AS 19.56% IN THE SHOW CAUSE GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT. EVEN OTHERWISE THIS SHAREHOLDING OF THE DIRECTOR IN BOTH THE COMPANIES DOES NOT TRIGGER THE PROVISIONS OF DEEMED DIVIDEND ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN OR ADVANCE TO A COMPANY. THE SUBSTANTIAL INTEREST, I.E. SHAREHOLDING OF 20% OR MORE, OF THE DIRECTOR HAS TO BE THERE IN BOTH THE C OMPANIES FOR TRIGGERING THE PROVISIONS OF DEEMED DIVIDEND. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE DIRECTOR, WHICH HAS SHAREHOLDING IN BOTH THE COMPANIES, DOES NOT HAVE S UBSTANTIAL SHAREHOLDING IN ANY OF THE COMPANIES. THEREFORE, THE SECOND LIMB AL SO DOES NOT COVER THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. THE LOAN OR ADVANCES, THEREFORE, ACC EPTED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY FROM AKIK TILES CANNOT BE TREATED AS DEEMED DIVIDEND. THE ACTION OF THE AO IS THEREFORE SET ASIDE AND THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN OR ADVANCES TAKEN FROM AKIK TILES IS DIRECTED TO BE DETESTED. 2. LOANS FROM MARBOLITE GRANITO (I) LTD: - THE FACTS STATED BY THE AO SHOW THAT THE APPELLAN T COMPANY IS NOT A SHAREHOLDER IN AKIK TILES, THEREFORE, THE FIRST LIM B THAT IS LOAN OR ADVANCES TO A SHAREHOLDER IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THIS CASE. FURTHER IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED BY THE AO THAT AKIK T ILES IS HAVING 15.34% SHAREHOLDING IN MARBOLITE GRANITO AND IT WAS HAVING 23.38% SHAREHOLDING IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY. NOTHING GETS TRIGGERED ON THIS S HAREHOLDING PATTERN AS THE APPELLANT COMPANY HAS TAKEN THE LOAN. FURTHER THIS LOAN WOULD HAVE BEEN A ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 10 DEEMED DIVIDEND IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT COMPA NY IN CASE THE SHAREHOLDING OF AKIK TILES WAS MORE THAN 20% IN BOTH THE COMPANI ES. THAT IS NOT SO IN THE PRESENT CASE. THEREFORE, ON THIS CONDITION NO DEEME D DIVIDEND CAN BE ASSESSED. REGARDING THE SHAREHOLDING OF ONE OF THE DIRECTORS SHRI GIRISH PATEL, THE AO HAS OBSERVED THAT HE WAS HAVING 20% SHAREHOLDING IN THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE FACT HAS BEEN DISPUTED BY THE APPELLANT AND IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THE SHAREHOLDING WAS ONLY 19.56%. A PERUSAL OF THE DETA ILS FILED SHOW THAT THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT IS CORRECT. THE AO HAS HIMSELF MENTIO NED THE SHAREHOLDING AS 19.56% IN THE SHOW CAUSE GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT. FU RTHER SHRI PATEL IS HAVING 9.7% SHAREHOLDING IN MARBOLITE GRANITO. SINCE SHRI PATEL IS HAVING SHAREHOLDING LESS THAN 20% DEEMED DIVIDEND CANNOT BE ATTRACTED EVEN B Y APPLYING THIS CONDITION. SHRI GIRISH PATEL SHOULD HAVE MORE THAN 20% IN BOTH THE COMPANIES IN ORDER TO TRIGGER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2(22) (E). THEREF ORE, DEEMED DIVIDEND ON ACCOUNT OF THIS LOAN TAKEN FROM MARBOLITE GRANITO CANNOT BE ASSESSED ON THE APPELLANT. THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON THIS ACCOUNT IS THER EFORE, DIRECTED TO BE DELETED 16. BEFORE US, THE LD. D.R. COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY FAC TUAL ERROR IN THE AFORE- STATED FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). 17. AFTER GIVING A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE FACT UAL MATRIX RELATING TO THE SHAREHOLDING PATTERN AS MENTIONED HEREINABOVE, IN O UR CONSIDERED OPINION, SECTION 2(22)(E) OF THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY ON THE F ACTS OF THE CASE. WE, THEREFORE, DECLINE TO INTERFERE. GROUND NO. 2 IS AC CORDINGLY DISMISSED. 18. GROUND N. 3 RELATES TO THE DELETION OF THE ADDITION OF RS. 21,315/- MADE ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE U/S. 36(1)(VA) R.W.S. 2(24) (X) IN RESPECT OF EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION PAID AFTER THE DUE DATE. ITA NO. 386/ AHD/2014 . A.Y.2010-11 11 19. THIS ISSUE IS NOW SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE AND AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIO NAL HIGH COURT IN 366 ITR 170. IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JU RISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTOR E THAT OF THE A.O. GROUND NO. 3 IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 20. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS P ARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 23- 01- 20 17 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER TRUE COPY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 23 /01/2017 RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD