DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Metro Institute of Medical Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Noida

ITA 3949/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 65332 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 16-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R S NEGI
• Keywords: Proportionate interest; Additional evidence; Commercial expediency
• Section: 143(3); 14A; 37; 6

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: E NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M.GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO: 3938/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : - 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. VS. ACIT , RANGE 6 X-1, SECTOR 12, NOIDA, UP NEW DELHI PIN 201 301 ITA NO: 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR : - 2007-08 ACIT, RANGE 6 VS. METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENC ES P.LTD. NEW DELHI NOIDA, UP (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI HIREN MEHTA, C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.S.NEGI, SR.D.R. O R D E R PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS AND ARE DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-IX, NEW DELHI DT. 25.5.2011 FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING OF HOSPITALS UNDER THE BRAND NA ME METRO IN VARIOUS PARTS OF THE COUNTRY. THE COMPANY HAS HIGH EXPERTISE IN OPERATING AND MANAGING NURSING HOMES/HOSPITALS SPEC IALLY WITH RESPECT TO CARDIO VASCULAR CARE. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INC OME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON 31.10.2007 DECLARING AN INCOME OF R S.7,13,10,790/-. ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 2 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. THE A.O. COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) ON 29. 12.2009, ASSESSING INCOME AT RS.7,60,620/-, WHERE INTERALIA HE HAS DIS ALLOWED INTEREST ON BORROWED CAPITAL AS WELL AS U/S 14A OF THE INCOME T AX ACT, 1961. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT. THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE ON PROPORTIONATE INTEREST MADE BY THE A.O. HE ALSO RESTRICTED THE D ISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 14A. AGGRIEVED BOTH THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE A RE IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. WE HAVE HEARD MR. R.S.NEGI, SR.D.R. AND MR. HIREN MEHTA, C.A. LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE FIRST TAKE UP REVENUES APPEAL. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS FOLLOWS. 1. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS AND CONTR ARY TO FACTS AND LAW. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.26,30,636/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY DISALLOWING THE PR OPORTIONATE INTEREST IN RESPECT OF INTEREST FREE ADVANCES GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IGNORING THAT: 2.1 THE ASSESSEE HAD BORROWED HUGE FUNDS ON WHICH I T WAS PAYING INTEREST AND CLAIMING SAME AS EXPENDITURE IN ITS P&L A/.C; 2.2. THE ASSESSEE ITSELF SUBMITTED THAT 35.71% OF T HE TOTAL FUNDS USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING INTEREST FREE ADVANC ES WERE BORROWED FUNDS AND REMAINING FUNDS WERE ASSESSEES OWN FUNDS. 2.3. SIMILAR DISALLOWANCES MADE IN THE CASE OF ASSE SSEE ITSELF FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 WERE UPHELD BY THE HONBLE ITAT B BENCH OF CHANDIGARH IN ITA NO.1432/CHANDI/2010 VIDE ORDER DT. 28.2.2011. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 4. THE MAIN CONTENTION OF THE LD.D.R. IS THAT THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 3 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. ORDER IN ITA 1057/CH./2008 DT. 24 TH SEPTEMBER,2009, WHEREIN IT FOLLOWED THE JUDGEMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES, (2006) 286 ITR P.1 AND CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE REMAIN THE SAME. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ANOTHER THE CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA 1432/CH./20 10 ORDER DT. 28 TH FEB.,2011 HAD FOLLOWED ITS EARLIER ORDER AND CONFIR MED THE SAME DISALLOWANCE. HE ARGUED THAT THE PRECEDENCE SET BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE HA S TO BE FOLLOWED. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE IN HIS EXPLANATION HA S ALSO SUBMITTED THAT DISALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE ON PROPORTIONATE BASIS AND HAD GIVEN REASONS FOR THE SAME. THUS HE SUBMITS THAT IT CANNOT ARGU E OTHERWISE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) HAS ACCEPTED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FROM THE ASSESSEE AND WITHOUT CONFRONTING THE A.O. WITH THIS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE, HAD ADJUDIC ATED THE MATTER. HENCE HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) HAS TO BE REVERSED. 5. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAN D SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS ARE DIFFERENT IN THIS YEAR AND THAT CASE LAW RELIED UPON BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE EARLIER A.YS IS NO MORE GOOD LAW I N VIEW OF THE SUBSEQUENT JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N THE CASE OF S.A.BUILDERS, 288 ITR P.1. THUS HE SUBMITTED THAT THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE P&H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ABHISHEK INDU STRIES CANNOT BE FOLLOWED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CASE NOW F ALLS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT AND THAT THE A SSESSEE SATISFIES THE ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 4 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. H.B.STOCK HOLDING LTD. 325 ITR 316 AND SUBMITTE D THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN ITS FAVOUR. THE LD.COUNSELS SUBMISSIO NS ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER. (A) THE BORROWINGS WERE FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS FROM PNB CENTURIAN BANK AND OTHERS AND FOR SPECIFIED BUSINESS PURPOSE AND HENCE THE INTEREST PAID ON THE LOANS CANNOT BE DISALLOWED; (B) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUFFICIENT INTEREST FREE FUNDS, WHICH HAVE TO BE PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN ADVANCED AS INTEREST FREE ADV ANCES. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE UTILITIES 313 ITR 340 @ PAGE 344. HE FURT HER RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING DECISION:- I. CIT VS. DCM LTD.325 ITR 310 DELHI; (C) THAT SECURED LOANS GIVEN BY BANKS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO BE DIVERTED; (D) THE ADVANCES WERE GIVEN KEEPING IN VIEW COMMERC IAL EXPEDIENCY; (E) THAT THE CIT CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE EVIDENCES ADMITTED BY HIM, AND HENCE THERE C AN BE NO GRIEVANCE OF NOT HAVING AN OPPORTUNITY. 6. IN REPLY THE LD.D.R. TRIED TO DISTINGUISH THE DE CISION OF THE DELHI HIGH COURT BY SUBMITTING THAT IT WAS A CASE WHERE I NTEREST FREE ADVANCE WAS GIVEN PRIOR TO TAKING A LOAN. ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 5 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. 7. ON THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THOUGH NOT LEAVING THIS GROUND ULTIMATELY SUBMITTED THAT H E IS NOT PRESSING THE SAME IN VIEW OF THE SMALLNESS OF THE AMOUNT. 8. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HEARD. ON A CAREFUL CONSIDERA TION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ON PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WE HOLD AS FOLLOWS:- 9. THE LOANS IN QUESTION, ON WHICH INTEREST HAS BEE N PAID BY THE ASSESSEE AND PART OF WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE DISALLOW ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS GIVEN BELOW:- NATURE OF LOAN AMOUNT-RS. AMOUNT-RS. 1)WORKING CAPITAL LOANS: - PNB A/C - CENTURION & LORD KRISHNA BANK - GE CAPITAL 7,10,58,400/- 14,37,51,079/- 3,12,19,849/- 24,60,29,328/- 2) TERM LOANS: - PNB A/C 36 - PNB A/C 20 - PNB A/C 717 - OTHERS 19,56,99,172/- 2,45,44,501/- 4,05,25,092/- 3,00,00,001/- 29,07,68,766/- T O T A L : 53,67,98,094/- 10. IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT LOANS GRANTED BY BA NKS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES SUCH AS WORKING CAPITAL OR TERM LOAN ARE TO BE UTILIZED FOR AN AGREED SPECIFIED PURPOSE AND THAT THE UTILIZATION I S MONITORED BY THE BANK AND THAT THE QUANTUM OF WORKING CAPITAL ADVANC E LIMIT DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL OF STOCKS AND SUNDRY DEBTORS OF THE ORGAN IZATION TAKING THE LOANS AND THAT TERM LOANS ARE DISBURSED ONLY ON ACQ UIRING OF SPECIFIED ASSETS. THE WORKING CAPITAL LIMITS VARY IN DIRECT PROPORTION TO THE NET ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 6 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. CURRENT ASSETS. SIMILARLY TERM LOANS GRANTED ARE T IED UP FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND THE BANKER INSISTS ON BILLS ETC. TO MO NITOR UTILIZATION. THE PRESUMPTION IN SUCH CASES SHOULD BE THAT THE BANKER HAVE MONITORED THE DISBURSEMENTS AND THAT THE LOANS GRANTED BY THE BANKER HAVE BEEN UTILIZED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY HAVE B EEN GRANTED. THIS PRESUMPTION IS A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION AND THE A.O . SHOULD HAVE SOME EVIDENCE OR MATERIAL ON RECORD TO HOLD OTHERWISE. THERE IS NO SUCH EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE. 11. THE EARLIER BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL HAVE FOLLOW ED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE P&H HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ABHISHEK INDUSTRIES. THE PROPOSITION LAID DOWN IN THIS JUDGEMENT ARE AT VARI ANCE WITH THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF S.A.BUILDERS LTD. VS CIT (S.C.)(2007) 288 ITR 1 HAS HELD AS FOLLOWS:- 22. IN OUR OPINION, THE HIGH COURT IN THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, AS WELL AS THE TRIBUNAL AND THE INCOME-TA X AUTHORITIES HAVE APPROACHED THE MATTER FROM AN ERRO NEOUS ANGLE. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE BORROWED T HE FUND FROM THE BANK AND LENT SOME OF IT TO ITS SISTER CON CERN (A SUBSIDIARY) AS INTEREST FREE LOAN. THE TEST, IN OUR OPINION, IN SUCH A CASE IS REALLY WHETHER THIS WAS DONE AS A ME ASURE OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY. 23. IN OUR OPINION, THE DECISIONS RELATING TO SECTI ON 37 OF THE ACT WILL ALSO BE APPLICABLE TO SECTION 36(1)(III) B ECAUSE IN SECTION 37 ALSO THE EXPRESSION USED IS FOR THE PUR POSE OF BUSINESS. IT HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY HELD IN THE DEC ISIONS RELATING TO SECTION 37 THAT THE EXPRESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS INCLUDES EXPENDITURE VOLUNTARILY INCURRED FOR COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY, AND IT IS IMMATERIAL IF A TH IRD PARTY ALSO BENEFITS THEREBY. 25. IN OUR OPINION, THE HIGH COURT AS WELL AS THE T RIBUNAL AND OTHER INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES SHOULD HAVE APPROA CHED THE ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 7 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. QUESTION OF ALLOWABILITY OF INTEREST ON THE BORROWE D FUNDS FROM THE ABOVE ANGLE. IN OTHER WORDS, THE HIGH COURT AND OTHER AUTHORITIES SHOULD HAVE ENQUIRED AS TO WHETHER THE INTEREST FREE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE SISTER COMPANY (WHICH IS A SUBSIDIARY OF THE ASSESSEE) AS A MEASURE OF COMMERC IAL EXPEDIENCY, AND IF IT WAS, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ALLO WED. 26. THE EXPRESSION COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY IS AN EXPRESSION OF WIDE IMPORT AND INCLUDES SUCH EXPENDI TURE AS A PRUDENT BUSINESSMAN INCURS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSIN ESS. THE EXPENDITURE MAY NOT HAVE BEEN INCURRED UNDER ANY LE GAL OBLIGATION, BUT YET IT IS ALLOWABLE AS A BUSINESS E XPENDITURE IF IT WAS INCURRED ON GROUNDS OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY . 31. THE HIGH COURT AND THE OTHER AUTHORITIES SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE ADVANCE D THE MONEY TO ITS SISTER CONCERN, AND WHAT THE SISTER CO NCERN DID WITH THIS MONEY, IN ORDER TO DECIDE WHETHER IT WAS FOR COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY, BUT THAT HAS NOT BEEN DONE. 32. IT IS TRUE THAT THE BORROWED AMOUNT IN QUESTION WAS NOT UTILIZED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS OWN BUSINESS, BUT H AD BEEN ADVANCED AS INTEREST FREE LOAN TO ITS SISTER CONCER N. HOWEVER, IN OUR OPINION, THAT FACT IS NOT REALLY RELEVANT. WHAT IS RELEVANT IS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE ADVANCED SUCH AMOUNT TO ITS SISTER CONCERN AS A MEASURE OF C OMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY. 35. WE AGREE WITH THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CIT V. DALMIA CEMENT (B.) LTD. [2002] 254 ITR 377 THAT ONCE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THERE WAS NEXUS BE TWEEN THE EXPENDITURE AND THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS (WHICH NEED NOT NECESSARILY BE THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF) , THE REVENUE CANNOT JUSTIFIABLY CLAIM TO PUT ITSELF IN T HE ARM-CHAIR OF THE BUSINESSMAN OR IN THE POSITION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND ASSUME THE ROLE TO DECIDE HOW MUCH IS REASONABL E EXPENDITURE HAVING REGARD TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF T HE CASE. NO BUSINESSMAN CAN BE COMPELLED TO MAXIMIZE HIS PRO FIT. THE INCOME-TAX AUTHORITIES MUST PUT THEMSELVES IN THE S HOES OF THE ASSESSEE AND SEE HOW A PRUDENT BUSINESSMAN WOULD AC T. THE AUTHORITIES MUST NOT LOOK AT THE MATTER FROM THEIR OWN VIEW POINT BUT THAT OF A PRUDENT BUSINESSMAN. AS ALREADY STATED ABOVE, WE HAVE TO SEE THE TRANSFER OF THE BORROWED FUNDS TO A SISTER CONCERN FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY AND NOT FROM THE POINT OF VIEW WHETHER THE AMOUNT W AS ADVANCED FOR EARNING PROFITS. ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 8 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. IN THE CASE OF MUNJAL SALES CORPORATION VS. CIT, 29 8 ITR 298, THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS OBSERVED AS FOLLOWS. 17. ONE ASPECT NEEDS TO BE MENTIONED DURING THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 1995-96, APART FROM THE LOAN TO ITS SISTER CON CERN AMOUNTING TO RS.5 LAKHS. ACCORDING TO THE TRIBUNAL, THERE WAS N OTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW THAT THE LOANS WERE GIVEN TO THE SISTER CONCER N BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM OUT OF ITS OWN FUNDS, AND, THEREFORE, IT WAS N OT ENTITLED TO CLAIM DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III). THIS FINDING I S ERRONEOUS. THE OPENING BALANCE AS ON APRIL 1, 1994, WAS RS.1.91 CR ORES WHEREAS THE LOAN GIVEN TO THE SISTER CONCERN WAS A SMALL AMOUNT OF RS.5 LAKHS. IN OUR VIEW, THE PROFITS EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THERELEVANT YEAR WERE SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE IMPUGNED LOAN OF RS.5 LAKHS 12. THUS APPLYING THE PROPOSITIONS LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT, WE HAVE TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE FIRST APP ELLATE AUTHORITY. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE BORR OWINGS IN QUESTION ARE NOT FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES. THE A.O. HAS NO MATERIA L TO DISBELIEVE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE THE ASSESSEE SHOULD S UCCEED. 13. EVEN OTHERWISE THE INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABL E WITH THE ASSESSEE ARE RS.44.28 CRORES. THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED PROFI T OF RS.5.93 CRORES DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. IF DEPRECIATIO N OF RS.2.88 CRORES IS ADDED, THE CASH ACCRUALS DURING THE YEAR WOULD BE R S.8.81 CRORES. THE INTEREST FREE ADVANCES ARE TO THE TUNE OF RS.14.89 CRORES. THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELIANCE U TILITY AND POWER LTD. 178 TAXMAN 135 BOMBAY HELD THAT IN SUCH SITUATIONS THE PRESUMPTION WOULD BE THAT INTEREST FREE FUNDS WERE USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING INTEREST FREE ADVANCES. THE A.O. HAS NOT DISLODGED THIS PRESUMPTION. ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 9 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. HENCE ON THIS GROUND ALSO, THE ISSUE IS TO BE DECID ED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 14. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS AL SO CALLED FOR THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE DET AILS FILED BEFORE HIM AND HENCE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER H AS NOT BEEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY IS AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. ADMI SSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE HAS NOT BEEN CHALLENGED BY REVENUE. 15. FOR ALL THESE REASONS, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) AND DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 16. COMING TO THE ASSESSEES APPEAL, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS THE SAME, IN VIEW OF THE SMALLNESS O F THE AMOUNT AND ON THE CONDITION THAT IT WOULD NOT SET A LEGAL PRECEDE NT. ACCEPTING THIS PROPOSITION WE DISMISS THIS APPEAL; BY THE ASSESSEE . 17. IN THE RESULT BOTH THE REVENUES APPEAL AND THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 29 TH AUGUST, 2012. SD/- SD/- (C.M. GARG) (J.SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBE R DATED: THE 29 TH AUGUST, 2012 *MANGA ITA 3938/DEL/2011 PAGE 10 OF 10 ITA 3949/DEL/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 METRO INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES P.LTD. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT; 2.RESPONDENT; 3.CIT; 4.CIT (A); 5.DR; 6.GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 17/7 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE THE AUTHOR ON:27/8 3. DRAFT PROPOSED AND PLACED BEFORE SECOND MEMBER ON: 28/8 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY THE SECOND MEMBER ON:28 /8 5. APPROVED DRAFT CAME TO SR.P.S. ON:29/8 6. DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :29/8 7. FILE SENT TO BENCH CLERK ON :30/8 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GIVEN TO HEAD CLERK ON: 9. DATE OF DISPATCHING THE ORDER ON :