M/s R. N. Gupta &Brothers, Mandi Gobindgarh V. ITO, Mandi Gobindgarh

ITA 402/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5353 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Depreciation; Search and seizure; Reason to believe
• Section: 143(3); 147; 148; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS.SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.402 /CHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2002-03) R.N.GUPTA & BROTHERS, VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, LOHA BAZAR, WARD 1, MANDI GOBINDGARH. MANDI GOBINDGARH. PAN: AACFR9291A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI VINEET KRISHAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N.K.SAINI, DR O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M, : THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A), DATED 11.2.2011 RELATING TO ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2002-03 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-T AX ACT. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 1. THAT THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 250(6) OF T HE I.T. ACT, 1961 BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), PATIALA IN APPEAL NO.232/IT/CIT(A)/PTA/09-10 DATED 11.02.2011 IS CONTRARY TO LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) GRAVELLY ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE INITIATION OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MADE BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER 2 SECTION 147/148 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 WHICH ARE ILLEGAL AND VOID AB INITIO. 3. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) GRAVELLY ERRED IN SUSTAINING AN ADDITION OF RS.1,50,000/- MADE BY THE LD. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MANDI GOBINDGARH ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNEXPLAINED SOURCE OF CREDIT ENTRY. THAT COMPLETE EVIDENCE WAS PRODUCED AND FILED BEFORE THE LD. A.O. AND LD. CIT(A) REGARDING THE SAID TRANSACTION WHICH WAS NOT CONSIDERED BY THEM. 4. THAT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) GRAVELLY ERRED IN SUSTAINING AN ADDITION OF RS.33167/- MADE BY THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF 1/5 TH DISALLOWANCE OF PERSONAL EXPENSES ON CAR, DEPRECIATION AND TELEPHONE EXPENSES. 3. THE GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE BEING GEN ERAL IS DISMISSED. THE GROUND NO.2 IS AGAINST THE INITIATION OF PROCEE DINGS UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE GROUND NOS. 3 AND 4 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AGAINST THE MERITS OF THE ADDITION. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE INFORMA TION WAS RECEIVED FROM THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE INCOME TAX DEPA RTMENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED HAWALA PAYMENT OF RS.1,50,300 /- THROUGH DRAFT. CONSEQUENTLY, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 WAS ISSUED T O THE ASSESSEE, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING INCOME OF RS.60,112/- WAS FILED. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING S, THE TRADING RESULTS DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE ACCEPTED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER. ON THE PERUSAL OF THE BANK STATEMENT WITH UNION BANK OF IN DIA, MANDI GOBINDGARH, A SUM OF RS.1,50,000/- WAS CREDITED ON 17.10.2001. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSED VIDE ORDER-SHEET ENTRY DAT ED 15.12.2009 TO 3 EXPLAIN THE SAME AND TO FILE CONFIRMATION AND ALSO TO PRODUCE THE PARTY FOR VERIFICATION. IN REPLY THE ASSESSEE STATED THA T THE SAID SUM OF RS.1,50,000/- VIDE DEMAND DRAFT NO.097990 WAS RECEI VED FROM ONE M/S SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPRISES, ALWAR, AGAINST SALE OF GOO DS SENT THROUGH GR OF TRANSPORT. THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE BILL ALONGWI TH GR RECEIPT WAS FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSEE E XPLAINED THAT AS THERE WAS NO TRANSACTION WITH THE PARTY W.E.F.28.2.2003, THE CONFIRMED COPY OF ACCOUNT WAS NOT AVAILABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER O BSERVED THAT THE PARTY, M/S SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPRISES WAS LOCATED AT A LWAR, WHEREAS THE DRAFT OF RS.1,50,000/- WAS PURCHASED AT DELHI AND I N THE ABSENCE OF THE DETAILS/CONFIRMATION, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HELD TH E ASSESSEE NOT TO HAVE DISCHARGED ITS ONUS. ACCORDINGLY, ADDITION OF RS.1 ,50,000/- WAS MADE AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER DISAL LOWANCE FOR PERSONAL USE OF CAR AND TELEPHONE EXPENSES WAS ALSO MADE. 5. DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSEE WA S SUPPLIED A COPY OF THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147/148 OF THE ACT. THE SAID REASONS ARE INCORPORA TED UNDER PARA 4.1 AT PAGE 2 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER. THE COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUE OF NOTICE FOR RE-ASSESSMENT WAS ILLE GAL AND NEEDS TO BE QUASHED AS THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER FOR REOPENING DO NOT TALLY WITH THE ADDITION MADE IN THE ASSESSME NT ORDER. FURTHER IT WAS CONTENDED THAT NO PROPER ENQUIRY WAS MADE TO AS CERTAIN THE TRUE FACTS. THE CIT(A) VIDE PARA 4.6 OBSERVED THAT THE REASONS TO BELIEVE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT. THE CIT(A) FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IN THE INFORMATION SENT BY THE INVESTIGATION WING, SHRI N.K.GARG, C.A. HAD DEPOSED THAT THE ENTRIES IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WERE ACCOMM ODATING IN NATURE AND WERE NOT GENUINE AND HENCE, THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER FORMED AN 4 OPINION FOR INVOKING JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) FURTHER HELD THAT THE MATERIAL ON WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER FORMED SUCH A BELIEF WAS THE MATERIAL SENT BY THE I NVESTIGATION WING AND AT THE STAGE OF ISSUE OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 O F THE ACT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT REQUIRED TO COME TO ANY CO NCLUSIVE FINDING AS TO WHETHER SUCH ENTRY IS GENUINE OR NOT AND ONLY A REA SONABLE BELIEF IS TO BE FORMED THAT THE SAME WAS NOT GENUINE. THE CIT(A ) THOUGH ADMITTED THAT THE REASONS FOR REOPENING DO NOT MENTION IN DE TAIL THE MATERIAL COLLECTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEADING TO THE I NFERENCE THAT THE INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. HOWEVER, THE NEXUS BETWEEN THE MATERIAL COLLECTED AND HIS BELIEF WAS ESTABLISHED. ACCORDINGLY THE JURISDICTION TO REOPEN AND INITIATE THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 147/148 OF THE ACT AND FRAMING OF THE RE-ASSESSMENT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS UPHELD BY THE CIT(A). FURTHER THE CIT(A) ALSO UPHE LD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIS--VIS THE ADDITION MADE ON AC COUNT OF THE ENTRY IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND DISALLOWANCE OF PERSONAL EXPEN SES. 6. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID DISAL LOWANCE. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE MADE ELABORATE SUBMIS SIONS AND ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE AMRIT SAR BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN SHRI MOHD.YOUSUF WANI VS. ITO, I.T.A.NO. 372(ASR )/2009. 7. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED T HE RECORD. THE FIRST ISSUE TO BE ADDRESSED IS THE VESTING OF JURIS DICTION IN THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 147/148 OF THE ACT. THE LEAR NED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE HAD POINTED OUT THAT THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING WERE SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSEE DURING THE APPELLATE PROCE EDINGS, COPY OF WHICH 5 IS PLACED AT PAGE 17 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE PERUSA L OF THE SAID REASONS WOULD REVEAL THAT THE BASIS FOR RECORDING THE REASO NS UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT WAS VERIFICATION OF HAWALA PAYMENT THROU GH DEMAND DRAFT DATED 15.10.2001 FROM ONE SHRI N.K.GARG, C.A. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS REASON TO BELIEVE TH AT THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.1,50,300/- OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM SHRI N. K.GARG WAS HIS OWN MONEY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DECLARED FOR TAXATION. TH E PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RECEIVED THE SAID INFORMATION FROM INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTME NT. HOWEVER, NO OTHER MATERIAL HAS BEEN REFERRED TO BY THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER EXCEPT THE AFORESAID INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION W ING. 9. UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT, THE PRECONDITION FOR ASSUMING JURISDICTION UNDER THE AFORESAID SECTI ON IS THAT AT THE TIME OF ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT THERE MUST BE A RELEVANT MATERIAL ON WHICH A REASONABLE PERSON COULD HAVE FORMED A REASO NABLE BELIEF THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE PREREQUISITE F OR INITIATING THE RE- ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE ACT IS THE EX ISTENCE OF MATERIAL WHICH CAN FORM THE BASIS OF THE BELIEF, THAT THE IN COME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE MATERIAL MUST EXIST ON THE RECORD OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE FORMATION OF BELIEF AND REASONS FOR SUCH BE LIEF SHOULD HAVE A NEXUS TO THE MATERIAL. 10. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE REASONS RECORDED IN THE PRESENT CASE WE FIND THAT THE BASIS FOR INITIATING THE ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS U/S 147/148 OF THE ACT WAS THE SO-CALLED INFORMATION RECEIVED F ROM THE INVESTIGATION WING OF THE DEPARTMENT UNDER WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO HAVE NOT DECLARED FOR TAXATION THE AMOUNT OF RS.1,50,300/- RECEIVED VIDE DEMAND DRAFT FROM ONE SHRI N.K. GARG, C.A. THERE W AS NO OTHER EVIDENCE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE SO-CALLED DEMAND 6 DRAFT HAD BEEN RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE SA ID SHRI N.K.GARG EXCEPT THE INFORMATION FORWARDED BY THE INVESTIGATI ON WING OF THE DEPARTMENT. THE AFORESAID INFORMATION WAS IN CONNE CTION WITH THE DEMAND DRAFT DATED 15.10.2001 FOR A SUM OF RS.1,50, 300/-. THE PERUSAL OF THE BANK STATEMENT WITH THE UNION BANK OF INDIA REV EALED THAT A CREDIT OF RS.1,50,000/- ON17.10.2001. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED FROM M/S SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPRISES AGAIN ST THE SALE OF GOODS SENT THROUGH GR OF TRANSPORT. IN RESPECT OF ITS CL AIM THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED COPY OF THE SALE BILLS AND ALSO OF THE G R RECEIPT. THE AFORESAID FACTS ARE MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE A SSESSEE HAS ENCLOSED THE COPY OF ACCOUNT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2001-02 BEFORE ME IN WHICH THE SAID AMOUNT IS REFLECTED AS HAVING BEEN RECEIVED FR OM M/S SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPRISES WITH WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAS TRADING TRAN SACTIONS. DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2001-02 THE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED BILL S TOTALING RS.15,72,933/- STARTING FROM 6.9.2001 TO 1.10.2001 AGAINST WHICH PAYMENT OF RS.3 LACS WAS RECEIVED VIDE CHEQUE DATED 2.9.200 1 AND VIDE DEMAND DRAFT OF RS.1,50,000/- ON 16.10.2001. THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAS FAILED TO PROVE ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS.1,50,000/- RECEIVED FROM M/S SHIV SHAKTI ENTERPR ISES WAS IN ANY MANNER CONNECTED TO SHRI N.K.GARG, C.A. THE VIEW O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE SAID AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM SHRI N.K .GARG IS NOT ACCOUNTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, WHILE RECORDING THE REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147/148 OF T HE ACT HAS NO BASIS. THE SAID INVOKING OF JURISDICTION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT CORRECT AS THERE WAS NO MATERIAL WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE SAID AMOUNT HAS ESCAPED ASSESSM ENT. I FIND SUPPORT FROM THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COU RT IN THE CASE OF ITO VS. LAKHMANI MEWAL DAS, (1976) 103 ITR 0437. T HE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT HELD AS UNDER :- 7 THE REASONS FOR THE FORMATION OF THE BELIEF CONTEMPLATED BY SECTION 147(A) OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T, 1961, FOR THE REOPENING OF AN ASSESSMENT MUST HAVE A RATIONAL CONNECTION OR RELEVANT BEARING ON THE FORM ATION OF THE BELIEF. RATIONAL CONNECTION POSTULATES THAT THERE MUST BE A DIRECT NEXUS OR LIVE LINK BETWEEN THE MAT ERIAL COMING TO THE NOTICE OF THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER AND THE FORMATION OF HIS BELIEF THAT THERE HAS BEEN ESCAPEM ENT OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM ASSESSMENT IN THE PARTICULAR YEAR BECAUSE OF HIS FAILURE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS. 11. IT WAS FURTHER HELD BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COUR T :- THE EXPRESSION REASON TO BELIEVE DOES NOT MEAN A PURELY SUBJECTIVE SATISFACTION ON THE PART OF THE INCOME- TAX OFFICER. THE REASON MUST BE HELD IN GOOD FAITH . IT CANNOT BE MERELY A PRETENCE. IT IS OPEN TO THE COU RT TO EXAMINE WHETHER THE REASONS FOR THE FORMATION OF TH E BELIEF HAVE A RATIONAL CONNECTION WITH OR A RELEVAN T BEARING ON THE FORMATION OF THE BELIEF AND ARE NOT EXTRANEOUS OR IRRELEVANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE SEC TION. 12. I ALSO FIND SUPPORT FROM THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN CIT VS. SFIL STOCK BROKING LTD. (2010) 325 ITR 285 (DELHI), WHICH HAS BEEN REFERRED TO BY THE AMRITSAR BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN SHRI MOHD. YOUSUF WANI (SUPRA). THE HON'BLE COURT HELD AS UNDER : AFTER HAVING HEARD THE COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES, WE ARE INCLINED TO AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE RESPONDENT/ ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT THE SUPREME COURT IN RAJESH JHAVERI [2007] 291 ITR 500 MADE IT ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT BEFORE AN ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUES A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148, THEREBY REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT UNDE R SECTION 147 OF THE SAID ACT, HE MUST HAVE FORMED A BELIEF THAT INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AND THAT THERE MUST BE SOME BASIS FOR FORMING SUCH A BELIEF. THE SUPREME COURT MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE BASIS OF SUCH BELIEF COULD BE DISCERNED FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD WHICH WAS AVAILABLE WITH TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THE SUPREME COURT IN RAJESH JHAVERI [2007] 291 ITR 500 DID NOT SAY THAT IT WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO FORM A 'BELIEF' AND THAT THE MERE FACT THAT THERE WAS SOME MATERIA L ON RECORD WAS SUFFICIENT. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT THE FIRST SENTENC E OF THE SO-CALLED REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS MERE I NFORMATION RECEIVED 8 FROM THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX (INVESTIGAT ION). THE SECOND SENTENCE IS A DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE VERY SAME DEP UTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME- TAX (INVESTIGATION) TO ISSUE A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 AND THE THIRD SENTENCE AGAIN COMPRISES OF A DIRECTION GIVEN BY T HE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS U NDER SECTION 148 IN RESPECT OF CASES PERTAINING TO THE RELEVANT WARD. THESE THREE SENTENCES ARE FOLLOWED BY THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE, WHICH IS THE C ONCLUDING PORTION OF THE SO-CALLED REASONS : 'THUS, I HAVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION IN MY POSSESSI ON TO ISSUE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 IN THE CASE OF M/S. SFIL STOCK BR OKING LTD. ON THE BASIS OF REASONS RECORDED AS ABOVE.' FROM THE ABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFI CER REFERRED TO THE INFORMATION AND THE TWO DIRECTIONS AS 'REASONS' ON THE BASIS OF WHICH HE WAS PROCEEDING TO ISSUE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148. W E ARE AFRAID THAT THESE CANNOT BE THE REASONS FOR PROCEEDING UNDER SECTION 147/148 OF THE SAID ACT. THE FIRST PART IS ONLY AN INFORMATION AND THE SECON D AND THE THIRD PARTS OF THE BEGINNING PARAGRAPH OF THE SO-CALLED REASONS AR E MERE DIRECTIONS. FROM THE SO-CALLED REASONS, IT IS NOT AT ALL DISCE RNIBLE AS TO WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE INFO RMATION AND INDEPENDENTLY ARRIVED AT A BELIEF THAT, ON THE BAS IS OF THE MATERIAL WHICH HE HAD BEFORE HIM, INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. CON SEQUENTLY, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ARRIVED AT THE CORRECT CONCL USION ON THE FACTS. THE LAW IS WELL SETTLED. THERE IS NO SUBSTANTIAL QUEST ION OF LAW WHICH ARISES FOR OUR CONSIDERATION. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 13. APPLYING THE ABOVE SAID RATIO TO THE FACTS OF T HE PRESENT CASE, I HOLD THAT THE INITIATION OF RE-ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS WAS WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND HENCE BAD IN LAW. THE ASSESSMENT COMPLE TED, THEREFORE, U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT IS QUASHED. THE GROUN DS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 14. IN VIEW OF QUASHING THE ASSESSMENT, THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED AGAINST MERITS OF ADDITION DO NOT SURVIVE. 15. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2011. SD/- (SUSHMA CHOWLA) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 30 TH JUNE, 2011 RATI COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH