J.C.I.T Rg - 3,Asansol, Asansol V. M/s Pawan Hardcoke Industries, Burdwan

ITA 406/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1868 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 03-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJAT KUMAR KUREEL J
• Assessee Lawyers: T P ROY
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C, BENC H KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM ./ ITA NO.406/KOL/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) JCIT, RANGE-3, ASANSOL PARMAR BUILDING, 54, G.T.ROAD (WEST), ASANSOL- 713304 VS. M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES, BHUKANIA HOUSE, PERA GALLI, KACHARI ROAD, BARAKAR, BURDWAN ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AADFP 4056 E ( /APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) /REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJAT KUMAR KUREEL, JCIT-DR /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI T.P.ROY, ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 03/04/2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 19/04/2017 / O R D E R PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, IS DIRE CTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DURGAPUR IN APPEAL NO.108/CIT(A)/ASL/CIR-2/ASL/2010-11,WHICH IN TURN ARISES OUT OF AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S.144 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961, (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT), DATED 25.10.2010. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE QUA THE ASSESSEE ARE THA T THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFAC TURING OF COKE BOTH HARDCOKE AND SOFT COKE. THE ASSESSEE IS DOING BUSIN ESS IN THE NAME OF M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES, WHICH IS A PARTNERSH IP FIRM CONSISTING OF TWO PARTNERS. THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT. LATER ON, ASSESSEES CASE WA S SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY U/S.143(3) OF THE ACT AND THE AO COMPLETED THE ASSE SSMENT BY MAKING ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 2 ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO DISALLOWED THE TRANSPORTATIO N CHARGES AT RS.12,85,223/- AND DISALLOWED SOME EXPENDITURE UNDE R DIFFERENT HEADS. THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN CREDITORS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 37,30,760/- IN BALANCE SHEET AS ON 31.03.2008. OUT OF THAT CREDITO RS, M/S NIRMAL FIBERS PVT. LTD. HAD SHOWN THE CREDIT OF RS.36,94,402/-. A S PER AO IT WAS A FRESH CREDIT BALANCE APPEARING IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDER ATION. THEREFORE, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE U/S.133(6) TO M/S NIRMAL FIBERS PV T. LTD. TO FURNISH THE PAN NO. DETAILS OF TRANSACTION, AGREEMENT IN RESPEC T OF TRANSACTION, CONFIRMATION AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE TRANSACTIO NS. ON RECEIPT OF THE NOTICE, M/S NIRMAL FIBERS PVT. LTD., AS REQUIRED BY THE AO, PROVIDED A FEW INFORMATION, STATING THE DETAILS OF RS.36,94,400/-. THE AO OBSERVED THAT M/S NIRMAL FIBERS PVT. LTD. DID NOT PROVIDE THE DET AILS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE TRANSACTION, THEREFORE, THE AO STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE VERACITY OF THE TR ANSACTIONS AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THEREFORE, THE AO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNISH THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITORS, CAPACITY OF THE CREDITORS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. THER EFORE, THE AO TREATED THE SAID TRANSACTION AS AN UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT AND ADDED IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AT RS.36,94,402/-. THE AO AL SO MADE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF INCREASE IN TRANSPORTATION CHARGES AT RS.12,85,223/- OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE THE IDE NTITY (REGISTRATION DOCUMENT) OF THE OWNER OF THE VEHICLES. IN ADDITION TO THIS, LD. AO ALSO MADE DISALLOWANCE UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS. ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 3 3. AGGRIEVED FROM THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER, T HE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), WHO HAS DELETED THE AD DITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD CIT (A) OBSERVED, IN RESPECT OF THE GROUND N O.1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE, WHICH RELATES TO RS. 36,94,4 02/-, WHICH WAS ADDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/ S 68 OF THE I.T.ACT, THAT THE SAID AMOUNT WAS CONFIRMED BY THE TRADE CREDITOR. IT APPEARED TO CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSMENT DETAILS OF THE SAID CONCERN HAD BEEN PRO VIDED TO THE A.O. IF THE A.O. HAD ANY DOUBT REGARDING THE CREDITWORTHINESS O F THE SAID CONCERN HE COULD HAVE MADE INDEPENDENT ENQUIRIES. HOWEVER, CERTAIN REQUISITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. TO THE SAID CONCERN WERE NOT COMPLIED WITH. BU T THE ASSESSEE CAN NOT BE LIABLE FOR THAT BECAUSE THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN BORNE O UT BY THE CONFIRMATION GIVEN BY THE TRADE CREDITOR. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IF THE A.O. HAD ANY DOUBTS REGARDING THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF SUCH A PARTY HE W AS AT LIBERTY TO CONDUCT HIS OWN ENQUIRIES. HOWEVER NO SUCH ENQUIRIES WERE CONDU CTED BY AO. MOREOVER, PURCHASES HAVE CERTAIN PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES RELATED TO THEM. THE LD CIT(A) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED ITS LIABILITY AND IF AT ALL ANY ADVERSE VIEW HAS TO BE TAKEN THEN IT MUST BE DONE SO ON THE BASIS OF FURTHER MATERIAL GATHERED BY THE A.O. BUT NO SUCH MATERIAL WAS ON RECORD OF THE AO. THIS WAY, THE LD CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A.O. U/S.68 OF THE ACT TO THE TUNE OF RS.36,94,402. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO PROVIDED THE RELIEF OF RS. 2,86, 252/- WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF EXPENDIT URE UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS, SUCH AS, TELEPHONE, VEHICLE UPKEEP AND REBATE ETC. THE ASSE SSING OFFICER MADE THESE ADDITIONS BASED ON ESTIMATE WITH OUT ANY LOGIC THEREFORE, LD CIT(A) DELETED THEM. ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 4 THE LD CIT (A) ALSO DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.12,8 5,223/- WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF I NCREASE IN TRANSPORTING CHARGES. THE LD CIT (A) OBSERVED THAT REASONING GIVEN BY THE A.O. TO BE EXTREMELY CRYPTIC AND THE BASIC FACTS NARRATED BY T HE ASSESSEE WERE NOT DISPUTED BY THE A.O. IT APPEARED TO THE LD CIT(A) THAT TDS HAD INDEED BEEN DEDUCTED ON PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION CHARGES PAID . IT WAS ALSO SEEN FROM THE ORDER OF AO THAT PART OF THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE BY CASH THROUGH VOUCHERS AND ALSO THAT THESE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN IN SUMS LOWE R THAN.RS.20,000/-. THE CIT(A) NOTICED THAT WHY AN ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE H AS BEEN MADE WITHOUT INVOKING SECTION 40(A)(IA). AS PER THE ASSESSMENT O RDER, THE A.O. KNEW THE EXACT AMOUNT OF TRANSPORTATION SINGLE OCCASION, ARE BELOW RS.20,000/-. THE CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT WHY WITHOUT ENQUIRY AN ES TIMATED DISALLOWANCE OF THIS NATURE HAS BEEN RESORTED TO. IN THIS CASE, IT IS SE EN THAT CONSIDERABLE FACTS WERE IN THE POSSESSION OF THE A.O. HOWEVER, NO ENQUIRY O N THESE FACTS IS VISIBLE ON RECORD. THE A.O'S LOGIC BEHIND THIS DISALLOWANCE IS NOT COMPREHENSIBLE. TRANSPORTATION CHARGES ARE RELATED NOT ONLY TO THE AMOUNT OF PURCHASE BUT ALSO TO THE DISTANCE TRAVELLED. THIS WAY, THE LD CIT (A) DELETED RS.12,85,223/- 4. NOT BEING SATISFIED WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) , THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUND S OF APPEAL :- 1. THAT, THE LD. CIT(A), ASANSOL HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BY ALLOWING THE RELIEF OF RS. 36,94,402/-WHICH WAS ADD ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S 68 OF THE I.T.ACT.1961. 2. THAT, THE LD. CLT(A) ASANSOL HAS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON FACTS BY ALLOWING THE RELIEF OF RS. 2,86,252/- DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUT OF EXPENDITURE UNDER DIFFERENT HEADS. 3. THAT, THE LD. CLT(A) ASANSOL HAS ERRED IN LAW A ND ON FACTS BY ALLOWING THE RELIEF OF RS. 12,85,223/-, DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF INCREASE IN TRANSPO RTING CHARGES. 5. FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE RELATES TO UN EXPLAINED CASH CREDIT U/S.68 OF THE ACT AT RS.36,94,402/-. ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 5 5.1 LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM BEING A MANUFACTURER OF HARDCOKE AND SOFT-COKE HAS TO PUR CHASE COAL FROM VARIOUS PARTIES. DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, THE APPELLANT FIRM PURCHASED COAL FROM M/S NIRMAL FIBERS (P) LTD. AT R S.36,94,402/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS, IN SPITE OF SUBMISSION OF TH E CONFIRMATION OF ACCOUNTS AND THEIR DETAILS OF TRANSACTIONS WITH THE ASSESSEE FIRM, ADDED BACK THE ENTIRE OUTSTANDING AMOUNT TO THE TOTAL INC OME OF THE ASSESSEE, ALLEGING THAT THE CREDITOR LACKED CREDITWORTHINESS. THE ADDITION BY THE AO IS TOTALLY ARBITRARY, ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS , AS M/S NIRMAL FIBERS (P) LTD. IS A REPUTED COAL DEALERS OF THAT AREA AND HAV E CONSIDERABLE VOLUME OF BUSINESS AND ALL PARTICULARS OF HAVING DEALING W ITH THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE AO. THE LD. AO DID NOT A T ALL CONSIDER THE REPLY OF M/S NIRMAL FIBERS (P) LTD. AS WELL AS ITS STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS AND CONFIRMATION. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION IS UNJUST AND SHOULD BE DELETED. RELEVANT PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS AND ALSO EVIDENCE OF PAYMENTS MADE TO THEM IN THE NEXT YEAR ARE BEING FURNISHED. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE VAT ON ALL THE PURCHASES MADE BY HIM, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO ANY QUESTION OF BOGU S CREDITORS. 5.2 ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE HAS S TATED THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF THE CR EDITORS, CAPACITY OF THE CREDITOR AND THE GENUINENESS OF THE CREDITOR. MEREL Y BECAUSE THERE IS A CREDITOR IN THE BALANCE SHEET DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS A REAL LIABILITY. THEREFORE, THE CREDIT BALANCE SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET IN RESPECT OF M/S NIRMAL FIBERS PVT. LTD. OF RS.36,94,400/- IS BOGUS. ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 6 5.3 HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATER IAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSE, AS THE PROPOSITIONS CANVASSED BY THE LD AR FOR THE ASSESSE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE FACTS NARRATED BY HIM ABOVE. AS WE NOTICED THAT LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE CONFIRMATION OF THE TRADE CREDITOR AND THE AO DID NOT DOUBT REGARDING T HE CREDITWORTHINESS OF SUCH PARTY. IF ACCORDING TO THE AO IT WAS A BOGUS L IABILITY THEN AO COULD DO INDEPENDENT ENQUIRIES. THE AO DID NOT CARRY OUT ANY INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY. MOREOVER, THE AO HAS NOT DISPUTED THE PURCHASES MAD E BY THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS LIABILIT Y. THE AO DID NOT BRING ANY COGENT MATERIAL ON RECORD THAT THE CREDIT BALAN CE SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BALANCE SHEET, IS BOGUS. THEREFORE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY INFIRMITY AND, HENCE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 5.4 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON G ROUND NO.1, IS DISMISSED. 6. GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE RELATES TO DIS ALLOWANCE OF RS.2,86,252/- MADE BY THE AO OUT OF EXPENDITURE UND ER DIFFERENT HEADS. 6.1 LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS DISALLOWED CERTAIN EXPENSES DEBITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PRO FIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF TELEPHONE EXPENSES, VEHICLE EXPENSES, RE PAIRS EXPENSES AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES. THE LD. AR FOR THE AS SESSEE HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE AO HAS MADE THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SMALL-SMALL ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 7 EXPENSES ON AN ESTIMATED BASIS. WE FAILED TO UNDERS TAND THE LOGIC AND THE METHOD ADOPTED BY THE AO TO MAKE THE ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE UNDER VARIOUS SMALL EXPENSES WITHOUT BRINGING ANY COGENT REASON ON RECORD. 6.2 ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE HAS P RIMARILY REITERATED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHICH WE HAVE ALREA DY NOTED IN OUR EARLIER PARA AND IS NOT BEING REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREV ITY. 6.3 HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATER IAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, AS THE PROPOSITIONS CANVASSED BY THE LD A R FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE FACTS NARRATED BY HIM ABOVE. W E NOTICED THAT THE AO MADE ADDITION ON AN ESTIMATED BASIS AND THERE WAS N O ANY LOGIC FOR THE ESTIMATED METHOD ADOPTED BY THE AO. MOREOVER ADDITI ON MADE BY THE AO BASED ON ESTIMATE WITHOUT REJECTING BOOKS OF ACCOUN TS ARE NOT TENABLE AS THE SAME HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN DHAKESWARI COTTON MILLS, 26 ITR 775 (SC). CONSIDERING THE FACT UAL POSITION, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DO ES NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE. HENCE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 6.4 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON G ROUND NO.2, IS DISMISSED. 7. GROUND NO.3 RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AT RS.12,85,223/- ON ACCOUNT OF INCREASE IN TRANSPORTA TION CHARGES. 7.1 LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE AO HAS MADE THE ABOVE DISALLOWANCE BEING ALLEGEDLY EXCESSI VE EXPENDITURE INCURRED UNDER THIS HEAD IN COMPARISON TO THE EARLI ER YEARS. THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 8 FIRM DURING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR, HAD PURCHASED COAL WORTH RS.5,12,79,932/- AND HAS PAID TRANSPORT CHARGES OF RS.56,48,577/- AS AGAINST RS.28,98,775/- PAID IN THE EARLIER YEAR. AS PER ASSESSING OFFICER, THE RATE OF INCREASE IN TRANSPORT CHARGES AS COMPAR ED TO EARLIER YEAR IS QUITE EXCESSIVE IN RELATION TO PURCHASE OF COAL, TH E AO HAS APPLIED THE RATE OF INCREASE IN THE COST OF COAL TO THE TRANSPO RT CHARGES AND HAVE MADE A TOTAL DISALLOWANCE OF RS.12,85,223/- IN TRAN SPORT CHARGES BEING HELD TO BE VERY MUCH EXCESSIVE AND INFLATED. THE LD AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE RATE OF TRANSPORTATION CHARGES H AS INCREASED DUE TO INCREASE IN OPERATING CHARGES DURING THE YEAR. THE COST OF TRANSPORTATION OF COAL HAVE THUS BEEN MUCH HIGHER DURING THIS YEAR THAN THAT OF THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR. 7.2 ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE HAS P RIMARILY REITERATED THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A), WHICH WE HAVE ALREA DY NOTED IN OUR EARLIER PARA AND IS NOT BEING REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREV ITY. 7.3 HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED THE MATER IAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, AS THE PROPOSITIONS CANVASSED BY THE LD A R FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE FACTS NARRATED BY HIM ABOVE. A S WE HAVE NOTICED FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR THAT THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE AO ARE EXTREMELY CRYPTIC. THE BASIC FACTS NARRATED BY THE ASSESSEE A RE NOT DISPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID THE TR ANSPORTATION CHARGES AFTER DEDUCTING TDS AND, HENCE, 15-I/J FORMS WERE N OT APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AMOUNT OF TDS HAD BEEN DEDUCTED ON PA RT OF THE ITA NO.406/13 M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 9 TRANSPORTATION CHARGES PAID. WE ALSO NOTICED THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PART OF PAYMENT BY CASH THROUGH VOUCHERS AND WE NOT ICED THAT THESE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN IN SUMS LOWER THAN RS.20000/-. T HE AO HAS MADE THE ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE WITHOUT INVOKING THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA). THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT MENTION IN HIS ORDER ABOUT THE NON-AVAILABILITY OF TRUCK NOS./VOUCHERS, THEREFORE, ESTIMATED DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO WITHOUT REJECTING BOOKS OF ACCOUNT I S NOT JUSTIFIABLE. CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL POSITION, WE ARE OF THE VIE W THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE , HENCE, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A). 7.4 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON G ROUND NO.3 IS DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE, IS D ISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 19/04/ 2017. SD/ - (N.V.VASUDEVAN) SD/ - (DR. A.L.SAINI) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /KOLKATA ; %& DATED 19/04/2017 ' ()* /PRAKASH MISHRA ,SR.PS. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) % & , / ITAT, KOLKATA 1. / THE APPELLANT-JCIT, RANGE-3, ASANSOL 2. / THE RESPONDENT.-M/S PAWAN HARDCOKE INDUSTRIES 3. 4 ( ) / THE CIT(A), KOLKATA. 4. 4 / CIT 5. 56 7 8 , 8 , / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. 7 9 / GUARD FILE. 5 //TRUE COPY//