The DCIT, (Central)-1, Bhopal V. Smt. Smita Pandey, Bhopal

ITA 414/IND/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8427 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 27-12-2018
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 02-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA GUPTA
• Keywords: Sale consideration of property below Jantri Value; Capital asset
• Section: 143(3); 54B; 50C; 2(14); 54

Judgement Text

SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.414/IND/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 REVENUE BY SMT. ASHIMA GUPTA, CIT ASSESSEE BY NONE DATE OF HEARING 27 . 12. 2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 02.01.2019 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEAL IS FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF REVENUE PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 AND IS DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDERS OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 3 (IN SHORT LD.CIT(A)], BHOPAL DATED 29.03.2017 WHICH IS ARIS ING OUT OF THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961(IN SHOR T THE ACT) DATED 27.03.2015 FRAMED BY DCIT(CENTRAL)-I, BHOPAL. DEPUTY CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I BHOPAL VS. SMT. SMITA PANDEY, E-2/182, ARERA COLONY, BHOPAL ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) PAN NO. A DLPP5384Q SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 2 2. THE CASE WAS CALLED UP BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE PAST ALSO ON 27.4.2018 AND 10.10.2 018 NOTICES OF HEARING WERE SERVED THROUGH DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTA TIVE AS THE NOTICE SENT TO THE ASSESSEE WAS RETURNED BACK UN SE RVED. EVEN THE NOTICE OF HEARING TO BE SERVED THROUGH THE DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE COULD NOT BE SERVED AS THE PREMISES AT THE ADDRESSED MENTIONED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS FOUND LOCKED AND FOR THIS REASON THE INSPECTOR OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT A FFIXED THE NOTICE AT THE ASSESSEES PREMISES. IN THE GIVEN FA CTS IT WAS DECIDED TO HEAR THE REVENUES APPEAL IN THE ABSENCE OF ASSE SSEE. 3. REVENUE HAD RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL; ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LEARNED CIT(A)-2 HAS ERRED IN :- 1. LD.CIT(A) HAS NOT TAKEN THE REMAND REPORT, SUBMITTE D BY THE A.O IN TO CONSIDERATION. 2. LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE BY DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.1,33,08,531/- FOR THE A.Y. 2013- 14 MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED LONG TE RM CAPITAL GAIN. 4 THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE RELATES TO DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS.1,33,08,531/- MADE BY LEARNED ASSESS ING OFFICER (IN SHORT LD.A.O) ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 3 5. LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY ARGUE D AND SUPPORTING THE ORDERS OF LD. A.O. 6. WE HAVE HEARD LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AN D CAREFULLY PERUSED THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US. 7. REVENUES SOLE GRIEVANCE IS FOR DELETION OF ADDI TION BY LD.CIT(A) OF RS.1,33,08,531/- MADE BY THE LD.A.O ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. BRIEF FACTS RE LATING TO THIS GROUND ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE PURCHASED 5.71 HECTARE AGRICULTURE LAND LOCATED AT SHIVANGAON, AMRAWATI ON 8.5.2008 AT A COST OF RS.11,55,540/-. ON 27.08.2012 THIS AGRICULTURE LA ND WAS SOLD TO SHRI HEMANT DHIRAJLAL SANGANI, SMT. MINAKSHI DHIRAJ LAL AND SHRI PRATEEK HEMANT SANGVI FOR TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS .1,50,00,000/- IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR A SSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.1,33,08,53 1/- WAS SHOWN AND THE DEDUCTION FOR THE SAME AMOUNT WAS CLA IMED U/S 54B OF THE ACT. WE OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS C ONTENDED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES THAT THE ALLEGED LAND WAS AN AGRICULTURAL LAND NOT FALLING UNDER THE CATEGORY OF CAPITAL ASSETS AS PROVIDED U/S 2(14) OF THE ACT AND THE GAIN FROM THE SALE THEREOF WAS NOT LIABLE TO SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 4 TAX BUT AS THERE WAS NO COLUMN IN THE INCOME TAX RE TURN SHE BONAFIDELY DECLARED THE TRANSACTION UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL AND CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 54B OF THE ACT. NOW THE QUES TION BEFORE US IS THAT WHETHER THE AGRICULTURAL LAND MEASURING 5.7 1 HECTARE LOCATED AT SHIVANGAON, AMARAWATI IS AN AGRICULTURAL LAND AND IS NOT FALLING UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL ASSETS AS DEFINED U/S 2(14) OF THE ACT?. 8. WE FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION FOR LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AT RS. 1,33,08,531/- OBSERVING AS FOLL OWS AFTER DULY CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE; 8.1 THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED A.R. ON THE ABO VE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 8.1.1 SUBMISSION (OR GROUND 2 A. Y 2013-14) LD AO HAS VIDE ABOVE PARA ADDED RS. 13308531/- ON A CCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. APP ELLANT HAD SOLD HER AGRICULTURAL LAND ADMEASURING 5.71 HECTARE SITUATED AT VILLAGE SHIVANGAON , DISTRICT AMRAWATI IN NET CONSIDERATION OF RS. 15000000/-. LD AO HAS TREATED THE SALE OF RURAL AGRICULTURAL LA ND AS BEING OF CAPITAL ASSETS ON ACCOUNT OF NON SUBMISSION OF ANY EVIDENCE , SUBMISSION OF MERE CERTIFICATE FROM SARPANCH REGARDING POPULATION OF THE VILLAGE, NON DEPOSIT OF CAPITAL GAIN IN CAPITAL GAIN ACCOUNT SCH EME ETC. SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 5 IT IS SUBMITTED HERE THAT THE LD AO HAS EITHER NOT GONE THROUGH PROPERLY REPLY OF THE APPELLANT OR GONE IN A HAP HAZARD MANN ER IN TAKEN DECISION REGARDING NATURE OF ABOVE LAND. APPELLANT HAS, IN H IS REPLY DATED 09.03.2015 SPECIFICALLY SAID :- ' IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD 5.71 H EC RURAL AGRICULTURAL LAND SITUATED AT SHIVANGAON, AMRAWATI TO SHRI HEMAN T DHIRAJLAL SANGANI AND SMT MINAKSHI DHIRAJLAL SANGANI ON 27.08.2012 FO R AN AMOUNT OF RS. 9000000/- AND RS. 6000000/- AGGREGATING TO RS. 1500 0000/-. THE RURAL AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH WAS SOLD AS BEING USED OR AGRICULTURAL PURPOSES BY THE ASSESSEE. SIR IN REGARD TO CAPITAL GAIN ON S ALE A SUCH LAND IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THIS LAND IS NOT A CAPITAL ASSETS DE FINED IN SECTION 2(14) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT HENCE CAPITAL GAIN ON SUCH LAND IS NOT ATTRACTED. FOR REFERENCE, COPY OF CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE GRAM P ANCHAYAT IS ENCLOSED HEREWITH. SIR, IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WANT S TO SHOW THIS TRANSACTION IN HER RETURN BUT IN RETURN THERE IS CO LUMN FOR SALE OF CAPITAL ASSETS ONLY AND HENCE THE SAME WAS SHOWN AS CAPITAL ASSETS. SINCE THE AGRICULTURAL LAND IS NOT UNDER CAPITAL ASSETS ,TO N ULLIFY THE GAIN ARISING ON SALE, EXEMPTION U/S 54 B COLOUMN WAS FILLED UP S O THAT THE RESULTANT AMOUNT OF GAIN COMES TO NIL' IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED HERE THAT FOR ARRIVING AT S OME CONCLUSION LD. AO WAS EXPECTED TO EXAMINE THESE BASIC FACTORS GIVEN U /S 2(14) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 WHICH DECIDE WHETHER A ASSET IS CAPITAL ASSET OR NOT:- CAPITAL ASSET MEANS PROPERTY OF ANY KIND HELD BY TH E ASSESSEE, WHETHER OR NOT CONNECTED WITH HIS BUSINESS OR PROFESSION, B UT DOES NOT INCLUDE- SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 6 (I) ANY STOCK-IN-TRADE, CONSUMABLES, STORE, RAW MAT ERIALS HELD FOR THE PURPOSES OF HIS BUSINESS OR PROFESSION; (II) PERSONAL EFFECTS, THAT IS TO SAY, MOVABLE PROP ERTY (INCLUDING WEARING APPAREL, JEWELLERY AND FURNITURE) HELD FOR PERSONAL USE BY THE ASSESSEE OR ANY MEMBER OF HIS FAMILY DEPENDENT ON HIM; (III) AGRICULTURAL LAND IN INDIA, NOT BEING LAND SI TUATED- (A) IN ANY AREA WHICH IS COMPRISED WITHIN THE JURIS DICTION OF A MUNICIPALITY (WHETHER KNOWN AS MUNICIPALITY, MUNICI PAL CORPORATION, NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE, TOWN AREA COM MITTEE, TOWN COMMITTEE OR ANY OTHER NAME) OR A CANTONMENT BOARD AND WHICH HAS A POPULATION OF NOT LESS THAN TEN THOUSAND ACCO RDING TO THE LAST PRECEDING CENSUS OF WHICH THE RELEVANT FIGURES HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BEFORE THE FIRST DAY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR ; OR (B) IN ANY AREA WITHIN SUCH DISTANCE, NOT BEING MOR E THAN EIGHT KILOMETERS, FROM THE LOCAL LIMITS OF ANY MUNICIPALI TY, OR CANTONMENT BOARD REFERRED TO IN ITEM (A), AS THE CE NTRAL GOVERNMENT MAY, HAVING REGARD TO THE EXTENT OF, AND SCOPE FOR, URBANISATION OF THAT AREA AND OTHER RELEVANT CONSID ERATIONS, SPECIFY IN THIS BEHALF BY NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFIC IAL GAZETTE. ' THE EXPRESSION 'AGRICULTURAL LAND' IS NOT DEFINED E ITHER IN THE CONSTITUTION OR IN THE INCOME-TAX ACT. IT, THEREFOR E, MUST BE GIVEN THE MEANING WHICH IT ORDINARILY BEARS IN ENGLISH LA NGUAGE AND AS UNDERSTOOD IN ORDINARY PARLANCE. THE DETERMINATION OF THE CHARACTER OF A PARTICULAR PIECE OF LAND, ACCORDING TO THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS MEANT OR S ET APART AND CAN SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 7 BE USED, IS A MATTER WHICH OUGHT TO BE DETERMINED O N THE FACTS OF EACH PARTICULAR CASE. WHAT IS REALLY REQUIRED TO BE SHOWN IS THE CONNECTION WITH AN AGRICULTURAL PURPOSE AND USER AN D NOT THE MERE POSSIBILITY OF USER OF THE LAND, BY SOME POSSI BLE FUTURE OWNER OR POSSESSOR, FOR AN AGRICULTURAL PURPOSE. IT IS NO T THE MERE POTENTIALITY, BUT ITS ACTUAL CONDITION AND INTENDED USER, WHICH HAS TO BE SEEN. IF THERE IS NEITHER ANYTHING IN ITS CON DITION, NOR ANYTHING IN EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THE INTENTION OF I TS OWNER OR POSSESSOR, SO AS TO CONNECT IT WITH AN AGRICULTURAL PURPOSE, THE LAND CANNOT BE TERMED 'AGRICULTURAL LAND'. ENTRIES IN REVENUE RECORDS ARE, HOWEVER, GOOD PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE BUT THEY ARE NOT CONCLUSIVE ON THE POINT. THERE ARE VARIOUS CRITERIA WHICH MAY BE APPLIED TO FIND OUT IF THE LAND IN A PARTICULAR CASE IS AGRICULTURAL OR NOT. S OME OF THEM ARE: (I) CLASSIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE LAND TO LA ND REVENUE; (II) WHETHER AGRICULTURAL OPERATIONS ARE CARRIED ON ; (III) CHARACTER OF ADJOINING LAND. IF THE SURROUNDI NG LANDS ARE AGRICULTURAL LANDS, THE PRESUMPTION WOULD BE IN FAV OUR OF HOLDING THAT THE LAND IN QUESTION WAS ALSO AGRICULTURAL LAN D [ADDL. CIT VS. TARACHAND JAIN (1980) 123 ITR 567 (PAT) TC 20R. 73 0]. ACCORDING TO THE DEFINITION OF CAPITAL ASSET AS IT STANDS EVEN NOW, IT SHALL BE SEEN THAT AGRICULTURAL LAND BY AND LARGE D OES NOT FALL WITHIN THE DEFINITION; IT IS ONLY THE SPECIFIED LAN D WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE DEFINITION OF CAPITAL ASSET AND ALL OTHER AG RICULTURAL LAND IS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF CAPITAL GAINS. THE AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH IS COVERED UNDER THE DE FINITION OF A CAPITAL ASSET IS THE ONE WHICH IS SITUATED IN ANY A REA WHICH IS SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 8 COMPRISED WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF A MUNICIPALITY OR A CANTONMENT BOARD ETC. WHICH HAS A POPULATION OF NOT LESS THAN TEN THOUSAND ACCORDING TO THE LAST PRECEDING CENSUS OF WHICH THE RELEVANT FIGURES HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED BEFORE THE 1ST DAY OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. THIS DEFINITION CONTEMPLATES THAT IN ORDER TO BRING AN AGRICULTURAL LAND WITHIN THE DEFINITION OF A CAPITAL ASSET. TWO CONDITIONS MUST BE SATISFIED: (I) THE LAND MUST BE SITUATED IN ANY AREA WHICH IS COMPRISED WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF A MUNICIPALITY OR CANTON MENT BOARD; (II) THE POPULATION OF THE AREA WHERE THE LAND IS S ITUATED SHOULD NOT BE LESS THAN 10,000 ACCORDING TO THE LAST PRECE DING CENSUS. IN THIS CASE APPELLANT HAD ALREADY SUBMITTED USES, DISTANCE AND POPULATION OF THE VILLAGE. WE FAILED TO UNDERSTAND WHY LD AO HAS NOT RELIED ON THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SARPANC H . GRAM PANCHAYAT IS VERY MUCH APPROPRIATE AGENCY FOR CERTI FYING POPULATION AND SURPANCH ,BEING HEAD OF THE GRAM PAN CHAYAT, IS VERY MUCH APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY OF ISSUING POPULATI ON AS WELL AS LAND USES CERTIFICATE. WE FAILED TO UNDERSTAND LD A O EXPECTATION OF GETTING CERTIFICATE FROM ANY HIGHER AUTHORITY IN TH IS RESPECT. HERE LD AO SHOULD HAVE DECIDED LAND NATURE ON THE BASIS OF SITUATION AND POPULATION WHICH IS ALREADY GIVEN IN THE WEB SI TE OF REVENUE DEPARTMENT OF MAHARASHTRA GOVT WHERE THE LAND SITUA TION IS SHOWN AS 40 KM FROM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION LIMITS AND POPU LATION IS 2294 AS PER YEAR 2011 CENSUS .ANNEXURE 'E' ENCLOSED . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE LAND SOLD BY THE APPELLANT IS NOT A CAPITAL ASSETS. SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 9 IT IS, THEREFORE, REQUESTED THAT THE ADDITION OF IN COME OF RS. 13308531/- BY LD. A.O MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE WRITTE N SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED AR, THE VARIOUS DECISION CITED AND ALSO PERUSED THE CASE RECORD. THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED TO HAVE SOLD 5.71 HECTARE AGRICULTURAL LAND TO SHRI HEMANT DHIRAJLAL SANGANI, SMT MINAKSHI DHIRAJLAL AND SHRI PRATEEK HEMANT SANGVI L OCATED AT SHIVANGAON, AMRAVATI ON 27.08.2012 FOR A TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 1,50,00,000/-. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS IT IS SEEN BY THE A.O THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED RETUR N FOR A.Y 2013- 14 BUT HAS NOT OFFERED CAPITAL GAIN ON THE SALE OF THE ABOVE LAND HOWEVER IT WAS SEEN THAT IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCO ME THE APPELLANT ASSESSE HAD CALCULATE CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 1,33,08,531/- AND CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 54B OF THE LT ACT. 8.2 THE A.O VIDE QUERY LETTER DATED 23.09.2014 AS KED THE APPELLANT TO FURNISH COMPLETE DETAILS OF THE TRANSACTION. IN RES PONSE TO THE QUERY THE APPELLANT FILED CERTIFICATE FROM GRAM PANCHAYAT WHI CH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE A.O. BUT DURING THE APPELLATE STAGE THE APPE LLANT ASSESSEE FIRST FILED A SHEET HAVING GOOGLE NAVIGATION AND DETAIL O F THE POPULATION OF THE AREA SHIVANGAON (PLACE WHERE THE SAID LAND OF THE A PPELLANT EXISTS) AND THEN THE APPELLANT ASSESSEE FILED A CERTIFICATE OF TEHSILDAR OF SHIVENGAON DATED 06.03.2017. WHICH GIVES CLEAR-CUT FINDING THA T THE ABOVE MENTIONED PLACE IS 27 KM FROM AMRAVATI AND HAS TOTA L POPULATION OF 2294 AS PER GOVT. RECORD. IN VIEW OF THE MATERIAL EVIDENCE FILED BY THE APPEL LANT IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ABOVE LAND FULFILLS THE CONDITIONS TO BE AN AGRICUL TURAL LAND AS THE SAME IS MORE THAN 8 KM AWAY FROM THE CITY AND HAS POPULA TION LESS THAN 10,000. THUS THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT ASSESS EE IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT AND THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,33,08,531/- MADE BY THE A.O ON SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 10 ACCOUNT OF LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN U/S 50C IS HEREBY DELETED. THE GROUND OF APPEAL FOR A.Y 2013-14 IS ALLOWED. 9. THE ABOVE FINDING OF FACT GIVEN BY LD.CIT(A) HAS NOT BEEN REBUTTED BY LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE. IT IS CLEARLY EMANATING FROM THE RECORDS THAT THE AGRICULTURE LAN D IS LOCATED 27 KM AWAY FROM THE MUNICIPAL LIMIT OF CITY AMARAWATI AND ISSITUATED IN A VILLAGE HAVING POPULATION OF 2294 PERSONS AND THIS FACT HAS BEEN CERTIFIED BY THE TEHSILDAR OF SHIVANGAON VIDE LETTER DATED 6.3.2017. THEREFORE IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE ALL EGED AGRICULTURAL LAND DO NOT FALL UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN ASSETS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 2(14) OF THE ACT AND THEREFORE THE CAPITAL GAIN ARISED IN THE SALE OF SAID AGRICULTURAL LAND IS NOT LIABLE TO TAX . NO INTERFERENCE IS THEREFORE CALLED FOR IN THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A). GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 10. AS REGARDS GROUND NO.1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE TH AT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT TAKEN THE REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WITH REGARD TO THE CERTIFICATE OF THE TEHSILDAR OF SHIVANGAON, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVIDED THE CERTIFICATE OF GRAM PANCHAYAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS ITSELF. SMT. SMITA PANDEY ITA NO.414/IND/2017 11 FURTHER THE CERTIFICATE OF TEHSILDAR OF SHIVANGAON DATED 6.3.2017 CLEARLY SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND WHICH HAS BEEN DULY EXAMINED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND THEREFORE THERE REMAINED NO REASON FOR LD. CIT(A) TO CALL FOR A RE MAND REPORT. THEREFORE GROUND NO.1 OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 11. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.01.201 9. SD/- SD/- ( KUL BHARAT) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / DATED : 2 ND JANUARY, 2019 /DEV COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT CONCERNED/CIT (A) CONCERNED/ DR, ITAT, INDORE/GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, ASSTT.REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T., INDORE