Shri Gopal Sharma, Kolkata V. ACIT, CIR-34, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 416/KOL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7871 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-03-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S M SURANA; A K TIBREWAL
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition
• Section: 143(3); 133(6); 263

Judgement Text

, B , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH: KOLKATA ( ) BEFORE , /AND , ) [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , AM ] / I.T.A NO. 416 /KOL/20 1 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 9 - 1 0 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA V ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, (PAN: AKCPS4303E) CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA. ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 0 8 . 12 .201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 12 . 1 2 .201 4 FOR THE APPELLANT : SHRI S. M. SURANA , ADVOCATE & SHRI A. K. TIBREWAL, FCA FOR THE RESPONDENT : SHRI VIJAY KUMAR, CIT / ORDER PER SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM : T HE APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY CIT - XII , KOLKATA U/S . 263 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961(HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT ) VIDE M. NO. C IT - XII/KOL/TECH/263/2013 - 14/2881 - 2883 DATED 30 .0 1 .201 4 . ASSESSMENT W AS FRAMED BY ACIT, CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA U/S. 14 3(3) OF THE ACT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 9 - 1 0 VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 2 3 . 09 .20 11. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY CIT - XII, KOLKATA U/S. 263 OF THE ACT. FOR THIS, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUND NOS. 2 TO 6: 2. FOR THAT THE LD. CIT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED IN HASTY MANNER WITHOUT MAKING NECESSARY ENQUIRY IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE AO DULY LOOKED INTO AND EXAMINED THE ISSUES ON WHICH THE LD. CIT HELD THE VIEW THAT NECESSARY ENQUIRIES WERE NOT MADE BY THE AO. 3. FOR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CANCELLING THE ORDER BECAUSE SUCH ENQUIRIES SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE MANNER THE LD. CIT WANTED TO MAKE WHEN THE ISSUES WERE DULY EXAMINED BY THE LD. AO AND, ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLET ED AFTER MAKING ENQUIRIES AND EXAMINING THE BOOKS AND OTHER RELEVANT DETAILS AND ISSUING SUMMONS WHEREVER CONSIDERED NECESSARY. 4. FOR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN PRESUMING THAT NOTHING WAS MENTIONED REGARDING THE METHOD FOR VALUATION IN 3CD REPORT AND FURTHER PRESUMING THAT THE CLOSING STOCK WAS UNDERVALUED, HIMSELF MAKING THE VALUATION ON AVERAGE RATES METHOD WHEN IT WAS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN 3CD REPORT THAT STOCK REGISTER WAS MAINTAINED, THE STOCK WAS PROPERLY VALUED AT COST OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER W AS LESS, SUCH DAY TO DAY STOCK REGISTER WAS PRODUCED AND VERIFIED BY THE AO, THE DETAILS OF WHICH WERE ALSO FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT. 2 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 5. FOR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THE VIEW THAT THE AO DID NOT EXAMINE THE STOCK DETAILS WITH REGARD TO THE SE CURED LOANS WHEN THE STOCK DETAILS FILED BEFORE THE BANK WERE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO WHICH TALLIED WITH THE STOCK REGISTER AND THE COPY OF THE SAME WAS ALSO FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT. 6. FOR THAT THE LD. CIT CONCLUDING THAT THE PAYMENT OF COMMISSION WAS N OT EXAMINED BY THE AO WHEN ADMITTEDLY THE LD. AO ISSUED NOTICES U/S. 133(6) DULY APPLIED HIS MIND TO THE ISSUE INVOLVED AND THEREFORE THE ORDER WAS NOT ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN TRADING OF BALL BEARING AS WELL AS SALE AND PURCHASE OF BALL BEARING ON COMMISSION BASIS FROM FOREIGN PARTIES. IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT BY ACIT, CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA VIDE ORDER DATED 23. 09.2011. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CIT - XII, KOLKATA ISSUED SHOW - CAUSE NOTICE U/S. 263 OF THE ACT VIDE NO. CIT - XII/263/TECH./KOL/2013 - 14/2018 DATED 29.11.2013 AND THE RELEVANT SHOW - CAUSE NOTICE READS AS UNDER: FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, RECORD AND INFORMATION RECEIVED FOR THE AY 2009 - 10, IT HAS BEEN NOTICED THAT THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS OF THE RETURN OF INCOME COMPUTATION OF INCOME WAS NOT LOOKED INTO BY THE AO CONCERNED. IT HAS BEEN NOTICED THAT FOLLOWING ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN YOUR CASE. I) UNDERSTATEMENT OF CLOSING STOCK. AS PER F. NO.3CD, THE ASSESSEE MAINTAINED A STOCK REGISTER, BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN MENTIONED REGARDING ANY PARTICULAR METHOD FOR VALUATION OF STOCK FOLLOWED I.E. LIFO/FIFO/ACM ETC. SL. NO. ITEM (BEARING) QUANTITY AS PER CL.28(A) OF F. NO. 3CD VALUE AS PER P&L A/C. AVERAGE RATE PER PC. 1. OPENING STOCK 10926 5,21,07,745/ - 4760/ - 2. PURCHASE 21558 20,50,42,101/ - 9507/ - 3. TOTAL (O/S + PURCHASE) 32494 25,71,49,846/ - 7913/ - 4. LESS: SALES 12448 21,43,60,625/ - 17,220/ - 5. BALANCE (CLOSING STOCK) 20046 9,74,66,752/ - 4862/ - APPLYING AVERAGE RATE CALCULATED IN COLUMN 3 I.E. RS.7913/ - PER PC. THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK COMES TO: BEARING (C/S) X AVERAGE RATE RECEIVED CLOSING STOCK 20046 X RS.7913 RS.15,86,23,998/ - LESS: VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK OF 20046 BEING DISCLOSED RS. 9,74,66,752/ - POSSIBLE UNDERSTATEMENT RS. 6,11,57,746/ - FURTHER THE LOW RATE APPLIED FOR VALUATION IS QUITE DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT CONSIDERING AVERAGE COST OF ACQUISITION. HOW CAN THE ASSESSEE DETERMINE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK AT HALF OF P URCHASE RATE. IF THE CLOSING STOCK CONTAINS ENTIRE OPENING STOCK, WHAT MAY BE REASON OF HOLDING SUCH STOCK FOR A LONG TIME, WHICH WAS APPARENTLY FUNDED BY THE SECURED LOAN? II) SECURED LOAN : IT MAY BE MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN SECURED LOAN AGAINST HYPOTHECATION OF STOCK FROM THE ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE. THE AMOUNT OF OUTSTANDING LOAN AS PER 3 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 B/SHEET WAS RS.4,78,41,728/ - OUT OF MAXIMUM CREDIT LIMIT OF RS.5.90 CRORES. THIS ISSUE A PPARENTLY NOT INVESTIGATED/ENQUIRED Y THE AO WHICH SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN IN VIEW OF VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK AT A RATE MUCH LOWER THAN AVERAGE COST OF PURCHASE AS DISCUSSED IN PARA - 1. III) COMMISSION : THE ASSESSEE CREDITED NOT COMMISSION OF RS.2,23,40,6 38/ - IN THE P & L A/C. NO BREAK UP REGARDING COMMISSION RECEIVED AND PAID WAS AVAILABLE. IT APPEARS FROM THE COMPUTATION THAT ONLY RS.63,601/ - WAS CLAIMED AS TDS ON COMMISSION RECEIPT. WHY THERE HAS BEEN SUCH LOW AMOUNT OF TDS WHEN THE ASSESSEE APPARENTLY RECEIVED COMMISSION WHICH RUNS INTO CRORES. AS PER STATEMENT OF TDS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 194H THE AMOUNT OF COMMISSION PAID WAS STATED TO BE RS.6,44,17,568/ - . IT IS ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SEPARATELY DEBITED RS.1,76,14,211/ - UNDER THE HEAD CO MMISSION ON SALES, WHICH WAS BROADLY CATEGORIZED UNDER ADMINISTRATIVE AND SELLING EXPENSES (SCH - 8) P & L A/C. NOW IF FOR THE SAKE OF ARGUMENT, IT IS CONSIDERED THAT THIS COMMISSION OF RS.1,74,14,211/ - IS PART OF COMMISSION PAID AMOUNTING RS.6,44,17,568/ - A S PER TDS (MADE BY THE ASSESSEE) STATEMENT, THERE REMAINS AN AMOUNT OF RS.4,68,03,357/ - WHICH APPEARS TO BE NETTED WITH COMMISSION RECEIVED. THUS THE AMOUNT OF COMMISSION APPARENTLY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE MAY BE RS.4,68,03,357/ - + RS.2,23,42,638/ - (NET C OUNT) FURTHER IT IS NOTED THAT THE AMOUNT OF CURRENT LIABILITIES HAS JUMPED TO RS.6,97,64,141/ - IN THE AY 2009 - 10 FROM RS.3,45,45,313/ - IN AY 2008 - 09 THOUGH THE QUANTUM OF PURCHASE DID NOT RISE THAT MUCH. ON EXAMINATION OF SCH - 7 OF B/SHEET IT IS NOTED THA T S/CREDITORS FOR COMMISSION PAYABLE CONSTITUTES MAJOR PART OF CURRENT LIABILITIES. THE AMOUNT OF COMMISSION PAYABLE WAS RS.5,86,27,765/ - WHICH APPEARS TO BE ABNORMAL. THIS FACTOR ALSO INDICATES NEED FOR DETAILED SCRUTINY OF COMMISSION PAID BY THE ASSESSEE . IT MAY ALSO BE MENTIONED THAT THE NET COMMISSION NOW CONSTITUTES AN IMPORTANT SEGMENT OF ASSESSEE S INC ESPECIALLY FOR AYS 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10. THUS WITH REGARD TO COMMISSION PAYMENT, THE AO SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED THE QUANTUM AND NATURE OF COMMISSION REVI EWED AND THE QUANTUM PAID. THE AO DID NOT CALL FOR SUCH DETAILS. FURTHER NOTICES U/S 133(6) WERE SENT TO 16 PARTIES BUT THE AO DID NOT ENQUIRE ABOUT THE NATURE OF SERVICES RENDERED, THE RATES AT WHICH COMMISSION WAS PAID ETC. ONE OF THE REASON FOR SELECTI ON OF CASE FOR SCRUTINY AS PER CASS IS AO SHOULD EXAMINE THE GENUINENESS OF COMMISSION EXP. CLAIMED . THE EXAMINATION WAS NOT APPARENTLY DONE. KEEPING IN MIND THE FACT THAT COMMISSION INCOME HAS INCREASED EXPONENTIALLY. AY 2007 - 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10 COMMISSION (NET) CREDITED AS INCOME 28,70,725/ - 1,81,69,330/ - 2,23,40,638/ - IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 DT.23.09.2011 IS ERRONEOUS IN SO FAR AS IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE AND DESERVED TO BE REVISED U/S. 263 OF THE IT ACT, 1961. I REQUEST YOU TO APPEAR EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED ON 16.12.2013 AT 12.15 P.M. AND PRODUCE/SUBMIT ANY DOCUMENT/EVIDENCE/BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS/EXPLANATI ON TO SHOW WHY THE ACTION U/S 263 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 DOES NOT LIE IN YOUR CASE ON THE AFORESAID GROUND(S). FAILURE IN YOUR PART WILL LEAD THE UNDERSIGNED TO DECIDE THE CASE ON MERIT WITHOUT GIVING ANY FURTHER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. 4 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 THE ASSESSEE REPLIED TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE VIDE LETTER DATED 16.01.2014 BUT CIT WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE AND REVIS ION U/S 263 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT FOR THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S. 14 3 (3) OF THE ACT BEING ERRONEOUS AND PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE AND DIRECTED THE AO TO MAKE FRESH INVEST IGATION ON THE ABOVE TWO ISSUES AND PASSED A FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE CAME IN APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 4. BEFORE US, LD. COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE SHRI S. M. SURANA, ADVOCATE, FIRST OF ALL TOOK US TO THE 1 ST ISSUE OF UNDERSTATEMENT OF CLOSING STOCK AND INTER CONNECTED ISSUE OF SECURED LOAN. ACCORDING TO CIT, THERE IS POSSIBLE UNDERSTATEMENT OF CLOSING STOCK AT RS.6,11,57,746/ - . FOR THIS, THE CIT HAS GONE TO FORM NO. 3CD OF THE AUDIT REPORT AS FILED AND MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE, WHICH READS AS UNDER: SL. NO. ITEM (BEARING) QUANTITY AS PER CL.28(A) OF F. NO. 3CD VALUE AS PER P&L A/C. AVERAGE RATE PER PC. 1. OPENING STOCK 10926 5,21,07,745/ - 4760/ - 2. PURCHASE 21558 20,50,42,101/ - 9507/ - 3. TOTAL (O/S + PURCHASE) 32494 25,71,49,846/ - 7913/ - 4. LESS: SALES 12448 21,43,60,625/ - 17,220/ - 5. BALANCE (CLOSING STOCK) 20046 9,74,66,752/ - 4862/ - THE CIT APPLYING AVERAGE RATE CALCULATED IN COLUMN NO. 3 @ RS.7913/ - PER PIECE ESTIMATED THE CLOSING STOCK AT RS.15,86,23,998/ - AND REDUCED THE SAME FROM VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK DISCLOSED AT RS.9,74,66,752/ - . ACCORDING TO HIM, THERE IS A POSSIBLE UNDERSTAT EMENT OF RS.6,11,57,746/ - . ACCORDING TO CIT, ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN SECURED LOAN AGAINST HYPOTHECATION OF STOCK FROM O RIENTAL B ANK OF COMMERCE (OBC) AND AMOUNT OUTSTANDING AGAINST LOAN AS PER BALANCE SHEET WAS RS.4,78,41,728/ - OUT OF MAXIMUM CREDIT LIMIT OF RS .5.90CR. THE CIT NOTED THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN QUANTITY OF CLOSING STOCK BUT ONLY DIFFERENCE IN AVERAGE RATE PER PIECE. FOR THIS, HE RECORDED AS UNDER: FURTHER THE LOW RATE APPLIED FOR VALUATION IS QUITE DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT CONSIDERING AVERAGE CO ST OF ACQUISITION. HOW CAN THE ASSESSEE DETERMINE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK AT HALF OF PURCHASE RATE. IF THE CLOSING STOCK CONTAINS ENTIRE OPENING STOCK, WHAT MAY BE REASON OF HOLDING SUCH STOCK FOR A LONG TIME, WHICH WAS APPARENTLY FUNDED BY THE SECURED LO AN? AND FOR SECURED LOAN HE NOTED THAT THIS ISSUE APPARENTLY NOT INVESTIGATED/ENQUIRED BY THE AO WHICH SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN IN VIEW OF VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK AT A RATE MUCH LOWER THAN AVERAGE COST OF PURCHASE AS DISCUSSED IN PARA - 1. 5 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 5 . LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI SURANA, ADVOCATE IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS VALUED THE STOCK AT COST OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER IS LESS. ACCORDING TO HIM, ASSESSEE HAS MAINTAINED COMPLETE STOCK REGISTER IN COMPUTER SYSTEM ITEM WISE , WHICH CONTAINS FULL DETAILS OF OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES MADE, SALES MADE AND ALSO CLOSING STOCK GIVING QUANTITY, QUALITY, RATE AND VALUE. ACCORDING TO HIM, COMPUTER SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY COMPUTES THE VALUE OF CLOSING STOCK ON COST BASIS AND THERE IS NO C HANCE FOR POSSIBILITY OF ANY UNDER - STATEMENT IN THE VALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK. ACCORDING TO LD. COUNSEL, THIS FIGURE OF CLOSING STOCK OF 20046 BEARING NOS. IS EXACTLY MATCHING WITH THE VALUE ADOPTED BY CIT IN HIS REVISION ORDER. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. CIT, DR SHRI VIJAY KUMAR ONLY ARGUED THAT THIS IS MERELY SETTING ASIDE OF THE ASSESSMENT AND NO HARM IS BEING DONE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT THE AO WILL VERIFY THE DOCUMENTS AGAIN. ACCORDING TO HIM, IF THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE SO STRONG HE CAN DEMONSTRATE THE SAME BEFORE AO. BUT LD. CIT, DR COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY DEFECT OR COULD NOT MAKE ANY ARGUMENT THAT THERE IS A SHORTAGE OF STOCK OR HOW VALUE DECLARED BY ASSESSEE IS LESS IN TERM OF VALUE AS WELL IN TERM OF QUANTITY . EVEN LD. CIT CO ULD NOT THROW LIGHT ON THE ASPECT , WHETHER, THESE DETAILS WERE NOT AVAILABLE BEFORE AO OR NOT , DURING THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 7 . THE SECOND ISSUE OF THIS REVISION PROCEEDING IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED COMMISSION FROM FOREI GN PARTIES AT RS.7,39,01,248/ - AND ALSO PAID COMMISSION OF RS.6,44,17,568/ - . ACCORDING TO CIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CREDITED COMMISSION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,23,40,638/ - AND NO BREAK - UP OF THE SAME WAS AVAILABLE IN THE RECORDS. ACCORDING TO HIM, TDS WAS DEDUCTED ON TOTAL COMMISSION PAID TO THE EXTENT OF R S.6,44,17,568/ - . HE ALSO NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SEPARATELY DEBITED A SUM OF RS.1,76,14,211/ - UNDER THE HEAD COMMISSION ON SALES. ACCORDING TO CIT, THE COMMISSION APPARENTLY RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE IS A T RS.6,91,43,993/ - , WHICH IS RS.4,68,03,357/ - + RS.2,23,42,638/ - (BUT THIS WAS NOT CREDITED IN TRADING ACCOUNT ) . ACCORDING TO CIT, THE AO OUGHT TO HAVE ENQUIRED INTO SUCH HUGE RECEIPT OF COMMISSION AGAINST WHICH APPARENTLY VERY LESS TAX WAS DEDUCTED BY TH E PAYER I.E. THE TOTAL TAX DEDUCTED TO THE EXTENT OF RS.63,601/ - . THE CIT FINALLY NOTED THAT NECESSARY VERIFICATION OF COMMISSION PAID WAS EXAMINED BY THE AO IS NOT CORRECT BECAUSE MERE CONFIRMATION OF TRANSACTION BY THIRD PARTY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO VERIFICA TION. ACCORDING TO HIM, NOTICES ISSUED U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT AND REQUISITE INFORMATION WERE FILED WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE NOTICES AND HEARING WAS CONCLUDED ON THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING WITHOUT MAKING ANY FURTHER 6 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 VERIFICATION. HE FURTHER NOTED TH AT OUT OF THE TOTAL COMMISSION EXPENDITURE CLAIMED AT RS.6,94,43,342/ - AN AMOUNT OF R S.5,86,27,756/ - IS SHOWN TO BE PAYABLE AS ON 31.03.2009. ACCORDINGLY, HE NOTED THAT THIS EXPENDITURE WAS ALLOWED WITHOUT MAKING REQUIRED INVESTIGATION. 8 . ON APPEAL BEFORE US, ASSESSEE FILED COMPLETE BREAK UP OF COMMISSION. AS PER AUDITED ACCOUNTS BREAK UP OF WHICH IS AS UNDER: COMMISSION RECEIVED RS.7,41,69,769/ - LESS: COMMISSION PAID RS.5,18,29,131/ - NET CREDITED TO P/L ACCOUNT RS.2,23,40,638/ - LD. COU NSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT FURTHER COMMISSION ON SALES WAS DEBITED TO THE P&L ACCOUNT AT RS.1,76,14,211/ - UNDER THE HEAD ADMINISTRATIVE AND SELLING EXPENSES AND THUS TOTAL COMMISSION PAID WAS RS.6,94,43,342/ - . THE ASSESSEE FILED RECONCILIATION OF C OMMISSION PAID AS PER AUDITED ACCOUNTS AND AS PER TDS STATEMENT NOW WHICH IS ENCLOSED IN ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK AT PAGES 35 TO 41 AND ALSO FILED DETAILS OF COMMISSION PAID AGAINST THE COMMISSION RECEIVED INCLUDING RECONCILIATION AT PAGES 42 AND 43. THE SUM MARY OF THE COMMISSION AS AT PAGE 42 READS AS UNDER: SUMMARY OF COMMISSION RECEIVED (NET) LLOYDS CORPORATION (PROP. SRI GOPAL SHARMA) A. COMMISSION RECEIVED FROM OUR FOREIGN PRINCIPALS DURING THE YEAR 73901248 B. COMMISSION RECEIVED FROM DO MESTIC COMPANIES: COMM. RS . TDS RS. 1. SAIL/VISAKHAPATNAM STEEL PLANT 108098 12248 2. SAIL BHILAI STEEL PLANT 160423 18180 268521 TOTAL COMMISSION RECEIVED DURING THE YEAR 74169769 LESS: COMMISSION PAID 51829131 COMMISSION RECEIVED (NET) AS PER P&L A/C 22340638 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT FROM THE ABOVE DETAILS OF COMMISSION RECEIVED OF RS.7,41,69,769/ - WOULD REVEAL THAT A SUM OF RS.7,39,01,248/ - HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM FOREIGN PRINCIPALS OF WHICH NO TDS WAS DEDUCTED AND ONLY A SUM OF RS.2,68,521/ - IS RECEIVED FROM DOMESTIC PARTIES ON WHICH TDS OF RS. 63 , 601 / - HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO STATED THAT THE ENTIRE COMMISSION PAID IS SUBJECT TO TDS AND ON EACH AND EVERY TRANSACTION TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AND THE SUMMARY OF THE SAME IS AT PAGES 35 TO 41 OF ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK AND THE DETAILS OF COMMISSION PAID ARE AS UNDER: C OMMISSION ON SALES RS. 1,76,14,211/ - (DEBITED UNDE R ADMINISTRATIVE & SELLING EXPENSES) COMMISSION PAID RS. 5,18,29,131/ - (NETTED WITH COMMISSION RECEIPT) RS. 6,94,43,342/ - 7 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MADE ENQUIRIES AND VERIFICATIO N WAS CARRIED OUT BY ISSUING NOTICES U/S. 133(6) TO 17 PARTIES COVERING PAYMENT OF COMMISSION FOR AN AMOUNT OF R S.5,53,54,513/ - , WHICH COVERS ALMOST 80% OF COMMISSION PAID. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO STATED THAT COMPLETE FACTS REGARDING SERVICES RE NDERED BY THESE PARTIES W ERE DULY EXPLAINED TO THE AO DURING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND EVEN DURING REVISION PROCEEDING S WHICH ARE AS UNDER: PROCUREMENT OF ORDERS, FOLLOW UP FOR PAYMENTS, SUBMISSION OF TENDER DOCUMENTS, INTRODUCING NEW C USTOMERS ETC. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THESE PARTIES TO WHOM COMMISSION PAID IS RESPONDED AND FILED COMPLETE DETAILS IN RESPONSE TO NOTICES ISSUED U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT, WHICH WAS VERIFIED BY THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS. AS REGARDS THE DETAILS OF SUNDRY CREDITORS PAYABLE ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION AT RS.5,86,27,765/ - , IT WAS EXPLAINED BEFORE THE AO DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND EVEN FROM REVISION PROCEEDINGS U/S. 263 OF THE ACT , THAT SAME HAVE BEEN PAID IN SU BSEQUENT YEAR AND FOR THIS, COMPLETE DETAILS WERE FILED BEFORE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE CIT DURING REVISION PROCEEDINGS. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WHETHER FOR MAKING FURTHER INVESTIGATION OR LACK OF ENQUIRY CAN THE CIT REVISE THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 263 OF THE ACT O R NOT? LD. COUNSEL POSED THIS QUESTION AND ANSWERED THAT ACCORDING TO HI M , IT IS NOT POSSIBLE. FOR THIS, HE RELIED ON CERTAIN CASE LAWS OF VARIOUS COURTS . 9 . ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. CIT, DR SHRI VIJAY KUMAR REITERATED HIS SAME SUBMISSIONS AS CITED ABOVE IN EARLIER ISSUE. 1 0 . WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. IN RESPECT TO THE FIRST ISSUE OF UNDERSTATEMENT OF STOCK, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS VALUED THE STOCK AT COST ON THE BASIS OF COST PRICE OR MARKET PRICE WHICHEVER IS LESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS MAINTAINED COMPLETE STOCK RECORDS IN ITS COMPUTER SYSTEM ITEM WISE CONTAINING FULL DETAILS OF OPENING STOCK, PURCHASES MADE, SALES MADE AND CLOSING STOCK GIVING QUANTITY, QUALITY, RATE AND VALUE. ONCE THESE FACTS ARE VERY MUCH AVAILABLE BEFORE THE AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING AND EVEN BEFORE CIT DURING THE REVISION PROCEEDING, BU T CIT HAS FAILED TO VERIFY THE FACTUM OF CLOSING STOCK THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE WHILE VALUING CLOSING STOCK AND NO AVERAGE CAN BE TAKEN WHEN THE EXACT FACTS ARE BEFORE HIM. WE FIND FROM THE RECORDS OF THE CASE, WHICH WERE AVAILABLE BEFORE 8 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 AO DURING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS BEFORE CIT IN THE REVISION PROCEEDINGS AND EVEN NOW IN THE ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK THAT ASSESSEE HAS ENCLOSED THE ITEM WISE DETAILS OF CLOSING STOCK VALUING THE CLOSING STOCK AT RS.9,74,66,752/ - , WHICH IS ENCLOSED IN ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK AT PAGES 55 TO 73. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED STOCK SUMMARY AT PAGE 54 OF ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK I.E. TOTAL NO OF BEARING AT 20046 FOR AN AMOUNT OF RS.8,96,39,563/ - AND SPARE PARTS AT RS.78,27,188/ - , THE TOTAL COMES TO RS.9,74,66,7 52/ - . THE ASSESSEE FILED THE DETAILS AS FILED WITH BANK I.E. STOCK STATEMENT FOR HYPOTHECATION AND THE VALUE IS EXACTLY IDENTICAL I.E. RS.974.67 LACS. EVEN THE QUANTITY IS ALSO MATCHING. IT MEANS THAT THE STOCK STATEMENT SUBMITTED TO BANK AND STOCK AS P ER STOCK REGISTER IS EXACTLY MATCHING IN TERM OF QUALITY AND QUANTITY AND RATE. ONCE THIS IS THE POSITION, HOW THE CIT CAN PROPOSE A POSSIBLE UNDERSTATEMENT AND CAN GIVE A FINDING THAT LIKEWISE THE AO ACCEPTED THE CLOSING STOCK DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE W ITHOUT CALLING ANY DETAIL OF MAKING THE REQUIRED VERIFICATION THEREOF . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS ON THIS ISSUE, WE FIND NO REASON FOR REVISING THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED AFTER MAKING DUE INQUIRY. IT WAS ALSO ARGUED BY ASSESSEE THAT COMPLETE DETAILS OF CLO SING STOCK I.E. STOCK STATEMENT AS SUBMITTED TO THE BANK AND STOCK AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO STATEMENT OF PARTICULARS FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO U /S. 44AB OF THE ACT IN THE AUDIT REPORT AND RELEVANT SL. NO. 9, 10 AND 11 READS AS UNDER: 9.(A) (B) 10. 11.(A) (B) WHETHER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 44AA, IF YES, LIST OF BOOKS SO PRESCRIBED. BOOKS OF ACCOUNT MAINTAINED (IN CASE OF ACCOUNTS ARE MAINTAINED IN A COMPUTER SYSTEM, MENTION THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS GENERATED BY SUCH COMPUTER SYSTEM) LIST OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT EXAMINED WHETHER THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT INCLUDES ANY PROFITS AND GAINS ASSESSABLE ON PRE SUMPTIVE BASIS, IF YES, INDICATE THE AMOUNT AND THE RELEVANT SECTION (44AD, 44AE, 44AF, 44B, 44BB, 44BBA, 44BBB OR ANY OTHER RELEVANT SECTION) METHOD OF ACCOUNTING EMPLOYED IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR WHETHER THERE HAS BEEN ANY CHANGE IN THE METHOD OF ACCOUNT ING EMPLOYED VIS - - VIS THE NO CASH BOOK, LEDGER, JOURNAL, PURCHASE, SALES AND STOCK REGISTER, BILLS AND VOUCHERS. ALL BOOKS ARE GENERATED THROUGH COMPUTER. SAME AS ABOVE. NO MERCANTILE. HOWEVER EFFECT OF EXCHANGE RATE FLUCTUATION NOT DETERMINABLE AND INSURANCE CLAIM IS ACCOUNTED FOR ON CASH BASIS. THERE IS NO CHANGE FROM IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR 9 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 METHOD EMPLOYED IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING PREVIOUS YEAR. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TO ITEM NO.28 OF THE REPORT WHICH CLEARLY READS AS UNDER: 28.(A) IN THE CASE OF A TRADING CONCERN, QUANTITATIVE DETAILS OF : BEARINGS (NOS) PRINCIPAL ITEMS OF GOODS TRADED (I) OPENING STOCK 10926 (II) PURCHASE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR 21568 (III) SALES DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR 12448 (IV) CLOSING STOCK 20046 (V) SHORTAGE/EXCESS, IF ANY IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE REVISION ORDER PASSED BY CIT WHO HAS GIVEN FINDING FOR REVISION OF ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT, THERE IS POSSIBLE UNDERSTATEMENT IN CLOSING STOCK AND ALSO STATED THAT, LIKEWISE THE AO ACCEPTED THE CLOSING STOCK DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT CALLING ANY DETAIL AND MAKING THE REQUIRED VERIFICATION THEREOF. 1 1 . IN RESPECT TO THE SECOND ISSUE OF COMMISSION, THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED NET COMMISS ION OF RS.2,23,40,638/ - AND THE BREAK - UP OF THE SAME IS GIVEN ABOVE IN PARA 8 AND FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY THE SAME IS BEING REPRODUCED AGAIN AS UNDER: COMMISSION RECEIVED RS.7,41,69,769/ - LESS: COMMISSION PAID RS.5,18,29,131/ - NET CREDITED TO P/L ACCOUNT RS.2,23,40,638/ - IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE COMMISSION THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO DEBITED COMMISSION IN THE P&L ACCOUNT AT RS. 1,76,14,211/ - UNDER THE HEAD ADMINISTRATIVE AND SELLING EXPENSES AND THUS, THE TOTAL COMMISSION PAID WAS RS.6,94,43,342/ - . AS PER THE DETAILS FILED IN RESPECT TO STATEMENT OF TDS DEDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S. 194H OF THE ACT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID TOTAL COMMISSION AT RS. 6,44,17,568/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED CREDIT FOR TDS AT RS.63,661/ - , WHICH WAS DEDUCTED FROM THE FOLLO WING INCOMES: NATURE OF INCOME TDS CLAIMED COMMISSION INCOME RS.30,428/ - INTEREST INCOME RS.33,233/ - TOTAL RS.63,661/ - 12. WE FIND THAT THE AO HAS CARRIED OUT VERIFICATION OF COMMISSION PAID BY ISSUING NOTICES U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT TO 17 PARTIES, WHO ADMITTED TO HAVE RECEIVED THE COMMISSION FROM THE ASSESSEE IN ITS COMMUNICATION IN RESPONSE TO NOTICES U/S. 133(6) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE COVERED ALMOST 80% OF COMMISSION PAID AT RS.5,53,54,513/ - OUT OF THE TOTAL COMMISSION PAID AT RS.6,94,43,342/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO EXPLAINED THE NATURE OF SERVICES RENDERED BY THESE 10 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 PARTIES TO WHOM COMMISSION IS PAID DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND EVEN DURING REVISION PROCEEDINGS U/S. 263 OF THE ACT. THE AO HAS ALSO VERIFIED THE SUNDRY CREDITORS ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION PAYABLE OUTSTANDING AS ON 31.03.2009, WHICH WAS PAID IN THE SUBSEQUENT FINANCIAL YEAR 2009 - 10 RELEVANT TO AY 2010 - 11 AND THE DETAILS WERE ALSO FILED BEFORE CIT DURING REVISION PROCEEDINGS AND EVEN NOW BEFORE TRIBUNAL IN ITS PAPER BOOK. THE SIMPLE REASON FOR CARRYING OUT REVISION PROCEEDINGS U/S. 263 OF THE ACT BY CIT WAS THAT, MERE CONFIRMATION OF TRANSAC TION BY A THIRD PARTY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO VERIFICATION. IT IS NOTED THAT NOTICE UNDER SECTION 133(6) WAS ISSUED VIDE LETTER DATED 17.08.2011 AND REPLY IN ALMOST ALL CASES WAS FILED WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN THE NOTICE. THE CASE WAS CONCLUDED ON THE NEX T NEARING WITHOUT MAKING ANY FURTHER VERIFICATION. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT ALL THE PERSONS TO WHOM NOTICE WERE ISSUED ARE LOCATED IN KOLKATA AND REPLIES IN ALL THE CASES WERE FILED BY HAND. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT OUT OF TOTAL COMMISSION EXPENDITURE CL AIMED OF RS. 6,94,43,342/ - , AN AMOUNT OF RS.5,86,27,756/ - IS SHOWN TO BE PAYABLE AS ON 31.03.2009. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WHETHER THE REVISION U/S. 263 IS POSSIBLE OR NOT, LET US EXAMINE THE ISSUE FROM THE CASE LAW DECIDED BY VARIOUS COURTS AND CITED BEFO RE US BY ASSESSEE. 13. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE DECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT, DELHI F BENCH IN THE CASE OF GUPTA INTERNATIONAL VS. ITO IN ITA NO. 2812/DEL/2008 WHEREIN HON'BLE TRIBUNAL HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AS UNDER: 29. NOW COMING TO THE ISSUE THAT WHETHER THE AO HAS DONE THE ASSESSMENT IN HASTE AND WITHOUT MAKING PROPER ENQUIRY, IT MAY BE MENTIONED THAT IT IS NOT A CLEAR CASE WHERE NO ENQUIRY AT ALL HAS BEEN DONE BY THE AO. PROBABLY ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT PERIOD INVOLVING COMMENCEMENT OF AS SESSMENT PROCEEDING AND COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING BEARS IN THE MIND OF THE CIT TO HOLD THAT THE AO HAS DONE THE ASSESSMENT IN HASTY MANNER WITHOUT MAKING PROPER ENQUIRY BUT THAT ASSUMPTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT AS WHEN AN ISSUE HAS BEEN RAISED AND A PROPER REPLY OF THE SAME IS GIVEN THEN IT CANNOT BE PRESUMED THAT EITHER THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DEALT IN HASTE AND WITHOUT MAKING ENQUIRY UNLESS IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT AFTER RAISING THE QUERY AND AFTER REPLIES AND DETAILS BEING PLACED ON RE CORD THE DECISION TAKEN WAS INCORRECT. IN ANY CASE THE PRESENT CASE IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE NO ENQUIRY WAS MADE BY THE AO AND AT BEST, IT CAN BE THE CASE OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT IT IS A CASE OF INADEQUATE ENQUIRY. HERE ALSO THIS POSITION OF LAW HAS BEEN CLAR IFIED BY THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUNBEAM AUTO LTD. (SUPRA) WHEREIN THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE HELD THAT IF THERE WAS ANY ENQUIRY, EVEN INADEQUATE, THAT WOULD NOT BY ITSELF GIVE AN OCCASION TO THE CIT TO PASS ORDERS UNDER S. 263 OF THE ACT MERELY BECAUSE HE HAS DIFFERENT OPINION IN THE MATTER. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IT IS ONLY, IN THE CASE OF 'LACK OF ENQUIRY' THAT SUCH A COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE OPEN AND WHILE HOLDING SO THEIR LORDSHIPS HAVE CONSIDERED THE EARLIER DECISION OF THE HON BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GEE VEE ENTERPRISES VS. ADDL. CIT (SUPRA). THUS, APPLYING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUNBEAM AUTO LTD. (SUPRA), THE ORDER OF THE CIT UNDER S. 263 CANNOT BE HELD VALID AS PRE SENT CASE IS NOT A CASE OF 'LACK OF ENQUIRY'. 14. FROM THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY CIT IN HIS REVISION ORDER IN PARA 5, WHICH ARE VERY GENERAL IN NATURE AND SEEMS TO BE MORE OF ACADEMIC IN NATURE, HENCE, WE CANNOT ADJUDICATE ON 11 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 THE SAME. HOWEVER, THE CIT HA S RAISED THE ISSUES I.E. THE ISSUE OF UNDERSTATEMENT OF CLOSING STOCK AS WELL AS COMMISSION ONLY ON THE BASIS OF HIS OPINION THAT PROPER ENQUIRY IS NOT MADE BY AO DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. BUT THE FACTS, AS NARRATED ABOVE, SPEAK OTHERWI SE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTUAL SITUATION AND LEGAL POSITION, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE CIT HIMSELF WAS NOT SURE, WHETHER THE ORDER OF THE AO IS ERRONEOUS OR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE SO AS TO INVOKE THE PROVISION OF SECTION 263 OF THE ACT . WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT U/S.263 OF THE ACT ASSESSMENT ORDER CANNOT BE SET ASIDE FOR MAKING ROVING INQUIRIES WITHOUT POINTING OUT ANY ERROR IN THE ORDER. A SIMILAR VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GABRIEL INDIA LTD . (1993) 203 ITR 108 (BOM). THE POWER OF REVISION IS NOT MEANT TO BE EXERCISED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DIRECTING THE AO TO HOLD ANOTHER INVESTIGATION, PARTICULARLY WHEN THE ORDER OF THE AO IS FOUND NEITHER ERRONEOUS NOR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. HON BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SHAKTI CHARITIES (2000) 244 ITR 226(MAD) HELD THE SIMILAR VIEW. MAKING A VALID ORDER U/S.263 OF THE ACT THE ESSENTIAL CONDITION THAT THE COMMISSIONER HAS TO RECORD AN EXPRESS FINDING TO THE FACT THAT THE OR DER SOUGHT TO BE REVISED IS ERRONEOUS AS WELL AS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE AND IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SUCH FINDING, THE ORDER U/S.263 OF THE ACT IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE. WE FIND THAT, IN THE PRESENT CASE BEFORE US, THE AO HAS VERIFIED THE DETAILS OF EXPENSES AFTER CALLING THE DETAILS FROM THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUPPLIED BILLS AND VOUCHERS OF THESE EXPENSES. HON BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MULCHAND BAGRI(1992) 108 CTR 206(CAL) STATED THAT WHERE THE AO HAS MADE ENQUIRIES, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ORDER PASSED IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. IN THE PRESENT CASE THE AO HAS MADE ENQUIRIES AND THE ASSESSEE REPLIED TO THE ENQUIRIES, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO IN THE PRESENT CASE CANNOT BE SAID TO BE EITHER ERRONEOUS OR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF REVENUE. ACCORDINGLY, WE QUASH THE REVISION ORDER PASSED U/S.263 OF THE ACT BY CIT. 15 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 16 . ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 1 2 . 1 2 . 2 0 1 4 S D / - S D / - , , ( SHAMIM YAHYA ) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 1 2 T H DECEMBER , 201 4 JD.(SR.P.S.) - COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 12 ITA NO.416/K/2014 SHRI GOPAL SHARMA AY 2009 - 10 1 . / A PPELLANT SHRI GOPAL SHARMA, PROP. M/S. LLYODS CORPORATION, 33/1, N. S. ROAD, MARSHALL HOUSE, R. NO. 620, KOLKATA - 700001. 2 / RESPONDENT ACIT, CIRCLE - 34, KOLKATA. 3 . ( )/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. / CIT , KOLKATA / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA / TRUE COPY, / BY ORDER, /ASSTT. REGISTRAR .