B.D. MUNDRA & SONS, Kota V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Kota

ITA 430/JPR/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3687 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (International Taxation) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VARINDRA MEHTA
• Assessee Lawyers: C M BIRLA
• Keywords: Search and seizure
• Section: 143(3); 244A; 153A; 250; 132

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S,A JAIPUR JH JESK LH0 KEKZ] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI RAMESH. C. SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIJAY PA L RAO, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 & 2009-10 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS, 16, JHALAWAR ROAD, KOTA. CUKE VS. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AAAHB 7882 D VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI C.M. BIRLA (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI VARINDRA MEHTA (CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 12/02/2019 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 05/03/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAI NST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), JAIPUR BOTH DATE D 01.02.2018 ARISING FROM ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 153A OF THE I. T. ACT FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 & 2009-10 RESPECTIVELY. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED IDENTICAL GROUNDS FOR BOTH YEARS HOWEVER, THE QUANTUM OF DISA LLOWANCES/ ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 2 ADDITIONS VARIES. THE GROUNDS RAISED FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2008-09 ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING DISALLOWANCE OF: - (I) A SUM OF RS. 70984/- BEING 5% OF VEHICLE REPAIR & MAINTENANCE EXPENSES FOR PERSONAL USE IGNORING THAT THESES EXPENSES WERE ON 40 MOTOR CYCLE, 4 DEEPS, ONE TAVER A &ONE CAR AND THAT PERSONAL USE CONFINES TO TRAVERA & CAR ONL Y WHEREIN TOTAL EXPENSES ARE HARDLY LESS THAN RS. 2000/- P.M. AND ALSO IGNORING DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT IN ASS. YEAR 2007 -08 WHEREIN ADDITION OF RS. 5000/- WERE SUSTAINED BY HONBLE IT AT; (II) A SUM OF RS. 48065/- BEING 5% OF PETROL & DIES EL EXPENSES FOR PERSONAL USE IGNORING THAT EXPENSES ON TAVERA & CAR ARE HARDLY RS. 5000-6000 P.M. AND ALSO IGNORING DECISIO N OF HONBLE ITAT IN ASS. YEAR 2007-08 WHEREIN ADDITION OF RS. 1 2500/- WERE SUSTAINED BY HONBLE ITAT; (III) A SUM OF RS. 33000/- BEING 10% OF TELEPHON EX PENSES FOR PERSONAL USE IGNORING THAT EXPENSES ON TELEPHONE AT RESIDENCE AND MOBILES ARE HARDLY RS. 4000/- P.M. AND ALSO IGN ORING DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT IN ASS. YEAR 2007-08 WHEREIN ADDITI ON OF RS. 10000/-- WERE SUSTAINED BY HONBLE ITAT; (IV) A SUM OF RS. 144185/- BEING PAYMENT FOR MEMBER SHIP & SUBSCRIPTION EXPENSES OF CLUBS/INSTITUTIONS IGNORIN G THAT THESE EXPENSES WERE VERY MUCH NECESSARY FOR BISINESS EXPE DIENCY AND ALSO IGNORING DECISION OF HONBLE ITAT IN ASS. YEAR 2007-08 WHEREIN ADDITION OF RS. 17090/- WERE SUSTAINED BY H ONBLE ITAT; 2. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE HONBLE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 127779/- BEING TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION AT RIICO PLOT AND WHICH HAS LIFE OF 2-3 YEARS WHICH WAS USED TO HOUSE OLD TRACTORS RECEIVED IN EXCHANGE ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 3 SALE SCHEME THEREFORE IT IS ALLOWABLE EXPENSES U/S 37. BESIDES EVEN IF IT IS CAPITALIZED IT WAS TO BE PROVIDED DEP RECIATION @ 100% (AS PER APPENDIX 1-BUILDING (4)). 3. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE THE HONBLE CIT(A) FURTHER ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITIONS OF RS. 1805716/- OUT OF EXPENSES CLAIMED ON ACCOUNT OF EXCHANGE SALES SC HEME. THE ADDITIONS ARE CONFIRMED ON FLIMSY GROUNDS IGNORING THAT IN PAST YEARS AS WELL AS SUBSEQUENT YEARS IT WAS ALLOWED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICERS. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, A MEND, MODIFY AND/OR OTHERWISE SUBSTITUTE ANY OF THE FOREGOING GR OUNDS AS AND WHEN REQUIRED. 2. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT TH E LD. CIT(A) WHILE PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDERS AS DIRECTED THE A O TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 27.10.2016 WHEREBY THE APPEALS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 & 2009-10 ARISING FROM THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT WERE DECIDED. THE LD. AR HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED MISC. AP PLICATION AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2016 HOWEVER, THE MISC. APPLICATI ON FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE DISMISSED BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. THUS, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTERTAINED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THEREFORE, SOME OF THE ISSUES IN THE APPEALS AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143 (3) OF THE ACT ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 4 NEED SOME RECTIFICATION AND CLARIFICATION HAS NOT B EEN DONE. THE LD. CIT(A) INSTEAD OF DECIDING THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO PA SS THE ORDER IN CONSONANCE OF THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THUS, THE LD. AR HAS PLEADED THAT THOSE ISSUES WHICH WERE RAISED IN THE MISCELLA NEOUS APPLICATION MAY BE CONSIDERED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. HE HAS FUR THER POINTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE PASSING THE ORDER DATED 27.10.20 16 HAS FOLLOWED THE DECISION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 HOWEVER, T HERE IS NO CLARITY IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE A.Y. 2007-08 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE AO WHILE PASSING GIVING EFFECT ORDER HAS NOT GIVEN ANY RELIEF IN RESPECT OF THE ADDITIONS. THEREFORE, THE LD. AR HAS CONTENDED THAT THE TRIBUNAL MAY DECIDE ALL THESE ISSUES AGAIN IN THESE APPEALS. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DR HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY FRESH ADDITION IN THE INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE WHILE PASSING THE ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT BUT THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS REITERATED AS FINALLY CONFIRMED IN THE PROCEEDINGS ARISING FROM THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE ISSUES WHICH ARE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THESE AP PEALS HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSIDERED AND DECIDED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. THE O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALREADY ATTAINED FINALITY AND HENCE, NO FRESH F INDING CAN BE GIVEN ON ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 5 THE ISSUES WHICH WERE ALREADY ADJUDICATED BY THE TR IBUNAL. HE HAS RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THERE WAS A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION U/S 132 OF THE ACT IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 13.08.2013. THE AO ACCORDINGLY ISSUED NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEARS 2008-09 & 2009-10 ON 12.12.2014 HOWEVER, IN THE MEANTIME THE ASSESSMENT WERE COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDERS DATED 3 1.12.2010 AND 29.12.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 & 2009- 10 RESPECTIVELY. EVEN THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO DECIDE THE APPEALS FILED B Y THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 19.03.2013 AND CONSEQUENTLY THE AO PASS ED THE GIVING EFFECT ORDER ON 10.05.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 AND RECOMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS PER THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. SIMILAR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, THE AO RECOMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WHILE PASSING THE GIVI NG EFFECT ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) DATED 25.03.2013. THE MATTER ARISING FRO M THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED TO THI S TRIBUNAL AND TRIBUNAL FINALLY DECIDED THE APPEALS IN ITA NO. 399 & 400/JP/2013 VIDE ORDER DATED 27.10.2016. THOUGH THE ASSESSEE FILED M ISC. APPLICATION IN ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 6 RESPECT OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 27.10.2016 HOWEVER, THE SAID MISCELL ANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 12.02.2018 BEING BARRED BY LIMITATION. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2016 OF THIS TRIBUNAL HAS ATTAINED FINA LITY AS THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CHALLENGED THE SAID ORDER BEFORE THE HONBL E HIGH COURT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT U /S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON 29.01.2016 HAS REASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN PARA 6 AS UNDER:- 6. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COMPLETED U/S 143( 3) BY THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KOTA VIDE ORDER DATED 31.12.2010 BY MAKING CERTAIN ADDITION IN THE RETURN INCOME OF RS. 7,27,9 80/- AND ASSESSED AT RS. 66,50,461/-. THEREAFTER, ORDER DATE D 19.03.2013 OF LD. CIT(A), KOTA WAS RECEIVED AND INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE REVISED VIDE ORDER U/S 250 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 DATE D 10.05.2013 AND INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE RE-COMPUETED AT RS. 42,5 1,240/- BY THE ITO, WARD-1(1), KOTA. THUS, THE ADDITION IN ORD ER SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A), KOTA MAY BE CONSIDERED AS ADDITI ON MADE IN THIS ORDER AND TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEE N ASSESSED AT RS. 42,51,240/-. ASSESSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A AT RS. 42,51,240/-. INTEREST U/S 234A/234B/234C/234D IS/ARE CHARGED AND INTEREST U/S 244A IS WITHDRAWN AS PER ITNS-150, IF APPLICABLE. THE ITNS- 150 FORMING PART OF THIS ORDER, DEMAND NOTICED AND CHALLAN ARE ISSUED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED AFTER OBTAINING PRIOR AP PROVAL U/S 153D OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 OF THE ADDL. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME- ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 7 TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, JAIPUR VIDE HIS OFFICE LETTER - & V- VK- VK;QDR@DSUNZH; [K.M@T;IQJ@2015&16@2049 FNUKAD 29-01 -2016- THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PA SSED U/S 153A OF THE ACT THAT THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY ADDITION TO THE TO TAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS ASSESSED AND FINALIZED IN THE PROCEEDIN GS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. BUT THE AO HAS RECOMPUTED THE TO TAL INCOME AS IT WAS FINALLY ASSESSED AS A RESULT OF THE LD. CIT(A) ORDERS ARISING FROM THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER. HENCE, THE AO HAS NOT DE CIDED ANY ISSUE AFRESH WHILE PASSING THE ORDER U/S 153A BUT JUST RE COMPUTED THE TOTAL INCOME AS IT WAS ASSESSED IN THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 14 3(3) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE SAID ORDER BEFORE THE LD. C IT(A) HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE DECISION OF THIS T RIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE ARISING FROM THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 1 43(3) OF THE ACT HAS DIRECTED THE AO TO REITERATE THE ADDITIONS AS PER T HE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) H AS HELD IN PARA 4.3 AS UNDER:- 4.3 THUS, I AM OF THE VIEW THAT AO CAN REITERATE T HE ADDITIONS AFTER REFERRING AND FOLLOWING THE DIRECTIONS OF HON BLE ITAT, JAIPUR ORDER AS ABOVE. THUS, AO SHALL TAKE RETURNED INCOME AS PER RETURN FILED U/S 153A AND SHALL ADD THE ADDITION WH ICH ARE CONFIRMED/PENALTY CONFIRMED BY HONBLE BY HONBLE I TAT, JAIPUR. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, ADDITIONS ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 8 DIRECTED TO BE DELETED BY HONBLE ITAT, JAIPUR MAY BE DELETED. SUBJECT TO FINAL VERIFICATION BY THE AO THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THEREFORE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL AND DIRECTED THE AO TO GIVE EFFECT TO THE DIRECTIONS GI VEN IN THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 27.10.2016. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASS ESSEE IN THE PROCEEDINGS ARISING FROM THE ORDER PASSED U/S 153A OF THE ACT IS THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE MISCELLANEOUS A PPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS THERE IS NO CLARITY IN ORDER OF THI S TRIBUNAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 WHICH WAS FOLLOWED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 & 2009-10 RESPECTIVELY. HOWEVER, SINCE THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL DATED 27.10.2016 HAS ATTAINED FINALITY AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT MADE ANY FRESH ADDITIONS IN THE PRO CEEDINGS U/S 153A OF THE ACT, THEREFORE, ALL THE ISSUES WHICH ARE REITER ATED BY THE AO IN THE PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A OF THE ACT HAVE ALREADY BEEN A DJUDICATED BY THIS TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, IN THESE PROCEEDINGS WE CANNOT REVIEW OR REVISE THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL ON THE VERY ISSUES WH ILE PASSING THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2016 IN THE APPEAL ARISING FROM ORIGINA L ASSESSMENT YEARS. EVEN OTHERWISE THERE IS NO FRESH ISSUE ARISES FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 153A OF THE ACT THEN, THE ISSUES ALREADY ADJUDICATED BY THIS ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 9 TRIBUNAL CANNOT BE REOPENED IN THESE PROCEEDING WHE N THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY ADDITION. 6. AS REGARDS THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT TH ERE IS NO CLARITY IN THE ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 THE REMED Y WAS TO TAKE APPROPRIATE STEPS BY FILING THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLI CATION. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEPS THEREFORE, IN THES E PROCEEDINGS THE ORDER FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 CANNOT BE REL OOKED. HOWEVER, HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE DIRECT THE AO THAT WHILE GIVING EFFECT TO THE ORDER OF THIS TR IBUNAL DATED 27.10.2016 THE ADDITIONS SUSTAINED BY THIS TRIBUNAL MAY BE RECOMPUTED IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE TO THE TOTAL CLAIM AND THEN ALLOW THE RELIEF IF ANY TO THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF EACH ITEM OF DISALLOW ANCE/ ADDITION. THEREFORE, DISALLOWANCE SUSTAINED BY THIS TRIBUNAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 MAY BE FIRST CONVERTED IN THE PERCENTA GE OF THE TOTAL CLAIM AND THEN SHALL APPLY THE SAME PERCENTAGE FOR THE YE AR UNDER CONSIDERATION WHILE PASSING THE GIVING EFFECT ORDER . 7. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, THE AO HAS PASS ED AN IDENTICAL ORDER WITHOUT MAKING ANY FRESH ADDITION OR DISALLOW ANCE BUT REITERATED THE TOTAL INCOME AS ARISING FROM THE PROCEEDINGS OF ASSESSMENT U/S ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 10 143(3) OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE ORDER O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153 AND HAS HELD I N PARA 6 AS UNDER:- 6. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS COMPLETED U/S 143( 3) BY THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KOTA VIDE ORDER DATED 29.12.2011 BY MAKING CERTAIN ADDITION IN THE RETURN INCOME OF RS. 8,19,8 80/- AND ASSESSED AT RS. 81,87,064/-. THEREAFTER, ORDER DATE D 25.03.2013 OF LD. CIT(A), KOTA WAS RECEIVED AND INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE REVISED VIDE ORDER U/S 250 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 DATE D 13.05.2013 AND INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE RE-COMPUTED AT RS. 74,14 ,540/- BY THE ITO, WARD-1(1), KOTA. THUS, THE ADDITION IN ORD ER SUSTAINED BY THE LD. CIT(A), KOTA MAY BE CONSIDERED AS ADDITI ON MADE IN THIS ORDER AND TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEE N ASSESSED AT RS. 74,14,540/-. ASSESSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153A AT RS. 74,14,540/-. INTEREST U/S 234A/234B/234C/234D IS/ARE CHARGED AND INTEREST U/S 244A IS WITHDRAWN AS PER ITNS-150, IF APPLICABLE. THE ITNS- 150 FORMING PART OF THIS ORDER, DEMAND NOTICED AND CHALLAN ARE ISSUED. THIS ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED AFTER OBTAINING PRIOR AP PROVAL U/S 153D OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961 OF THE ADDL. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME- TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, JAIPUR VIDE HIS OFFICE LETTER - & V- VK- VK;QDR@DSUNZH; [K.M@T;IQJ@2015&16@2049 FNUKAD 29-01 -2016- THEREFORE, FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE AO HA S NOT MADE ANY FRESH ADDITION TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE BUT IT WAS ASSESSED AS PER OUTCOME OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/ S 143(3) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE DIRECTIONS GIVEN BY US FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 ARE ALSO APPLICABLE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018 B.D. MUNDRA & SONS VS. DCIT 11 IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED THE ASSESSEE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05/03/2019. SD/- SD/- JESK LH0 KEKZ FOT; IKY JKO (RAMESH. C. SHARMA) (VIJAY PAL RAO) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 05/03/2019. * SANTOSH. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- B.D. MUNDRA & SONS, KOTA 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 429 & 430/JP/2018} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR