M/s. Punjab Institute of Medical Sciences, Jalandhar city V. The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jalandhar

ITA 465/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9325 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 11 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 20-05-2019
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 15-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR DEVENDRA SING H LD
• Assessee Lawyers: PADAM BAHL; VIPU L ARORA LD CAS
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Opportunity of being heard; Retrospective amendment; Question of law; Initiation of penalty proceedings; Ignorance of law
• Section: 271(1)(c); 27

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. N.S.SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 465(ASR)/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 M/S. PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, GARHA ROAD, JALANDHAR CITY. [PAN:AAABP 0193P] VS. DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 463(ASR)/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1, (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH. VS. MS. PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, GARHA ROAD, JALANDHAR [PAN:AAABP 0193P] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) CROSS OBJECTION NO.06(ASR)/2018 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.463(ASR)/2017) ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 MS. PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, GARHA ROAD, JALANDHAR [PAN:AAABP 0193P] VS. DY. CIT, CIRCLE-III, JALANDHAR. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. PADAM BAHL & SH. VIPU L ARORA (LD. CAS) RESPONDENT BY: DR. DEVENDRA SINGH (L D. CIT-DR) DATE OF HEARING: 20.05.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 21 .06.2019 ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 2 ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM: BY WAY OF ITA NO.465(ASR)/2014 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER DATED 12/05/2014, IMPUGNED HERE IN PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A), JALANDHAR, WHEREBY THE LD. CIT( A) AFFIRMED THE LEVY OF PENALTY TO THE TUNE OF RS.6.50 CRORES U/S 2 71(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS THE 'ACT '. WHEREAS BY WAY OF ITA NO.463/ASR/2017 THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER DATED 10/04/2017, WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE PENALTY TO THE T UNE OF RS.7,14,97,376/- IMPOSED BY THE AO U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. BY WAY OF THE CROSS OBJECTION I.E. C.O. NO.06/ASR/2018, THE ASSESSEE ALSO CHALLENGED THE ORDER DATED 10/04/2017 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WHEREBY THE LD. CIT(A) PARTLY AFFIRM ED THE PENALTY. AS THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEALS AND CROSS OBJECTION UNDER CONSIDERATION IS THE SAME AND IDENTICAL, THEREFORE FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY HAVE BEEN TAKEN IN TO CONSIDERATION SIMULTANEOUSLY. 2. LET US TO FIRST DECIDE THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL I.E. ITA NO .465(ASR)/2014. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL I N ITA NO.465/ASR/2014. 1. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS JALANDHAR HAS GROSSLY ERRED BOTH IN LAW AND ON FACTS WHILE CO NFIRMING THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271(L)(C) OF THE ACT ON AN ADDITION OF RS 6.50 CRORES. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF APPEAL JALANDHAR HAS WRONGLY INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE TRUST HAD FILED INACCURA TE PARTICULARS OF INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS 6.50 CRORES. ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 3 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF APPEAL JALAN DHAR HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ACT OF DEPOSITING THE AMOUNT IN CAPITAL LOCAL AREA BANK WHICH IS A NONSCHEDULED BANK, WAS MERELY A TECHNICAL ERROR ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH OCCASIONED DUE TO IGNORANCE OF LAW. 4. THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) JALANDHAR HA S FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT LD CIT (A) IN APPEAL AGAINST QUANTU M PROCEEDINGS VIDE ORDER DATED 29/09/2009 HAS NOT RECORDED SATISFACTIO N FOR INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS U/S 271(1) OF THE INCOME TAX AC T 1961 WHILE MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS 6.50 CRORES. THE LD. CIT ( A) HAS FURTHER FAILED TO APPRECIATE IN THE PRESENT ORDER APPEALED AGAINST THAT THE AO MADE ADDITION OF RS 25 CRORES BY DISALLOWING CAPITAL REC EIPT CLAIMED EXEMPT WHEREAS ADDITION SUSTAINED BY CIT(A) OF RS 6.50 CRO RES OUT OF RS 25 CRORES WAS DUE TO THE AMOUNT BEING DEPOSITED IN CON TRAVENTION OF SECTION 11(5). 5. THAT BOTH LEARNED CIT(A) JALANDHAR AND ASSESSING OFFICER HAVE FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE MAXIMUM ADDITION ,SUB JECT TO PENALTY , ON ACCOUNT OF CONTRAVENTION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 1 1(5) COULD BE AT RS. 659863/- I.E. INTEREST EARNED ON RS.6.50 DEPOSITED WITH THE CAPITAL LOCAL AREA BANK INSTEAD OF RS.6.50 CRORE ,THE PRINC IPAL AMOUNT. THIS IS IN VIEW OF DECISION OF KARNATKA HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF CIT V. F.R. MULLER CHARITABLE INSTITUTION 363 ITR 230 (KARN), D ECISION OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DIT(EXEMPTIONS) V. SHETH MAFATLAL GAGAL BHAI FOUNDATION TRUST 249 ITR 533 (BOMBAY) AND DIT(EXEMP TION) V. AGRIM CHARAN FOUNDATION 253 ITR 593 (DELHI). 6. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF APPEAL JALANDHAR HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE MATTER OF RS 6.50 CRORE DEPOSIT ED BY THE ASSESSEE TRUST IN CONTRAVENTION OF SECTION 11(5) CROPPED UP FOR THE FIRST TIME IN FRONT OF CIT(A) IN APPEAL AGAINST QUANTUM PROCEEDIN GS. 4. IN ADDITION TO RAISING THE GROUNDS MENTIONED ABOVE , THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO RAISED ADDITIONAL GROUND CLAIMING TO BE B EING LEGAL IN NATURE WHICH FOR THE SAKE OF COMPLETENESS IS REP RODUCED HEREIN BELOW. THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274(1) READ WITH SECTION 271(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 DATED 30.12.2008 DOES NOT SPEC IFY WHETHER THE NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED ON THE GROUND OF CONCEALING THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHING THE INACCUR ATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE MATTER IS SQUARELY COVER ED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. SSAS EMERALD MEADOW (SLP CC NO.11485/2016). ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 4 5. HAVING HEARD THE PARTIES AT LENGTH AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE ADDITIONAL GROUND AND CLAIMED THE SAME AS LEGAL IN NAT URE. IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE APEX COURT, IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD. [229 ITR 38 3], AS THE ADDITIONAL GROUND CLEARLY EMANATES FROM THE FACTS ALRE ADY ON RECORD AND THERE IS NO EMBARGO, THEREFORE WE DO NOT H AVE ANY HESITATION TO ALLOW TO RAISE THE ADDITIONAL GROUND WH ICH IS UN- DOUBTLY LEGAL IN NATURE AS IT IS SETTLED BY THE APEX C OURT THAT THE LEGAL GROUND(S) IF ANY, NOT RAISED AT THE LOWER STAGE , CAN BE RAISED BEFORE HIGHER ADJUDICATORY AUTHORITIES/COURTS. 6. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE LEGAL GROUND, THEREFORE IN O UR CONSIDERED OPINION IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO DECIDE T HE LEGAL GROUND FIRST INSTEAD OF GOING INTO THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 7. IN THE INSTANT CASE, IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE AO INITIATED PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT FOR 'FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME AND T HEREAFTER ISSUED THE NOTICE DATED 30-12-2008 U/S 274 WITHOUT SPECIF YING THE LIMB OF THE PENALTY IMPOSABLE AND FINALLY IMPOSED PENALTY FOR FURNISHING INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE B Y WAY OF ADDITIONAL GROUND CHALLENGED THE PENALTY ORDE R ON THE GROUND OF DEFECTIVE NOTICE. 8. HON'BLE APEX COURT VIDE ITS JUDGMENT IN CASE OF M/S. SSA'S EMERALD MEADOWS, (2016) 73 TAXMANN.COM 248(SC) DISMISSED THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA WHEREBY IDENTICAL ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVO UR OF ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 5 THE ASSESSEE. FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFENCE AND BREVITY, THE OPERATIVE PART OF THE JUDGMENT RENDERED BY HON'BLE HI GH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN CASE OF M/S. SSA'S EMERALD MEADOWS (SUPRA) IS REPRODUCED BELOW :- '2. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED RAI SING THE FOLLOWING SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW: (1) WHETHER, OMISSION IF ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXPLICITLY MENTION THAT PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE BEING INITIATED FOR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OR THAT FOR CONCEALMENT OF INCOME MAKES THE PENALTY ORDER LIABLE FOR CANCELLATION EVEN WHEN IT HAS BEEN PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CONCEALED INCOME IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE? (2 WHETHER, ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL WAS JUSTIFIED IN LAW IN. HOLDING THAT THE PENALTY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 R.W.S. 271(1)(C) IS HAD IN LAW AND. INVALID INSPITE THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 271(1 B) WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT AND BY VIRTUE OF THE AMENDMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS INITIATED THE PENALTY BY PROPERLY RECORDING THE SATISFACTION FOR THE SAME? (3) WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE TRIBUNAL WAS JUSTIFIED IN DECIDING THE APPEALS AGAINST THE REVENUE ON THE BASIS OF NOTICE ISSUED, UNDER SECTION 274 WITHOUT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SPECIFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED PARTICULARS OF INCOME? 3. THE TRIBUNAL HAS ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HOLDING THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 274 READ WITH SECTI ON 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT 'T HE ACT') TO BE BAD IN LAW AS IT DID NOT SPECIFY WHICH LIMB OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, THE PENALTY PROCEE DINGS HAD BEEN INITIATED I.E., WHETHER FOR CONCEALMENT OF PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHING OF INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. .THE TRIBUNAL, WHILE ALLOWIN G THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, HAS RELIED 01 THE DERIS ION OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS COURT RENDERED IN THE ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 6 CASE OF COMMISSIONER OR INCOME T AX - VS - MANJUNATHA C OTTON AND G INNING F ACTORY (2013) 359 ITR 565. 4. IN OUR VIEW, SINCE THE MATTER IS COVERED BY JUDGMENT OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS COURT, WE AR E OF THE OPINION, NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES IN THIS APPEAL FOR DETERMINATION BY THIS COURT, THE AP PEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED.' 9. THE PENALTY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE A CT ARE ATTRACTED WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOME OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF SUCH INCOME . IT IS ALSO A WELL-ACCEPTED PROPOSITION THAT THE AFORESAID TWO LIMBS OF SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT CARRY DIFFERENT MEANINGS. T HEREFORE, IT IS IMPERATIVE FOR THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO STRIKE OFF THE IRRELEVANT LIMB SO AS TO MAKE THE ASSESSEE AWARE AS TO WHA T IS THE CHARGE MADE AGAINST HIM SO THAT HE CAN RESPOND ACCORDINGLY. THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MANJUNATHA COTTON & GINNING FACTORY, 359 ITR 565 (KA R) OBSERVED THAT THE LEVY OF PENALTY HAS TO BE CLEAR AS TO THE LIMB UNDER WHICH IT IS BEING LEVIED. AS PER HON'BLE HIGH COUR T, WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER PROPOSED TO INVOKE FIRST LIMB BEING CONCEALMENT, THEN THE NOTICE HAS TO BE APPROPRIATELY MA RKED. THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HELD THAT THE STANDARD PROFORMA OF NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 OF THE ACT WITHOUT STRIKING OFF THE I RRELEVANT CLAUSES WOULD LEAD TO AN INFERENCE OF NON-APPLICATION OF MIND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF DILIP N. SHROFF VS. JCIT, 291 ITR 519(SC) HAS ALSO NO TICED THAT WHERE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUES NOTICE UNDER SECTION 274 OF THE ACT IN THE STANDARD PROFORMA AND THE INAPPROPRIAT E WORDS ARE NOT DELETED, THE SAME WOULD POSTULATE THAT THE ASSE SSING OFFICER WAS NOT SURE AS TO WHETHER HE WAS TO PROCEED ON T HE ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 7 BASIS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CONCEALED THE PARTICULARS OF INCOM E OR FURNISHED INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME. ACCORDING T O THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT, IN SUCH A SITUATION, LEVY OF PEN ALTY SUFFERS FROM NON-APPLICATION OF MIND. 6. THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT ON THE CONTRARY SUBMITTED THA T AS PER SECTIONS 274/271(1) OF THE ACT , THE ONLY REQU IREMENT IS TO GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE , KEEPING IN ORDER TO FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLE OF NATURE JUSTICE. T HE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE CASE OF M/S. K.P. MADHUSUDAN 2001(SC) AND SUBMI TTED THAT WHEN THE AO ISSUES A NOTICE U/S 274 OF THE ACT THEN HE MAKES THE ASSESSEE AWARE ABOUT THE PROVISIONS WHICH ARE TO BE USED AGAINST HIM INCLUDING EXPLANATION WHICH IS NOT NECE SSARY TO BE MENTIONED IN THE NOTICE. FURTHER THE LD. DR ALSO R ELIED UPON THE CASE TITLED AS MAK DATA PVT. LTD. VS. CIT (SC) [2003] AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT REQUIRED TO RE CORD HIS SATISFACTION IN PARTICULAR MANNER OR REDUCE TO IT INTO WRITING. THE CASES RELIED UPON BY THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT ARE FACTUALLY DISSIMILAR BECAUSE IN M/S. K.P. MADHUSUDAN CASE (SUPRA) THE APEX COURT HAS NOT DEALT WITH THE STRIKING OFF THE COLUMN IN NOTICE U/S 274 OF THE ACT BUT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS. SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS 73 TAXMANN.COM 248 (SC) THE APEX COURT Y DISMISSING THE SLP, UPHELD THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, WHEREIN THE PENALTY WAS DELE TED FOR NOT SPECIFYING THE LIMB OF THE PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED IN TH E NOTICE U/S 274 OF THE ACT. THE DECISION IN MAK DATA PVT. LTD. VS. CIT (SUPRA) AS RELIED UPON BY THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT REL ATES TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE MAKING ASSESSMENT BUT IT DOES NOT SPEAK ABOUT THE NOTICE U/S 274 O F THE ACT. HENCE, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY HESITATION TO FOLLOW THE CASE I.E. ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 8 M /S SSAS EMERALD MEADOWS (SUPRA) DECIDED BY KARNATAKA HIGH COURT WHICH HAS BEEN AFFIRMED BY THE APEX COURT BY DI SMISSING THE SLP . 7. NOW COMING TO THE INSTANT CASE. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE NOTICE DATED 30-12-2008, ISSUED U/S 274 READ WITH SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT, APPARENTLY GOES TO PROVE THAT TH E ASSESSING OFFICER INITIATED THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS BY ISSU ING THE NOTICE U/S 274/271(1)(C) OF THE ACT WITHOUT SPECIFYING WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS CONCEALED ''PARTICULARS OF INCOME' OR ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED 'INACCURATE PARTICULARS OF INCOME', SO AS TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE. RATHER NOTICE IN THIS CASE HAS BEEN ISSUED IN A STEREOTYPED MANNER WITHOUT APPLYING ANY MIND WHICH IS BAD IN LAW, HENCE IS NOT A VALID NOTICE SUFFICIENT TO IMPOSE PEN ALTY U/S 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT., AS HELD BY THE VARIOUS COURT INCL UDING THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN M/S SSAS EMERALD MEADO WS (SUPRA), WHICH HAS BEEN AFFIRMED BY THE APEX COURT BY DISMISSING THE SLP AND BY THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF DILIP N. SHROFF VS. JCIT (SUPRA). HENCE, WE HAVE NO HESITATI ON TO DELETE THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE AO AND AFFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT (A). RESULTANTLY THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS IS LIABLE TO BE ALLOWED. 9. I.T.A NO.463/ASR/2017 . NOW COMING TO THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT I .E. I.T.A NO.463/ASR/2017 THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL ALSO RELATES TO THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY AND PARTLY DELE TION OF THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASED ON THE SAME AND ITA NOS.465 & 463/ASR/2014 &17 PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIEN CE VS. DCIT 9 IDENTICAL FACTS AND NOTICE DATED 30-12-2008 ISSUED U/S 27 4 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THE ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO.465/ASR /2017, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. 10. CROSS OBJECTION I.E. 06/ASR/2018 IN VIEW OF THE ORDER PASSED IN ITA NO.465/ASR/2014 F OR ASST. YEAR: 2006-07, THIS CROSS OBJECTION ALSO DOES NOT SURV IVE AND HENCE DISMISSED. 11. IN CONCLUSION, THE ITA NO. 465/ASR/2014 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED WHEREAS THE ITA NO. 463/ASR/2017 FILED BY THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND CROSS OBJECTION 06/ASR/2018 FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.06.2019. SD/- SD/- (N.S.SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER DATED: 21.06.2019 /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) M/S PUNJAB INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, GARHA ROAD, JALANDHAR. (2) THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR. (3) THE CIT(A), JALANDHAR. (4) THE CIT CONCERNED. (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., AMRITSAR TRUE COPY BY ORDER