ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Hema Engineering Industries (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 487/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 90930 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-04-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 10-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T VASANTHAN
• Keywords: Depreciation; Earning of tax free income; Commercial expediency
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH C NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.M. GARG: JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 778/DEL/2011 &487/DEL/2012 A.Y. 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT CIRCLE 12(1), VS. HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIE S (P) LTD., NEW DELHI. SACHINDANAND FARM HOUSE, KHASRA NO. 95/8,9,10,11,12, KISHANGARH VILLAGE, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. PAN: AAACH 0118 F AND ITA NO. 2446/DEL/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES (P) LTD., VS. ACIT CIR CLE 12(1), SACHINDANAND FARM HOUSE, NEW DELHI. KHASRA NO. 95/8,9,10,11,12, KISHANGARH VILLAGE, MEHRAULI, NEW DELHI. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI T. VASANTHAN SR. DR ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR MALHOTRA AD V. SHRI ANSH KUMAR SHARMA CA SHRI LALIT KUMAR SHARMA ADV. DATE OF HEARING : 11/03-2015 DATE OF ORDER : 22-04-2015. O R D E R PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A.M:- THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS, PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEE, FOR AY 2008-09. REVENUE HAS ALSO PREFERRE D APPEAL FOR AY 2007- 2 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. 08. ALL THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE B EING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE FOR AY 2008-09 ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINES S OF MANUFACTURING OF AUTO PARTS. IT HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLA RING INCOME OF RS. 2,22,58,723/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED AFTER M AKING FOLLOWING DISALLOWANCES/ ADDITIONS: DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENSES U/S 14A RS. 1,05,29,57 4 DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION ON COMPUTER ACCESSORIES RS. 44,325 DISALLOWANCE OF EXCISE DUTY AND SALES TAX LOSS RS. 2,36,797 DISALLOWANCE/ ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SALES TAX PAID RS. 9,78,958 FINE AND PENALTY RS. 1,69,915 ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF VARIOUS EXPENSES RS. 5,00,0 00 2.1. IN APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) PARTLY ALLOWED THE ASSES SEES CLAIMS. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE ASSESSEE ARE IN CROSS AP PEALS BEFORE US. REVENUES APPEAL (ITA NO. 487/DEL/2012 AY 2008-09 ) : 4. FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE RAISED: 1. WHETHER LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 44,325/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF DEPRECIATION ON COMPUTER ACCESSORIES. 2. WHETHER LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,36,797/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF EXCISE DUTY & SALES TAX LOSS. 3. WHETHER LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E 3 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 9,78,958/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF SALES TAX PAID. 4. WHETHER LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,69,9151- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF FINE AND PENALTY. 5. WHETHER LD. CIT(A) WAS CORRECT ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW IN DELETING TH E DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 5,00,0001- MADE BY THE AO OUT OF EXPENSES. 6. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE, TO ADD, ALTER OR AMEND ANY GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED ABOVE AT THE TIME OF THE HEARING. 5. BRIEF FACTS APROPOS GROUND NO. 1 ARE THAT ASSESS EE HAD MADE PURCHASES OF COMPUTER PERIPHERALS, UPS, CASSETTES ETC. AMOUN TING TO RS. 98500/-, ON WHICH IT HAD CLAIMED DEPRECIATION @ 60%, WHICH WAS RESTRICTED TO 15% BY THE AO. IN APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE ASESS EES CLAIM AND DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE. 5.1. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS SQUARELY COVERED BY VARIOUS DECISIONS OF DIFFEREN T HIGH COURT INCLUDING THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF DE LHI IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BSES RAJDHANI POWERS LTD. (ORDER DATED 31-8-201 0 IN ITA NO. 1266/2010), ALLOWING DEPRECIATION ON COMPUTER ACCES SORIES AND PERIPHERALS @ 60%. ACCORDINGLY, WE SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THE ISSUE IN QUESTION. GROUND IS DISMISS ED. 6. APROPOS GROUND NO. 2 THE AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSE E HAD DEBITED IN ITS P&L A/C UNDER THE HEAD EXCISE DUTY AND SALES-TAX L OSS A SUM 4 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,36,797/-. THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT THE AMOUNT REPRESENTED THE INTEREST ON PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY ON SUPPLEMENTARY BILLS. THE AO CONCLUDED THAT THESE WERE PENAL IN NATURE AN D, THEREFORE, NOT ALLOWABLE. 6.1. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE ORDER FOR AY 2007-08 ALLOWED THE CLAIM BY HOLDING THAT THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT WAS NOT PENAL IN NATURE. 6.2. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION THAT THE INTEREST REPRESENTED THE AMOUNT PAID ON AC COUNT OF EXCISE DUTY ON SUPPLEMENTARY BILLS HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED BY THE DE PARTMENT. THIS WAS CLEARLY COMPENSATORY IN NATURE AND COULD NOT BE TRE ATED AS PENAL IN NATURE BECAUSE THE SHORT FALL IN PAYMENT OF EXCISE DUTY WA S NOT QUA THE ORIGINAL BILLS BUT ON ACCOUNT OF RAISING OF SUPPLEMENTARY BI LLS. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 7. APROPOS GROUND NO. 3 THE AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSE E HAD DEBITED SALES- TAX AMOUNTING TO RS. 9,78,958/-. AFTER EXAMINING TH E ASSESSEES REPLY THE AO NOTICED THAT DEMANDS HAD BEEN RAISED BY SALES-TA X AUTHORITIES ON ACCOUNT OF PENALTIES AS ASSESSEE HAD NOT PRODUCED THE RELEV ANT FORMS BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES. THEREFORE, HE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 9,78,958/-, TREATING THE PAYMENTS AS PENAL IN NATURE. 7.1. IN APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: 11. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT AND I HOLD THAT THE DEPOSIT OF THE SA LES TAX ON ACCOUNT OF NON-SUBMISSION OF FORM-C AND VAT DL IS COMPENSATORY IN NATURE AND NOT PENAL IN NATURE. IT IS A COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY TO SELL GOODS TO REGISTERED DEALER AGAINST FORM-C. FURTHER IT IS ALS O SEEN THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER OF RS.239 CRORE S IT IS HARDLY 0.04% OF THE TURNOVER THAT THE APPELLANT HAS 5 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. NOT BEEN ABLE TO PROCURE 'C' FORMS AND HENCE PAID RS.91781958 EXTRA TO SALES TAX DEPTT. THEREFORE, CONSIDERING THE NATURE AND ALSO THE COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY THE SAME, I HOLD THAT IT IS NOT PENAL IN NATURE BUT REPRESENTS THE DIFFERENCE OF SALES TAX PAYABLE FOR NON SUBMISSION OF FORM 'C' AND VAT D1. ACCORDINGLY, I HOLD THAT ABOVE DISALLOWANCE IS DELETED AND THE APPELLANT GETS A RELIEF OF RS.9,78,958. 7.2. NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD TO CONTROVE RT THE FINDINGS OF LD. CIT(A). THE DEPOSIT OF THE SALES-TAX WAS ON ACCOUN T OF NON-SUBMISSION OF FORM C AND VAT D1 AND, THEREFORE, THIS COULD NOT BE HELD TO BE PENAL IN NATURE. WE CONCUR WITH THE FINDING OF LD. CIT(A). G ROUND IS DISMISSED. 8. APROPOS GROUND NO. 4 THE AO OBSERVED THAT ASSES SEE HAD DEBITED IN ITS P&L A/C OF RS. 1,69,915/- UNDER THE HEAD FINE AND PENALTY. THE AO DISALLOWED THE ASSESSEES CLAIM OBSERVING THAT DEMA NDS HAD BEEN RAISED ON ACCOUNT OF VIOLATION OF LAW. 8.1. LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE PENALTY FOLLOWING HIS F INDINGS WITH REGARD TO GROUND NO. 2 & 3 ABOVE. 8.2. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT BEF ORE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAD INTER ALIA, SUBMITTED AS UNDER: THAT THE LD. OFFICER HAS ARBITRARILY TREATED THE ABOVE AMOUNT SIMILAR GOING BY NOMENCLATURE OF THE HEAD AS FINE & PENALTY AND HAS DISALLOWED THE ENTIR E AMOUNT OF RS.1,69,915 WITHOUT LOOKING INTO THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 26.11.2010 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS POINTED OUT THA T THE ACCOUNT RS.1,69,915 CONSTITUTES THE FOLLOWING: A) SALES TAX PAID FOR MANESAR RS.30,229 PERTAINING TO FINANCIAL YEAR 2003-2004 ATTRIBUTED T O 6 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. THE SALES TAX PAYMENT RAISED ON FOR NON COLLECTION OF FORM -C, VA T C-4 ETC. AND THE SAME BE READ AS PART OF THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY US IN OUR GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO.4 ABOVE AND IS PRAYED TO BE DELETED. B) BALANCE OF RS.1,22,386. THIS AMOUNT REPRESENTS INTEREST ON SUPPLEMENTARY BILLS ON EXCISE DUTY RAIS ED TO ITS CUSTOMER FOR UNIT 11/ MANESAR PLANT. THE AMOUNT WAS WRONGLY INCLUDED UNDER THE HEAD FINE & PENALTY BUT SHOULD BE A PART OF HEAD EXCISE DUTY AND SALES TAX LOSS AS CONTAINED IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO.2 ABOVE. AS THIS IS ATTRIBUTED TO INTERES T ON EXCISE DUTY ON SUPPLEMENTARY BILLS THEREFORE, TH E SAME IS PRAYED TO BE DELETED IN FULL. SIMILAR ADDITION WAS MADE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007- 08 AND WAS DELETED BY THE HON'BLE CLT(A)XXVII VIDE ORDER DATED 11TH OCTOBER, 2010 IN APPEAL NO.168 BY 2009-10. 8.3. THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS HAVE NOT BEEN CONTROVERT ED BY THE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY REFERRED TO HIS F INDINGS QUA THE ISSUES RAISED IN GROUND NOS. 2 & 3 ABOVE. GROUND IS REJECT ED. 9. APROPOS GROUND NO. 5 THE AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSE E HAD INCURRED CERTAIN EXPENSES WHICH WERE DISPROPORTIONATE AS COM PARED TO PRECEDING YEAR WITH REGARD TO SALES DISCLOSED. HE HAS GIVEN FOLLOW ING DETAILS: HEAD 2007-08 (IN RS.) 2008-09 ( IN RS.) SALES 2619082196 2396355768 JOB WORK 188841479 151070236 7 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. PAYMENT TO PRODUCTION STAFF AND WORKS 50016594 130400715 MACHINERY REPAIRING 19762122 26257384 FREIGHT OCTROI & CARTAGE 9861889 37876169 PACKING EXPENSES 200550 1457710 STP RUNNING EXPENSES 2787637 3846815 PAYMENT TO GENERAL STAFF 25058609 41457388 TRAVELLING AND CONVEYANCE 7075350 16420444 RENT 120000 8867968 HOUSE KEEPING EXPENSES 1873760 3791420 SECURITY EXPENSES 4299430 7385874 9.1. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED DETAILS OF THESE EX PENSES AND ALSO SUBMITTED VOLUMINOUS EXPLANATION, AFTER CONSIDERING WHICH, THE AO DISALLOWED RS. 5 LACS, INTER ALIA, OBSERVING THAT M AJOR EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD JOB & FABRICATION CHARGES AND GENERAL EXPENSES HAD BEEN MADE TO RELATED PARTIES WHICH HAD NOT BEEN JUSTIFIED. 9.2. IN APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE DISALLOW ANCE OBSERVING IN PARA 16 AS UNDER: 16. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF T HE APPELLANT AND HAVE CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE AND FACT S ON RECORDS, SINCE ON THIS ISSUE THE CIT(A)-XXVII VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 11-10-2010 HAS ALREADY GIVEN A FINDINGS IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008, AND AS THERE ARE NO CHAN GE IN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERA TION, 8 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. HENCE I FIND NO REASON TO DISAGREE WITH THE DECISIO N OF CIT(A)-XXVII. AS THE AO HAS NOT GIVEN ANY SPECIFIC REASON FOR DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE AND AHS NOT CARD TO LOO K INTO THE VOLUMINOUS DETAILS OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED.. W HEREAS FULL DETAILS OF EXPENSES HAVE BEEN FURNISHED BY TH E ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO, I FIND NO REASON TO CONFIRM THE ADDI TION OF RS. 5,00,000 AND IS THEREFORE DELETED. 9.3. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, IN OUR CONSIDER ED OPINION, THIS BEING PURELY AD HOC DISALLOWANCE MADE BY AO WITHOUT REFER RING TO ANY SPECIFIC ITEM OF EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN RIGHTLY DELETED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WE UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THE ISSUE IN QUESTI ON. GROUND IS DISMISSED. ASSESSEES APPEAL (ITA NO. 2446/DEL/2012 2008-09) : 10. THE SOLE EFFECT GROUND RAISED IS AS UNDER: THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CO NFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE LD. OFFICER U/S 14A AMOUNT ING TO RS. 54,57,509/-. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. OFFICER IS ARBITRARY, UNLAWFUL, UNJUSTIFIED AND NOT FOUNDED ON FACTS OF T HE CASE. 11. THE AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAD MADE CERTAIN I NVESTMENT IN SHARES OUT OF FUNDS EITHER BORROWED BY THE ASSESSEE OR FRO M OWN RESOURCES. HE OBSERVED THAT THESE INVESTMENTS EITHER YIELDED OR C OULD YIELD INCOME IN THE FORM OF DIVIDEND, LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS, INTEREST FREE INTEREST ETC., WHICH DID NOT FORM INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THE EXPENDITUR ES WERE REQUIRED TO BE 9 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. DISALLOWED U/S 14A. HE COMPUTED THE DISALLOWANCE AS PER RULE 8D AT RS. 1,05,29,574/-. 11.1. IN APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) POINTED OUT THAT THE DISPUTE BETWEEN THE AOS WORKING AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ON TWO COUNTS, NA MELY, INTEREST COMPONENT AND FIGURE OF TOTAL ASSETS. HE POINTED OU T THAT AS FAR AS THE INTEREST COMPONENT WAS CONCERNED, SUM OF RS. 2,38,00,660/- R ELATED TO BILL DISCOUNTING CHARGES AND WAS TOWARDS BANK CHARGES AN D HENCE WAS NOT FOR EARNING EXEMPT INCOME. 11.2. AS REGARDS THE COMPUTATION OF AVERAGE TOTAL A SSETS, HE POINTED OUT THAT THE AO HAD NOT ADDED THE FIGURE OF CURRENT LIABILIT IES IN ORDER TO ARRIVE AT THE AVERAGE TOTAL ASSET FIGURE. HE, ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT ED THE AO TO RECOMPUTED THE INCOME. 11.3. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT N O DIVIDEND WAS RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR AND NO INVESTMENT WAS M ADE DURING THE YEAR. LD. COUNSEL REFERRED TO PAPER BOOK WHICH HAS BEEN FILED BEFORE US FOR THE FIRST TIME UNDER RULE 29. HE SUBMITTED THAT THESE DOCUMEN TS ARE NECESSARY FOR VERIFICATION OF ASSESSEES CLAIM. HE REFERRED TO PA GES 18 TO 35 OF THE PB, WHEREIN CIT(A)S ORDER FOR AY 2009-10 IS CONTAINED IN WHICH VARIOUS ISSUES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED HAVING REGARD TO THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RELEXO FOOTWEARS LTD. 293 ITR 231; AND JAY ENGINEERING WORKS LTD. VS. CIT 311 ITR 405, HE SUBM ITTED THAT AO HAS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE INVESTMENT MADE IN AY 2008-09 DID NOT YIELD EXEMPT INCOME. 10 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. 11.4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF BOTH THE PARTIES. THE MAIN THRUST OF THE ASSESSEES SUBMISSION IS WITH REGARD TO THE COMPUTATION OF CORRECT DISALLOWANCE AND, THEREFORE, WE ADMIT THE P APER BOOK FILED BY ASSESSEE AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO F OR DE NOVO ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. REVENUES APPEAL (ITA NO. 2446/DEL/2012 2007-08): 12. FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE RAISED: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS, PERVERSE, ILLEGAL AND AGAINST THE PROVISIONS OF LAW WHICH IS LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,37,31,379/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF SALES TAX. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 5,00,000/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUN T OF FABRICATION AND GENERAL EXPENSES. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 82,714/- MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ON SERVICE TAX AND EXCISE DUTY. 13. GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. 11 ITA NO. 778/D/11,487/D/12 & 2446/D/12 HEMA ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES LTD. 14. THE ISSUES INVOLVED FOR ADJUDICATION IN GROUND NOS. 2,3 & 4 HAVE BEEN DEALT BY US HEREINABOVE IN REVENUES APPEAL FOR A.Y . 2008-09. NO CHANGE IN FACTS HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT BY EITHER OF THE PARTIE S. THEREFORE, FOR THE REASONS GIVEN ON RELEVANT ISSUES IN A.Y. 2008-09, W E UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENU E. 15. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEALS FOR A.Y. 2007- 08 AND 2008 STAND DISMISSED AND ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR AY 2008-09 STAN DS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22-04-2015. SD/- SD/- (C.M. GARG ) ( S.V. MEHROTRA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 22-04-2015. MP: C OPY TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR