DCIT, New Delhi V. M/s. SKM Creations Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5148/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 514820114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-10-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J S MINHAS ACIT
• Assessee Lawyers: UMESH THAAKUR
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Bogus Share capital; Income from undisclosed sources; Share purchase agreement; Source of fund; Accommodation entries; Onus to prove
• Section: 131; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G , NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. D. MANMOHAN , VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. N. K. SAINI, AM ITA NO. 5148 /DEL/201 2 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2009 - 10 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 11, NEW DELHI VS M/S SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 333 - A, SANT NAGAR, EAST OF KAILASH, NEW DELHI - 110065 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A A ICS2335P ASSESSEE BY : SH. UMESH THAAKUR, CA REVENUE BY : SH. J. S. MINHAS, ACIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 02 .0 7 .2015 DATE OF PRONOUNC EMENT : 03 .07 .2015 ORDER PER N. K. SAINI, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31.07.2012 OF LD. CIT (A) - XXXI , NEW DELHI . 2 . FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THIS APPEAL: 1. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT( A) IS NOT CORRECT IN LAW AND FACTS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 44,00,000/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED SHARE CAPITAL UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE IT ACT , 1961 TREATING THE SAME AS INCOME FROM UNDISCLOSED SOURCES WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DISCHARGE ITS ONUS TO PROVE THE CREDIT WORTHINESS OF COMPANY PROVIDING SHARE CAPITAL AND ALSO THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 2 3. O N THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,12,000/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF 50% OUT OF SALARY EXPENSES ON ADHOC BASIS. 4. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, A MEND ANY/ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE OR DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3 . VIDE GROUND NO. 2 GRIEVANCE OF THE DEPARTMENT RELATES TO THE DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 44,00,000/ - MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED SHARE CAPITAL. T H E FACTS RELATED TO THIS ISSUE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED E - RETURN OF INCOME ON 26.12.2009 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS. 3,41,861/ - WHICH WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT). LATER ON THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED SHARE APPLICATION MONEY OF RS.44,00,000/ - INCLUDING PREMIUM OF RS. 41,80,000/ - ON 22000 SHARES. HE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE O F SHARE APPLICATION MONEY & SHARE PREMIUM, TO PRODUCE THOSE PERSONS FOR EXAMINATION OF GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS , TO EXAMINE THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSONS AND THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS. THE AO OBSERVED THAT NO ONE WAS PRODUCED AND NO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE HAD BEEN FILED SHOWING THE SOURCE OF FUNDS CONTRIBUTED BY THE APPLICANTS OF THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AND SHARE PREMIUM PAID BY THEM EXCEPT FOR THE ASSESSMENT DETAILS OF THE COMPANIES CONTRIBUTING TO THE SHARE CAPITAL AND PREMIUM. THE AO MADE ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 3 THE ADDITION OF RS. 44,00,000/ - U/S 68 OF THE ACT BY CONSIDERING THE SAID AMOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED CREDIT APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO ALSO DISALLOWED RS. 3,12,000/ - BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID SALARY OF RS. 6,24,000/ - TO THREE PERSONS AND THAT THE PAYMENT OF SALARY WAS EXCESSIVE IN VIEW OF MEAGER BUSINESS ACTIVITIES. HE, THEREFORE, DISALLOWED 50% OF THE SALARY EXPENSES AND MADE THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,12,000/ - 4 . BEING AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER TO THE LD. CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THA T THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE EXISTENCE OF THE PARTIES AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS: (I) NAME AND ADDRESS (II) SHARE APPLICATION FORM (III) PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER (IV) DETAIL OF BANK ACCOUNT FROM WHERE MONEY IS PAI D ALONG WITH COPY OF BANK STATEMENT (V) COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INCOME TAX RETURN (VI) CONFIRMATION FROM THE SUBSCRIBERS (VII) COPY OF BALANCE SHEETS OF COMPANIES 5 . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED THE AFFIDAVIT FROM ALL THE THREE COMPANIES CONFIRMING THE TRANSACTION WHICH INCLUDE D THE DISTINCTIVE NUMBERS OF THE SHARE S ALLOTTED TO THOSE COMPANIES AND EVEN THE COPIES OF SHARE CERTIFICATES WERE ALSO FURNISHED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE AO WITH SOME PR E CONCEIVED NOTION IN HIS MIND AND OUTRIGHTLY BY REJECTING EVERY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE AVAILABLE ON RECORDS , WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 4 SPECIFIC DEFICIENCY AND REASON FOR NOT ACCEPTING DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS STATED THAT ALL THE THREE INVESTO RS ARE PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY REGISTERED WITH REGISTRAR OF COMPANY , SO, IT WAS QUITE EASY TO PROVE IDENTITY OF THOSE AS THE DETAIL S WERE AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE OF THE REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES AND COULD BE VIEWED BY PUBLIC AT LARGE. SO, THERE COULD NOT HAV E BEEN ANY DOUBT ABOUT THE IDENTITY AND EXISTENCE OF THE APPLICANTS. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY O F BANK ACCOUNT, BALANCE SHEET AND INCOME TAX RETURNS WERE FURNISHED WHICH CLEARLY PROVES THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACE D ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LAWS: CIT VS OASIS HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD. 333 ITR 119 (DEL) CIT VS DATAWARE PVT. LTD. IN ITA NO. 263 OF 2011 (CAL) CIT VS VALUE CAPITAL SERVICES PVT. LTD. ITA NO. 348/2008 (DEL) CIT VS ORISSA CORP. PVT. LTD. (1986) 159 ITR 178 (SC) CIT VS LOVELY EXPORTS PVT. LTD. 216 CTR (SC) CIT VS M/S PONDY METAL & ROLLING MILLS (P) LTD. IN ITA NO. 786/06 (DEL) 6 . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED ALL THE SUBSCRIBERS TO MAKE THEMSELVES AVAILABLE FOR CONFIRMATION OF THE TRANSACTI ON. HOWEVER, INSTEAD OF PERSONALLY APPEARING THEY HAD CHOOSEN TO RESPOND VIA LETTER POSTED DIRECTLY TO THE AO AND IF IT WAS NECESSARY THEN THE AO SHOULD HAVE ISSUED NOTICE U/S 131 OF THE ACT BUT HE HAD NEVER ISSUED THE NOTICE U/S 131 OF THE ACT AND MADE TH E ADDITION OF RS. 44,00,000/ - . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 5 WITH REGARD TO THE SHARE CAPITAL MONEY IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IF THE IDENTITY OF THE INVESTOR IS PROVED. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE FOLLOWING CASE LA WS: CIT VS M/S GENERAL EXPORTS CREDITS LTD. IN ITA NO. 880/2006 (DEL) CIT VS RAGHVI FINANCE LTD. ITA 1264/2010 (DEL HC) CIT VS ORBITAL COMMUNICATIONS (P) LTD. ITA 989/2010 (DEL. HC) CIT VS ULTRATECH FINANCE & INVESTMENT LTD. ITA 1122/2010 (DELHI HC) CIT V S KHUSHAGRA REAL ESTATE (P) LTD. ITA 498/2010 (DELHI HC) GLOCOM IMPEX 205 CTR 511 (DELHI HC) CIT VS MAKHNI AND TYAGI PVT. LTD. 276 ITR 433 (DELHI HC) CIT VS ILLAC INVESTMENT PVT. LTD. 287 ITR 135 (DELHI) BARKHA SYNTHETHICS 286 ITR 377 (RAJ.) AVANTIKA INVES TMENT 262 ITR 493 (DELHI) CIT VS SUNTECH VISION LTD. (DELHI HC) ITA NO. 463/2010 7. AS REGARDS TO THE DISALLOWANCE OUT OF THE SALARY EXPENSES, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS AS REQUIRED BY THE AO WERE SUBMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSM ENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH WERE ACCEPTED BY THE AO AND IT WAS NOT THE CASE OF THE AO THAT THE EMPLOYEES WERE NOT ACTUALLY EMPLOY ED DURING THE YEAR OR THEY WERE NOT ACTUALLY PAID THE SALARY AND THAT THE AO HAD NOT CAUSED ANY SPECIFIC DOUBT ON THE NUMBER OF EMPLO YEES WORKING IN THE COMPANY . IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT IF THE PERSONS WERE WORKING THEY WERE PAID FOR IT, T HEREFORE, EXPENSES INCURRED FULLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS WERE ALLOWABLE. ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 6 8. THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE OBSERVED THAT THE AMOUNTS ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE CAPITAL WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE INDEPENDENTLY THROUGH THE ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE AND NOTHING WAS APPARENT FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT ANY ADVERSE MATERIAL EXISTED IN THE ASSESSMENT FOLDER FOR THE RELEVAN T PERIOD. HE FURTHER OBSERVED THAT IT WAS NOT THE CASE WHERE ANY PERSON CLAIMED BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT THAT THE IMPUGNED SHARE CAPITAL WAS NOTHING BUT BOGUS INTRODUCTION BY WAY OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE LD. CIT(A) CATEGORICALLY STATED THAT ALL THE THREE INVESTORS HAD SENT THEIR LETTERS TO THE AO ALONG WITH THEIR CONFIRMATIONS , SHARE APPLICATION FORM, COPY OF ITR ACKNOWLED GMENT, COPY OF BALANCE SHEET, BANK STATEMENT . HE ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO REQUESTED THE AO FOR ISSUING SUMMONS FOR PERS ONAL APPEARANCE TO ALL INVESTORS AS IT WAS NOT WITHIN THE ASSESSEE S POWER TO ENFORCE THEIR ATTENDANCE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAD DISCHARGED THE ONUS CAST UPON IT AND PROVIDED ALL THE ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS TO PROVE GENUINENESS, CREDITWO RTHINESS AND IDENTITY OF THE INVESTORS AS REQUIRED U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 44,00,000/ - . THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS LOVELY EXPORTS PVT. LTD. REPORTED AT 21 6 CTR. 9. AS REGARDS TO THE ANOTHER ADDITION OF RS. 3,12,000/ - , THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ACTION OF THE AO WAS BASED ONLY ON SUSPICION AND IT WAS NOT THE CASE OF THE AO THAT THE EMPLOYEES WERE NOT ACTUALLY ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 7 EMPLOYED OR NOT PAID THE SALARY. HE FURTH ER OBSERVED THAT WHEN A BUSINESS WAS IN A RUNNING STATE AND EMPLOYEES WERE BEING PAID ACTUALLY, THEN THE QUANTUM OF INCOME CAN NOT DECIDE AS TO WHETHER THE ENTIRE SALARY PAID WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OR NOT . THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSE SSEE COMPANY HAD NOT DISCONTINUED THE BUSINESS AND THUS THE EMPLOYEES WILL HAVE TO BE PAID TO KEEP THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES ALIVE. ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,12,000/ - WAS ALSO DELETED. 10 . NOW THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL. THE LD. DR STRONGLY SUPPOR TED THE ORDER OF THE AO AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE THE PERSONS ALTHOUGH THE AO SPECIFICALLY ASKED TO DO SO. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE INQUIRIES WERE MADE THROUGH INSPECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT THE CONCERNED PARTIES WERE N OT TRACEABLE. HE ALSO DREW OUR ATTENTION TOWARDS PAGE NO. 28 OF TH E ASSESSEE S PAPER BOOK, WHICH IS THE COPY OF CONFIRMATION FURNISHED BY M/S CHANDRA BUILDCON PVT. LTD. AND STATED THAT IN THE SAID CONFIRMATION IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED THAT SURBHI CHANDRA, DIR ECTOR HAD CONFIRMED , HOWEVER THE SIGNATURE HAD BEEN DONE BY KAVITA AS A DIRECTOR . IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE CONFIRMATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT RELIABLE. THE LD. DR ALSO STATED THAT T HE ASSESSEE COULD NOT DISCHARGE THE ONUS CAST UPON IT , TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE SHARE APPLICANT S AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION . THEREFORE, THE AO RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 8 THE IMPUGNED ADDITION . A S REGARDS TO T HE DISALLOWANCE OUT OF SALARY, T HE LD. DR REITERATED THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE AO. 11 . IN HIS RIVAL SUBMISSIONS THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE REQUISITE DOCUMENTS AND INFORMATION ASKED BY THE AO TO PROVE THE IDENTITY AND CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE INVESTORS , GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTION , WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED . IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAD SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE AO TO ISSUE SUMMONS U/S 131 OF THE ACT SINCE THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FORCE TH E APPEARANCE OF THE SUBSCRIBERS, HOWEVER, THE AO HAD NOT TAKEN ANY ACTION. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE DISCHARGED THE ONUS CAST UPON IT , THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND THE LD. CIT(A) RIGHTLY DELETED THE SAME. AS REGARDS TO THE ISSUE RELATING TO THE DELETION OF ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF SALARY EXPENSES , THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 12 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, IT IS AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE REC EIVED A SUM OF RS. 44,00,000/ - FROM THREE PARTIES ON ACCOUNT OF SHARE PREMIUM AMOUNTING TO RS. 41,80,000/ - AND THE SHARE APPLICATION MONEY AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,20,000/ - ON 2200 0 SHARES. THE AO FOR EXAMINING THE GENUINENESS OF ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 9 TRANSACTION, IDENTITY OF THE PER SONS AND THEIR CREDITWORTHINESS , ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THE CONCERN ED PARTIES BUT ASSESSEE FAILED TO DO SO. THE AO ALSO DEPUTED ONE INSPECTOR TO CONDUCT THE INQUIRIES TO FIND OUT THE GENUINENESS OF TH E PARTIES BUT HE COULD NOT LOCATE THOSE PARTIES A T THE GIVEN ADDRESSES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DID NOT FURNISH THE CHANGE OF ADDRESS, IF ANY, THEREFORE, THE ONUS CAST UPON THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT FULLY DISCHARGED. IN OUR OPINION THE LD. CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO PARTICULARL Y WHEN THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE CONCERN ED PARTIES . AT THE SAME TIME, I T ALSO APPEARS THAT THE AO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE FORM OF SHARE APPLICATION S, COPY OF BANK ACCOUNT FROM WHERE MONEY WAS PAID, COPY O F ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INCOME TAX RETURN, COPY OF THE BALANCE SHEET ETC. AND MADE THE ADDITION. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE CONFIRMATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE DOUBT FULL WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM THE CONFIRMATION PLACED AT PAGE NO. 28 OF THE ASSESSEE S P APER BOOK , CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN RE CEIVED FROM M/S CHANDRA BUILDCON PVT. LTD. AND HAD BEEN SIGNED BY KAVITA , BUT IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE SAID CONFIRMATION WAS GIVEN BY SURBHI JAIN, DIRECTOR. WE, THEREFORE, BY CONSIDERING THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS AS DISCU SSED HERE IN ABOVE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO REMAND THIS ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO BE ADJUDICATED AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABLE OPPORTUNITIES OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NOS.5148 /DEL /2012 SKM CREATIONS PVT. LTD. 10 13. AS REGARDS TO T HE ANOTHER ISSUE REL ATING TO DISALLOWANCE OUT OF SALARY, I T IS RELEVANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE AO WHILE MAKING THE DISALLOWANCE @ 50% HAD NOT GIVEN ANY BASIS OR COGENT REASONS. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO ACCEPTED THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE BY SIMPLY STATING THAT A BUSINESS IS IN A RUNNING STAG E AND THE EMPLOYEES WERE PAID ACTUALLY AND THAT THE QUANTUM OF INCOME CANNOT DECIDE AS TO WHETHER THE ENTIRE SALARY PAID WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OR NOT. HE ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE EMPLOYEES WILL HAVE TO BE PAID TO KEEP BUSINESS ACTIVIT IES ALIVE. HOWEVER, NOTHING WAS BROUGHT ON RECORD TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT THE PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF SALARY WAS MADE FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSES IN REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS. ACCORDINGLY, THIS ISSUE IS ALSO SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 14 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ( ORDER PRON OUNCED IN THE COURT ON 03 /07 /2015 ) SD/ - SD/ - (D. MANMOHAN ) (N. K. SAINI) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 03 /07 /2015 *SUBODH* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR