SHRI SHARAD C. PATEL, Ahmedabad V. THE ASSTT. CIT, CIRCLE -2(2), Ahmedabad

ITA 554/AHD/2003

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6505 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 year(s) 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-04-2011
• Assessment Year: 1998-1999
• Appeal Filed On: 10-02-2003
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJEEB JAIN SRDR
• Assessee Lawyers: A C SHAH
• Keywords: Business income; Business expenditure; Salary income; Capital Gains
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI D.K. TYAGI, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N.PHAUJA, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 ASSESSMENT YEAR:1998-99 DATE OF HEARING:6.4.11 DRAFTED:10.5.11 SHRI SHARAD C PATEL, RAM NIVAS 1, KHANPUR, AHMEDABAD PAN NO. NOT FOUND V/S. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI A.C. SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI RAJEEB JAIN, SR-DR O R D E R PER D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS IS ASSESSEES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COM MISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-VII, AHMEDABAD IN APPEAL NO. CI TAVII/CIR.2(2)/251/2001- 02 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1998-99. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE FI LED IS RETURN OF INCOME SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.4,72,010/- WHICH WAS COM PRISED OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.49,524/-. THE BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.49,524/- SO DECLARED WAS COMPRISED OF COMMISSION RECEIVED FROM M/S. VIMPSAN AGENCIES A T RS.7 LAKH AND PROFIT ON SALE OF SHARES OF PETROL AIR TEEMP LTD. OF RS.3, 68,292/- AGAINST THESE TWO RECEIPTS. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF INTERES T OF RS.4,15046/-. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S.143(1)(A) AND THEREAFTER S ELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER ASSESSEE FILED A REVISED STATEMENT CLAIM ING FURTHER INTEREST PAYMENT ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 2 TO M/S.NIRMAN CORPORATION OF RS.2,63,259/- AND THUS BUSINESS LOSS WAS REVISED TO RS.3,12,513/- AGAINST ORIGINAL LOSS OF R S.49,254/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE COMPLETING ASSESSMENT DISALLOWED BOTH THE INTEREST PAID TO M/S. NIRMAN CORPORATION AT RS.2,63,259/- AS WELL AS INTE REST OF RS.11,17,546/- BEING INTEREST PAID TO RIN FINANCE AT RS.9,76,682/- AND INTEREST CLAIMED OF RS.48,086/- AND RS.90,278/- IN RESPECT OF MINORS KR UTI AND KARTAVYA. ACCORDINGLY, TOTAL INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.16,07, 050/-. WHILE MAKING THIS DISALLOWANCE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OBSERVED AS UNDE R:- THE SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CAR EFULLY EXAMINED. HE BORROWING MADE BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NO DIRECT NEX US WITH THE BUSINESS AS SUCH. THE ASSESSEE, N FACT, IS NOT TRAD ER IN SHARES. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN HOLDING THE SHARES AS INVESTMENT AND NOT AS STOCK- IN-TRADE. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PREPARED ANY TRADING ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF HIS TRADING IN SHARES. THE BORROWED CAPITAL HAS BEEN UTILIZED NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AS SUCH . IT HAS NO NEXUS WHATSOEVER WITH THE SALARY INCOME OR THE INCOME FRO M THE OTHER SOURCES OR THE COMMISSION INCOME OF RS.7,00,000/. THE ASSES SEE HAS BORROWED FUNDS MAINLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASE OF SHARES, WHICH ARE HELD IN INVESTMENT AND NOT STOCK-IN-TRADE. A PART OF THE BO RROWINGS HAS BEEN UTILIZED FOR THE PERSONAL PURPOSES, LIKE CONSTRUCTI ON OF THE HOUSE ETC. THUS, THERE IS NOT DIR4EECT NEXUS BETWEEN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WITH RESPECT TO THE INTEREST PAYMENT AND THE PROFIT ON SALE OF SHARES. THE PROFIT ARISING ON SALE OF SHARE OF M/S. PATEL A IR TEMP LTD IS NOT TO BE TAKEN UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM BUSINESS , BUT IS TAKEN AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. SINCE THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED ON PAYMENT OF INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS.11,17,546/- AND RS.2,63,259/- HAS N O NEXUS WITH THE BUSINESS SINCE OF THE ASSESSEE, THE CLAIM OF THE AS SESSEE WITH RESPECT TO INTEREST PAYMENT IS DISALLOWED. THE INTEREST ON BORROWING MADE FOR ACQUISITION OF SHARES WHICH ARE HELD AS INVESTMENT IS NOT ALLOWABLE, AS INCOME FROM SUCH DIVIDEND IS EXEMPT U/S.10(33) OF T HE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY THIS ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER ASSESS EE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND CHALLENGED THE OR DER OF ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- I. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN HOLDING THAT INT EREST AMOUNTS OF RS.11,17,546 AND RS.2,63,259 WERE NON=BUSINESS EXPE NDITURE WHEREAS INTEREST WAS ACTUALLY PAID ON BORROWINGS US ED FOR THE PURCHASE OF SHARES FOR TRADING ACTIVITY OF THE APPELLANT. ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 3 II. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN TREATING PROFIT ON SALE OF SHARES OF M/S. PATEL AIR TEMP LTD AS SHORT TERMK CAPITAL GAINS WHE REAS THE SAME WAS PART OF BUSINESS INCOME AND THEREFORE, INTEREST PAID ON BORROWINGS MADE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES WAS AN ALLOWABLE BUSINE SS EXPENDITURE. III. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN CONSIDERING ACQ UISITION OF SHARES AS INVESTMENT AND NOT ALLOWING INTEREST PAID ON BORROW INGS FOR SUCH ACQUISITION THOUGH THE SHARES HAD BEEN PURCHASED AS A PART OF TRADING ACTIVITY AND WERE HELD AS STOCK-IN-TRADE. IV. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ERRED IN APPRECIATING THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD IN THE FORM OF TRADING AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET AND OTHER FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF THE PLEA T HAT INTEREST INCURRED WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS IN SHARES TRADING A CTIVITIES AS ADMISSIBLE U/S.36(I)(III) OF THE ACT OR OTHERWISE U /S.37(1) OF THE I.T. ACT. V. IT WAS AN ADMITTED FACT ON RECORD DULY ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES IN THE PAST THAT THE APPELLATE CARRIED ON BUSINESS OF TRADING IN SHARES, STOCKS AND SECURITIES AND EXPENSES IN THE N ATURE OF INTER4EST SO INCURRED WERE ADMISSIBLE U/S.36(I)(III). 3. AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE LD. CIT(APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFI CER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- IT WOULD BE RELEVANT HERE TO BRIEFLY NARRATE THE F ACTS RELATING TO ACQUISITION OF VARIOUS SHARES BY THE APPELLANT AND CLAIM OF INTEREST IN RESPECT OF BORROWED MONEY USED IN ACQUIRING SUCH SH ARES AS BELOW:- (A) THE FOLLOWING CHART SHOWS THE PARTICULARS RELAT ING TO ACQUISITION OF SHARES OF PATEL AIR TEMP LTD. ASST. YEAR PARTICULARS SALES NO. OF SHARES COST OF SHARES NO. OF SHARES SALE PRICE 1995-96 4,20,800 42,08,000 1,00,000 11,00,000 3.400 1,22,400 6,600 202,620 40,000 840,000 1996-97 90,000 18,49,500 90,000 18,00,00 40,000 802,000 1997-98 1998-99 (YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION) 310,800 4,425,792 TOTAL 550,800 550,800 ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 4 (B) TO SUM UP, THE APPELLANT HAD PURCHASED 5,50,800 SHARES OF PATEL AIR TEMP LTD. IN A.YS. 95-96 AND 96-97 FOR A TOTAL CONSIDERATION OF RS.68,59,500/-. THE SOURCES OF SUCH INVESTMENT WAS OUT OF AMOUNT OF RS.85 LAKHS BORROWED FROM M/S. NIRMANK CORPORATI ON (PATES 5,40- AND 41 OF PAPER BOOK)). DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED INTEREST OF RS.2,63,259/- TO M/S. NIRMAN CORPORATION. (C) SIMILARLY, THE APPELLANT HAD CLAIMED DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, INTEREST TO RIN FINANCE AT RS.9,76,6 82 AND ADMITTEDLY THIS INTEREST PERTAINED TO MONEYS BORROWED FOR INVE STMENT IN SHARES OF VARIOUS COMPANIES (PAGE 6 OF PAPER BOOK). (D) SIMILARLY, INTEREST PAYMENT MADE BY MINORS KRU TI (RS.48,086) AND BY KARTAVYA (RS.S90,278) HAVE BEEN CLAIMED ON AMOUN TS BORROWED FOR INVESTMENT IN SHARES OF SHRI RAMA MULTI-TECH LT D. (E) THE REVISED STATEMENT OF INCOME FILED AS PER LE TTER DATED 13.12.99 ADDRESSED TO DCIT, CIR.2(2), AHMEDABAD IS REPRODUCE D BELOW:- COMMISSION FROM VIMPSAN AGENCY 7,00,000 PROFIT ON SALE OF SHARES OF PATEL AIR TEMP LTD. 3,68,292 LESS: INTEREST PAID TO NIRMAN CORPN. 2,63,259 1,05,033 8,05,033 LESS: INTEREST PAID TO RIN FINANCE 9,76,682 BY KRUTI 48,086 BY KARTAVYA 90,278 VAKIL FEES 2,500 11,17,546 (-) 3,12,513 6. THE MAIN ISSUE, THEREFORE, BEFORE ME FOR DECISIO N IS AS TO WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAD ACQUIRED VARIOUS SHARES AS PART OF HI S TRADING ACTIVITY (AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT) OR WERE INVESTMENTS (AS H ELD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER). IN FORMER CASE, INTEREST ON BOR ROWED MONEY USED FOR ACQUIRING SHARES (RS.2,63,259 + 11,17,546) WOULD BE ALLOWABLE AS BUSINESS EXPENDITURE AND IN THE LATER CASE, GAINS O R LOSS WOULD BE ASSESSABLE UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS. FURTHER, I NTEREST ON BORROWED MONEY FOR ACQUIRING SUCH SHARES WHICH ARE HELD AS I NVESTMENT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWABLE AS DIVIDEND INCOME THERE FROM IS E XEMPT U/S.10(33). 7. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND CIRCUM STANCES OF THE CASE, ARGUMENTS ADVANCED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT AND T HE OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. I HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE FACTS RELATING TO ACQUISITION OF SHARES IN EARLIER YEARS WHICH WERE A DMITTEDLY OUT OF BORROWED MONEY ON WHICH INTEREST HAD BEEN PAID. I A M OF THE VIEW THAT ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 5 THE APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION OF INTE REST OF RS.13,80,805 (RS.2,63,259 + 11,17,546). IN VIEW OF THE FOLLOWING : (I) NEVER IN THE PAST THE APPELLANT HAS TREATED ACQ UISITION AND DISPOSAL OF SHARES AS TRADING ACTIVITY IN AS MUCH A S NO TRADING ACCOUNT, P & L ACCOUNT OR BALANCE SHEET ALONG WITH VALUATION OF OPENING AND CLOSING STOCK OF SUCH SHARES, IN ACCORD ANCE WITH SECTION145 HAVE BEEN FIELD. DURING APPEAL PROCEEDIN GS ALSO, THE APPELLANT HAS SIMPLY FILED DETAILS OF SHARES PURCHA SED AND SOLD (PAGES 8 TO 12 OF THE PAPER BOOK). FOR THE YEAR UND ER CONSIDERATION ALSO, NO TRADING ACCOUNT, P & L ACCOU NT OR BALANCE SHEET WAS FILED EITHER ALONG WITH THE RETURN OR DUR ING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. ON THE OTHER HAND, ALL ALONG IN THE PA ST, THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION FOR INTEREST PAID A GAINST DIVIDEND INCOME ETC. UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURC ES (II) THE APPELLANTS OWN RECORDS FOR THE EARLIER YE ARS SHOW THAT AS AND WHEN THE SHARES WERE SOLD, THE GAINS/LOSSES WER E SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD CAPITAL GAINS (PAGES 42 TO 45 OF THE PAPER BOOK). (III) ON THESE FACTS, THE ONLY CONCLUSION THAT CAN BE DRAWN IS THAT THE APPELLANT HAD HELD THE SHARES AS INVESTMENT AND NOT PART OF HIS TRADING ACTIVITY. 7.1 ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE PRESENT C ASE, AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, I HAVE NO HESITATION IN HOLDING THAT THE ASS ESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN DISALLOWING INTEREST CLAIMED OF RS.13, 80,805/-. 8. THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT FIRM IN RESPECT OF IN TEREST EXPENDITURE IS ALSO NOT ALLOWABLE IN VIEW OF SECTION 14A INTRODUCE D BY FINANCE ACT, 2001` WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.1962. THIS SECTION READS AS UNDER: 14.A EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN RELATION TO INCOME AN D NOT INCLUDIBLE IN TOTAL INCOME. FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME UNDE R THIS CHAPTER, NO DEDUCTION SHALL BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT O F EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE SE IN RELATION TO INCOM E WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME UNDER THIS A CT. 8.1 FROM THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE DISCUSSED IN DETAIL HEREINABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE APPELLANT HAD INCURRED INTERES T EXPENDITURE WHICH WAS ON ACCOUNT OF BORROWED FUNDS UTILIZED FOR INVESTING IN SHARES (WHICH WAS NOT A BUSINESS INVESTMENT). THIS INTEREST EXPENDITU RE IS IN RELATION TO SHARES FROM WHICH EITHER DIVIDEND INCOME IS EARNED (AT RS.4,32,107 WHICH IS CLAIMED AS EXEMPT U/S.10(33) OR NO DIVIDEN D/ANY OTHER INCOME IS EARNED IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. SINCE NO SUCH INCOME FORMS PARTS OF TOTAL INCOME OF THE APPELLANT, INTEREST EX PENDITURE IS NOT ALLOWABLE IN VIEW OF EXPRESS PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A. ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 6 FURTHER AGGRIEVED BY THIS ASSESSEE IS NOW APPEAL BE FORE US. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE REITERATED THE SAME SUBMISSION AS MADE BEFORE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND PLA CED RELIANCE ON THE ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDINGS ON 31 ST MARCH 1996 TO 31 ST MARCH 2000 WHICH COMPRISED OF BALANCE-SHEET GROUPING OF BALANCE-SHEE T, LIST OF SHARES HELD AS STOCK-IN-TRADE, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE STATEMENT OF INCOME WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT FOR THE YE AR ENDING ON 31 ST MAR.1999 AND SUBMITTED THAT LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE FAILED IN APPRECIATING EVIDENCE ON RECORD, IN SUPPORT OF ITS PLEA THAT INT EREST INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS IN SHARES TRADING ACTIVITIES IS ADMISSI BLE U/S.36(I)(III) OF THE ACT OR OTHERWISE U/S.37(1) OF THE ACT. HE ALSO PLACED RELI ANCE ON THE DECISION OF ITAT MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF YATISH TRADING CO.(P) LTD. V. ACIT (2011) 129 ITD 164 (MUM) AND HONBLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. SMT. LEENA RAMACHANDRAN (2010) 235 CTR 512 (KER) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT IF INCOME FORM PART OF TOTAL INCOME SECTION 14A IS NOT APPLIC ABLE. HE FURTHER ARGUED THAT SINCE THE SHARES WERE HELD AS STOCK-IN-TRADE THE IN TEREST HAS TO BE ALLOWED U/S.36(1)(III) EVEN IF THE DIVIDEND IS TAXED UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES RELYING ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDI CTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. COTTON FABRICS LTD. (1981). CONCLUDING HIS ARGUMENT LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS DEA LING IN SHARES AND PROFIT ON SALE OF SHARES IS PART OF BUSINESS INCOME AND, T HEREFORE INTEREST PAID ON BORROWING MADE FOR PURCHASE OF SHARES IS ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE AND PROVISION OF SECTION 14A ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO ASSESSEES CAS E. 5. THE LD. SR-DR ON THE OTHER HAND RELIED ON THE OR DER OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND PRAYED FOR CONFIRMING THE SAME. 6. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD AN D FIND THAT LD. CIT(A) WHILE CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CATEGORICALLY MENTIONED IN HIS APPELLATE ORDER AS UNDER, WHICH WE ARE REPRODUC ING AT THE COST OF REPETITION:- ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 7 (I) NEVER IN THE PAST THE APPELLANT HAS TREATED ACQ UISITION AND DISPOSAL OF SHARES AS TRADING ACTIVITY IN AS MUCH AS NO TRAD ING ACCOUNT, P & L ACCOUNT OR BALANCE SHEET ALONG WITH VALUATION OF OP ENING AND CLOSING STOCK OF SUCH SHARES, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION145 HAVE BEEN FIELD. DURING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ALSO, THE APPELLANT HAS S IMPLY FILED DETAILS OF SHARES PURCHASED AND SOLD (PAGES 8 TO 12 OF THE PAP ER BOOK). FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ALSO, NO TRADING ACCOUNT, P & L ACCOUNT OR BALANCE SHEET WAS FILED EITHER ALONG WITH THE RETUR N OR DURING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS. ON THE OTHER HAND, ALL ALONG IN THE PA ST, THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION FOR INTEREST PAID AGAINST DIVIDEN D INCOME ETC. UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND HAS CLAIMED THAT PAPERS NOW SUBMITTED IN FORM OF PAPER BOOK WERE ALREADY BEFORE ASSESSING OFFICER AND LD. CIT(A) AND THIS CLAIM OF ASSESSEE WAS NOT DISPU TED BY LD. AR AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US. 7. WE ALSO FEEL THAT ISSUE BEFORE US AS TO WHETHER ASSESSEE HAD ACQUIRED VARIOUS SHARES AS PART OF HIS TRADING ACTIVITY OR W ERE INVESTMENTS CANNOT BE DECIDED WITHOUT THE PRIMARY DETAILS OF BALANCE-SHEE T, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE WAY SHARES WERE HELD BY THE ASSESSEE I.E. W HETHER THEY WERE HELD AS STOCK-IN-TRADE OR NOT. SO EVEN IF THESE DETAILS WER E NOT PRODUCED BY ASSESSEE LD. CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE CALLED FOR THEM BEFORE DECID ING THE ISSUE. SINCE THIS HAS NOT BEEN DONE BY HIM AND NOW RELEVANT DETAILS A RE ON RECORD WE DEEM IT PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CO-OPERATE THE APP ELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LD. CIT(A) BY FURNISHING THE DETAILS WHICH HAVE BEE N RELIED BY HIM BEFORE US. 8. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STA TISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 27/05/2011 SD/- SD/- (A.N.PHAUJA) (D.K. TYAGI) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD, DATED : 27/05/2011 ITA NO.554/AHD/2003 A.Y. 1998-99 SH SHARAD C PATEL V. ACIT CIR-2(2), ABD PAGE 8 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-VII, AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT, AHMEDABAD