Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2330 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
04-02-2016
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
DB
Next Hearing Date
28-01-2016
Assessment Year
2006-2007
Appeal Filed On
22-10-2014
Judgement Text
, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [ CONDUCTED THROUGH E-COURT AT AHMEDABAD ] - , !' #$, %& BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SL. NO(S) ITA NO(S) ASSESSMENT YEAR(S) APPEAL(S) BY: APPELLANT VS. RESPONDENT APPELLANT RESPONDENT 1. 598/RJT/2014 2006 - 07 SH. JAGISHPRASAD N. KHATUWALA, SHREE SYAM SADAN 29/2, PARAS SOCIETY ROAD NO.3, PANCHVATI JAMNAGAR PAN: AEEPK 5370 D THE DY.CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 RAJKOT 2. 599/RJT/2014 2007 - 08 - DO - ASSESSEE - DO - REVENUE 3. 600/RJT/2014 2008 - 09 - DO - ASSESSEE - DO - REVENUE 4. 601/RJT/2014 2009 - 10 - DO - ASSESSEE - DO - REVENUE 5. 602/RJT/2014 2006 - 07 SH. VIJAYKUMAR NANDLAL KHATUWALA SHREE SHAYAM SADAN 10/2, PARAS SCOIETY ROAD NO.3, PANCHVATI JAMNAGAR PAN: AFGPK 2839 C THE DY.CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 RAJKOT 6. 603/RJT/2014 2007 - 08 - DO - ASSESSEE - DO - REVENUE 7. 604/RJT/2014 2008 - 09 - DO - ASSESSEE - DO - REVENUE 8. 605/RJT/2014 2009 - 10 - DO - ASSESSEE - DO - REVENUE 9. 615/RJT/2014 2007 - 08 SH. BANWARILAL DURGADATT KHATUWALA PROP.OF SHREE KATUWALA TRADING CO. G-482, ROAD NO.9A, VKI AREA, JAIPUR PAN: AGUPK 6532 H THE DY.CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 RAJKOT ASSESSEE(S) BY: SHRI CHETAN AGARWAL, C.A. REVENUE BY : SHRI YOGESH PANDEY, SR.DR ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 2 - !() * & / DATE OF HEARING 28/01/2016 +' * & / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 04/02/2016 % / O R D E R PER BENCH: THIS BUNCH OF NINE APPEALS BY THE DIFFERENT THREE ASSESSEES ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD.COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-V, AHMEDABAD [CIT(A) IN SHORT] IDENTICALLY DATED 26/08/2014 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS (AYS) 200 6-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. SINCE THE COMMON GROUNDS HAVE B EEN RAISED IN ALL THESE APPEALS, THESE WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE B EING DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE . THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING COMMON GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- HON. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACT IN CONFIRMING ADDITION MADE U/S.14A OF THE ACT MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER. HON.CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACT IN CONFI RMING ADDITION MADE U/S.14A, IGNORING CONTENTION THAT IN SEARCH ASSESSMENT U/S.153A ADDITION CAN ONLY BE MADE ON TH E BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF S EARCH. 2. FIRST, WE TAKE UP THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO.598/RJT/2014 FOR AY 2006-07 AS A LEAD CASE FOR THE PURPOSE OF NA RRATING THE FACTS. ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 3 - 3. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A S EARCH ACTION U/S.132 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT,1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TH E ACT) WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 25/08/2011. CONSEQUENT TO SEARCH, PROCEEDINGS U/S.153A OF THE ACT WERE INITIATED BY I SSUING NOTICE DATED 18/03/2013. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (A O IN SHORT) FRAMED ASSESSMENT U/S.153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE O RDER DATED 31/01/2014, THEREBY THE AO DISALLOWED THE INTEREST CLAIM BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). THE LD.CIT( A) BY A COMMON ORDER DATED 26/08/2014 DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE PERTAINING TO AYS 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE PRESENT A PPEAL(S). 4. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE S UBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS NOT BEEN FRAMED ON THE BASIS OF INCR IMINATING MATERIAL. HE SUBMITTED THAT NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL WAS FOU ND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSMENT WA S NOT PENDING ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, HENCE NOT ABATED. HE SUBMITTED THA T THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF TH E COORDINATE BENCH (ITAT RAJKOT BENCH CONDUCTED THROUGH E-COURT AT A HMEDABAD) IN THE CASE OF M/S.PANKAJ OIL MILL VS. DCIT IN ITA NOS .460, 461 & ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 4 - 462/RJT/2015 FOR AYS 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09, DA TED 23/12/2015, JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN THE CAS E OF KABUL CHAWALA IN ITA NO.707-709 & 713/2014, DATED 28/08/2015, JUD GEMENT OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY IN THE CASE OF CONTINE NTAL WAREHOUSING CORPN REPORTED AT 58 TAXMANN.COM 78, JUDGEMEN OF HO NBLE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN IN THE CASE OF JAI STEEL INDIA VS. ACI T REPORTED AT 259 CTR 281 (RAJ.) AND DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH (ITAT MUMB AI) IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DCIT REPORTED A T (2012) 18 ITR (TRIB) 106 (MUMBAI)(SB). 4. ON THE CONTRARY, LD.SR.DR SUPPORTED THE ORDERS O F THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND ALSO FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. THE WRIT TEN SUBMISSIONS SO FAILED ARE REPRODUCED HEREINBELOW:- THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE W RITTEN SUBMISSION DATED 21/12/2015 IN RESPECT OF VALIDITY OF JURISDIC TION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ASSESS OR REASSESS THE REGULAR INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER THE SEARCH OPERATION ON 25.08.2011 IN RESPECT OF ABOVE MENTIONED ASSESSMENT YEARS SHOULD NOT BE ACCEPTED IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENTS OF THE HIGH COURTS, AS UNDER; CASE LAW TO BE RELIED UPON : (2014) 367 ITR 0517(A11) : HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD- CIT V. RAJ KUMAR ARORA RATIO OF THE ABOVE JUDGMENT : ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 5 - EVEN THOUGH AN ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED UND ER SECTION 143(1) (A) OR UNDER SECTION 143(3) AO WOULD BE REQUIRED T O REOPEN THESE PROCEEDINGS AND REASSESS THE TOTAL INCOME TAKING N OTICE OF UNDISCLOSED INCOME EVEN FOUND DURING THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPE RATION. THE FETTER IMPOSED UPON THE AO UNDER SECTIONS 147 AND 148 HAVE BEEN REMOVED BY THE NON OBSTANTE CLAUSE UNDER SECTION 153A. THE AO HAS THE POWER TO REASSESS THE RETURNS OF THE ASSESSEE NOT ONLY FO R THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME, WHICH WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION BUT ALSO WITH REGARD TO THE MATERIAL THAT WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TI ME OF THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. CASE LAW TO BE RELIED UPON : (2012) 346 ITR 0106 (AP)- HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRAD ESH- GOPAL LAL BHADRUKA V. DCIT RATIO OF THE ABOVE JUDGMENT : BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 158B-I THE VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER XIV-B ARE MADE INAPPLICABLE TO PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153A/153C. EFFECT OF THIS WAS THAT WHILE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER XIV-B LIMIT THE INQUIRY BY AO TO THOSE MATERIALS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH AND S EIZURE OPERATION, NO SUCH LIMITATION WAS FOUND INSOFAR AS SECTION 153 A/153C WAS CONCERNED. THEREFORE, FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 153A/153C AO COULD TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION MATERIAL OTHER THAN WHAT WAS AVAILABL E DURING THE SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION FOR MAKING AN ASSESSMENT OF T HE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF ASSESSEE. CASE LAW TO BE RELIED UPON : (2014) 362 ITR 0664 (KER) - HIGH COURT OF KERALA- S UNNY JACOB JEWELLERS & WEDDING CENTRE V. DY. CIT RATIO OF THE ABOVE JUDGMENT : ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 6 - UNDER SECTION 153A THE DEPARTMENT CAN ASSESS OR REA SSESS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCEDURE CONTEMPLATED. THERE I S NO PROHIBITION OR EMBARGO ON THE DEPARTMENT TO CONSIDER ANY INFORMATI ON FOR ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENTS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 153 A. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AS WELL AS THE DECISIONS/JUDGEMENTS RELIED UPON BY THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES. WE FIND THAT UNDER THE IDENTICAL FACTS, THIS TRIBUN AL IN THE CASE OF M/S.PANKAJ OIL MILL VS. DCIT(SUPRA) HAS DECIDED THI S ISSUE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. THE REVENUE HAS NOT DISPUTED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSMENT U/S.1 53A R.W.S.143(3) OF THE ACT WAS NOT FRAMED ON THE BASIS OF ANY INCRIMINATING MA TERIAL. THE LD.CIT-DR HAS FAIRLY CONCEDED THAT THERE ARE DIVERGENT VIEWS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS ON THIS ISSUE. THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CO NTINENTAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (NHAVA SHEVA) LTD. REPORTED AT (2015 58 TAXMANN.COM 78 (BOMBAY). FURTHER, LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE H AS RELIED ON THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF NATIONAL TH ERMAL POWER CO. LTD. VS. CIT REPORTED AT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC), JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. B.HILL & CO.P.LTD . REPORTED AT (1983) 142 ITR 185 AND JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS. D.S. SCREENS (P)LTD. 4.1. WE FIND THAT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CONTINENTA L WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (NHAVA SHEVA) LTD. [SUPRA], THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HELD THAT IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING DOCUMENT, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE. 4.2. WE FIND THAT THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH (SPECIAL BENCH) IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LT D. VS. DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-44, REPORTED AT (2012) 23 TAXMANN.COM 103(MU M.)(SB)::137 ITD 287, DATED 06/07/2012, HAS BEEN AFFIRMED BY THE HONBL E BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 7 - THE CASE OF CIT VS. CONTINENTAL WAREHOUSING CORPORA TION (NHAVA SHEVA) LTD. REPORTED AT (2015) 58 TAXMANN.COM 78 (BOMBAY). 4.3. THE HONBLE ITAT MUMBAI BENCH (SPECIAL BENCH) IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD.(SUPRA), AFTER EXAMINING THE ENTIRE LAW, HELD AS UNDER:- 58. THUS, QUESTION NO.1 BEFORE US IS ANSWERED AS UNDER: (A) IN ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE ABATED, THE AO RETAINS THE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION AS WELL AS JURISDICTION CONFERRED ON H IM U/S.153A FOR WHICH ASSESSMENTS SHALL BE MADE FOR EACH OF THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS SEPARATELY; (B) IN OTHER CASES, THE ADDITION TO THE INCOME THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED, THE ASSESSMENT U/S.153A WILL BE MADE ON T HE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, WHICH IN THE CONTEXT OF REL EVANT PROVISIONS MEANS (I) BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, OTHER DOCUMENTS, FOUN D IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH BUT NOT PRODUCED IN THE COURSE OF ORIGINA L ASSESSMENT, AND (II) UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR PROPERTY DISCOVERED IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH. 4.4. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSMENT PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2009-10 HAD NOT BEEN ABATED. TH IS FACT IS NOT DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE BY PLACING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD. THEREFORE, IN THESE YEARS, THE ASSESSMENT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN MADE ON THE BASIS OF INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AS PER THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIR CLE-44(SUPRA). THE REVENUE HAS NOT POINTED OUT WHAT WAS THE INCRIMINAT ING MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER S HAD BEEN FRAMED. IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH MATERIAL, WE CANNOT SUSTAIN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER(S) IN VIEW OF THE BINDING PRECEDENT AS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SPECIAL BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL RENDERED IN THE CASE OF ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. VS. DCIT(SUPRA) AND THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH C OURT OF BOMBAY RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CONTINENTAL WAREHO USING CORPORATION LTD.(SUPRA), SINCE IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT THE VIEW WHICH IS BENEFICIAL TO THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE ADOPTED. THEREFORE, WE HEREBY Q UASH THE ASSESSMENT ORDERS PERTAINING TO AYS 2006-07, 2007-08 AND 2008- 09 AS CHALLENGED BEFORE ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 8 - US IN THIS BUNCH OF APPEALS. THUS, ADDITIONAL GROU ND OF ASSESSEES APPEAL(S) IS ALLOWED. 6. THE REVENUE HAS NOT CONTROVERTED THE FACTS BY PL ACING ANY CONTRARY MATERIAL, THEREFORE TAKING A CONSISTENT VI EW, WE HEREBY QUASH THE ASSESSMENT PASSED U/S.153A R.W.S.143(3) OF THE ACT AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS BAD IN LAW IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT NO INCRIMIN ATING MATERIAL FOUND OR SEIZED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND THE INCRIMIN ATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, IT WAS NOT THE BASIS F OR INITIATING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THUS, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. AS A RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IN ITA NO. 598/RJT/2014 FOR AY 2006-07 IS ALLOWED. 7. NOW, WE TAKE UP OTHER APPEALS, I.E. ITA NOS.599 , 600, 601/RJT/2014 FOR AYS 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 RESPECTIVELY (IN THE CASE OF SH. JAGDISHDPRASAD N.KHATUWALA), ITA NOS.602, 603, 604 & 605/RJT/2014 FOR AYS 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 RESPECT IVELY (IN THE CASE OF SH.VIJAYKUMAR NANDLAL KHATUWALA) AND ITA NO.615/ RJT/2014 FOR AY 2007-08 (IN THE CASE OF SH. BANWARILAL DURGADATT KH ATUWALA). 7.1. SINCE IT WAS A COMMON POINT BETWEEN THE P ARTIES THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES IN THESE PRESENT CASES ARE ALSO I DENTICAL TO THOSE ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 9 - CONSIDERED BY US IN THE CASE OF SHRI JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT IN ITA NO.598/RJT/2014 FOR AY 2006-07(SUPRA), THEREFORE TAKING A CONSISTENT VIEW, WE HEREBY QUASH THE ASSESSMENTS PASSED U/S.153A R.W.S.143(3) OF THE ACT IN ALL THESE APPEALS AS THE ASSESSMENTS WERE BAD IN LAW. THUS, THE COMMON GROUND OF ASSESSEES APPEA LS ARE ALLOWED. 8. IN THE COMBINED RESULT, ALL THE NINE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 4 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( !' #$) ( ) %& ( MANISH BORAD ) ( KUL BHARAT ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD ; DATED 04/ 02 /2016 ..!, (.!../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS ITA NOS.5 98 TO 601/RJT/2014 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-10 JAGDISHPRASAD N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT, ITA NOS.602 TO 605/RJT/14 - AYS 2006-07 TO 2009-1 0 VIJAYKUMAR N.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT AND ITA NO.615/RJT/2014 AY 2007-08 BANWARILAL D.KHATUWALA VS. DCIT - 10 - / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. 12 / THE APPELLANT 2. 3412 / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 5#5 6 / CONCERNED CIT 4. 6 ( ) / THE CIT(A)-V, AHMEDABAD 5. 8(9 3! , , /DR,ITAT, RAJKOT 6. 9DE F) / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, 48 3 //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) ! '# $, / ITAT, RAJKOT 1. DATE OF DICTATION .. 2.2.16 (DICTATION-PAD 7+ P AGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER ..3.2.16 3. OTHER MEMBER... 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.4.2.16 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 4.2.16 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER
