Surya Roshni Ltd., New Delhi V. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 6068/DEL/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3885 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 09-11-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Deemed to accrue or arise in india
• Section: 234B; 115JB; 11

Judgement Text

PAGE | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DELHI BEFORE SH.R.K.PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013 -14) APPELLANT BY SH. ARVIND KUMAR, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SH. AMIT JAIN, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING 18 . 1 0.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 7 . 1 0.2017 ORDER PER K.N.CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.08.2015 IN APPEAL NO.173/14-15 PASSING BY THE CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) [IN SHORT CIT(A)]-22, NEW DELHI FOR 201 3-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE APPELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED BOTH IN FACT AND IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT CHARGING INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B & 234C ON AMOUNT OF MAT PAYABLE CALCULATED UNDER SECTION 115J B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, '1961 ON BOOK PROFIT INSTEAD OF TAX PAYABL E CALCULATED AS PER NORMAL PROVISION OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON CURRENT INCOME OF THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE A PPELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED BOTH IN FACT AND IN LAW IN DISREGARDING THE LAW SETTLED DOWN BY HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX V. TULSYAN N EC LIMITED [2011] SURYA ROSHNI LTD., 2 ND FLOOR, PADMA TOWER-I, 5, RAJENDRA PLACE, NEW DELHI-110008. PAN-AAACS3558C VS DCIT, CIRCLE-I, LTU NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 PG. 2 196 TAXMAN 181 THAT MAT CREDIT BALANCE IS TO BE CON SIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATION OF LIABILITY TO PAY ADVAN CE TAX, CONSEQUENTLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234B & 234C ALSO. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE A PPELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED BOTH IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CONSIDERING ONLY THE PART OF JUDGMENT AND DI SREGARDING THE SETTLED LEGAL POSITION LAID DOWN IN THE CASE OF COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V JINDAL EXPORTS LIMITED [2009] 179 TAXMAN 391 THAT MAT CREDIT BALANCE AVAILABLE FOR SET OFF IN A YEAR FALLS WITHI N THE MEANING OF 'ADVANCE TAX'. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE A PPELLANT'S CASE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED BOTH IN FACT AND IN LAW BY DISREGARDING THE 1EGAL POSITION ALREADY SETT LED BY THE HONBLE ITAT IN THE APPELLANTS OWN CASE THAT MAT CREDIT AV AILABLE IS TO BE FIRST REDUCED FROM ADVANCE TAX PAYABLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B & 234C OF THE INCOME TA X ACT, 1961. 5. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, AMEND OR AL TER ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. BRIEFLY STATED FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A MAT COMPANY AND FOR THE AY 2013-14, THEY HAVE FILED THEIR RETURN OF INCOME ON 27.11.2013 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.33,86,51,780/-. THE BOOK PROFITS CALC ULATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION U/S 115JB OF THE ACT WERE RS.76,74,99,427 /-. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, TAX PAID ON THE INCOME CALCULATED AS PER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT I.E. RS.33,86,51,780/- WAS RS.10,91,86,476/- WHEREA S MAT PAYABLE ON THE BOOK PROFIT WAS RS.15,35,59,367/-. INTIMATION U/S 143(1 ) INDICATED THAT INTEREST U/S 234B & 234C AT RS.36,64,620/- AND RS.40,38,823/- RE SPECTIVELY WAS CHARGED ON THE MAT PAYABLE OF RS.15,35,59,367/- ON THE BOOK PR OFIT OF RS.76,74,99,427/-. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THIS LEVY OF INTEREST BY WA Y APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) AND THE LD.CIT(A) BY WAY OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DISM ISSED THIS APPEAL, HOLDING THAT MAT CREDIT CAN BE CLAIMED FOR SET OFF ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE TAX AS PER THE ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 PG. 3 NORMAL PROVISION OF THE ACT OVER AND ABOVE THE MAT BUT NOT IN RESPECT OF THE MAT IN EXCESS OF THE NORMAL TAX. HENCE THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. IT IS THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD.AR THAT THE FINDING S OF THE LD.CIT(A) THAT THE MAT CREDIT COULD BE SOUGHT SET OFF ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE TAX CALCULATED UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IN EXCESS OF MAT BUT N OT AGAINST THE ADVANCE TAX LIABILITY, IS NOT REASONABLE OR EQUITABLE AND AT LE AST FOR THE DELETION OF INTEREST CHARGED U/S 234 B & C, MAT CREDIT AMOUNT MAY BE CON SIDERED. HE SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE ITAT:- 1. SECTION 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ONLY CREATES A LEGAL FICTION FOR TAXING A 'DEEMED INCOME'. LEGAL FICTION HAS BEE N CREATED TO LEVY TAX ON 'DEEMED INCOME'. ITS PURPOSE IS SERVED BY TAXING SU CH INCOME. AS PER THE ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES OF LAW, PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 CANNOT BE MADE TO TRAVEL BEYOND THAT. 2. AS PER PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (2A) OF SECTION 11 5JAA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, NO INTEREST IS PAYABLE BY THE GOVERNMENT ON THE 'TAX CREDIT' ALLOWED ON THE TAX PAID UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. IF THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY ANY INTEREST ON PAYMENTS MADE UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, THEN EQU ITY DEMANDS THAT THE ASSESSEE ALSO, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY SPECIFIC PROVI SION, CANNOT BE MADE LIABLE TO PAY ANY INTEREST ON NON-PAYMENT /SHORT-PA YMENT OF TAX ON DEEMED INCOME COMPUTED UNDER THE SAME PROVISION. 3. THAT THE TAX CREDIT OF EARLIER YEARS IS AVAILABL E TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SET OFF IN A ASSESSMENT YEAR WHEN THE T AX AS PER NORMAL PROVISION IS MORE THAN MAT AND CONSEQUENTIALLY IS T AKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR INTEREST LEVIED UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234C BEC AUSE OF EXPLICIT STATUTORY PROVISION (SECTION 115JAA (4). 4. THAT IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE EXPLICIT PROVISION THE TAX CREDIT OF EARLIER YEARS IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR SET OFF IN AN ASSESSMENT YEAR WHEN THE TAX AS PER PROVISION IS LESS THAN MAT. 5. HOWEVER THERE IS NO REASON TO FURTHER EXPAND THE SCOPE OF ABOVE DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT AND THE AVAILABILITY OF MA T CREDIT (THOUGH NOT AVAILABLE FOR SET OFF) SHOULD IN THE LEAST BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR NON CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 234B AND 234C OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT ON EQUITABLE AND REASONABLE CONSIDERATION. 6. THAT THERE IS NO EXPRESS PROVISION UNDER THE ACT TO PROHIBIT SUCH EQUITABLE AND REASONABLE TREATMENT AND THAT THEREFORE SUCH BE NEFICIAL INTERPRETATION WOULD BE IN THE SPIRIT OF THE SCHEME OF MAT CREDIT/ .INTEREST ON DEFAULT IN PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX. ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 PG. 4 7. THAT THE ABOVE ISSUE IS NOT DIRECTLY ADDRESSED B Y THE HON'BLE COURTS IN THE DECISION OF CIT V. JINDAL EXPORTS LIMITED (SUPR A) ; CIT V. TULSYAN NEC LIMITED OR JCIT V. ROLTA INDIA LTD. [2011] 196 TAXM AN 594 (SC). 8. THAT THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS OF JURISDICTIONA L HIGH COURT OF DELHI HAS HOWEVER IN THE CASE OF JINDAL EXPORTS LTD. (SUPRA) ARE HOWEVER RELEVANT FOR THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF INTEREST IN THE FACTS OF THE C ASE, WHICH ARE AS BELOW:- '44 '.THE AVAILABLE TAX CREDIT UNDER SECTION 11 5JAA WOULD FALL WITHIN THE MEANING OF TAX PAID PRIOR TO THE DATE OF DETERMINATION OF TOTAL INCOME UNDER SECTION 143(1) OR COMPLETION OF REGULA R ASSESSMENT. AND, SIGNIFICANTLY, THIS CONCLUSION IS NOT DEPENDENT UPO N THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT ABOUT BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2006 WHICH MAKES THE POSITION EXPLICIT AND BEYOND DOUBT. IT IS ALSO NOTEWORTHY TH AT THE SAID CIRCULAR NO. 14 OF 2006 ITSELF RECOGNIZES THE FACT THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS INTRODUCED BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN REPRESENTED FROM SEV ERAL QUARTERS THAT THE TAX CREDIT ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 115JAA WAS NO DIFFERENT FROM THE TAX PAID IN ADVANCE AND CREDIT FOR HAVING PAID THE MAT OUGHT TO BE ALLOWED AGAINST THE TAX LIABILITY DETERMINED ON ASS ESSMENT. THIS CIRCUMSTANCE IS ANOTHER INDICATOR THAT THE AMENDMEN TS WERE CLARIFICATORY IN NATURE. 45. THE NEXT STEP IS TO PROCEED TO COMPUTE INTEREST IN TERMS OF SECTION 234B(2). THE SAID PROVISION STIPULATES THAT WHERE T AX IS SO PAID, INTEREST SHALL BE CALCULATED UP TO THE DATE ON WHICH THE TAX IS PAID. SINCE, WE ARE DEALING WITH TAX CREDIT WHICH HAS BEEN CARRIED FORW ARD FROM A PRIOR YEAR, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE TAX WOULD BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN PAID ON THE VERY FIRST DAY OF THE YEAR IN QUESTION, EVEN PR IOR TO THE DUE DATES OF PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX. THE IMPLICATION OF THIS IS THAT NO INTEREST WOULD BE CHARGEABLE ON SUCH AMOUNT. FROM THIS IT FOLLOWS THAT INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B IS TO BE CHARGED AFTER THE CARRIED FOR WARD TAX CREDIT (MAT CREDIT) AVAILABLE UNDER SECTION 115JAA IS SET OFF. THE SOME LOGIC WOULD APPLY TO THE COMPUTATION OF INTEREST FOR DELAYED PA YMENTS OF ADVANCE TAX UNDER SECTION 234C. 50. IT IS APPARENT THAT BECAUSE OF THE MANNER IN WH ICH THE TWO PROVISIONS WORK, IT IS ENSURED THAT A COMPANY ASSES SEE ALWAYS PAYS ITS MAT COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF 30 PER CENT OF ITS BOO K PROFIT. EVEN THE TAX CREDIT WHICH IS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE CAN ONLY BE SET OFF AGAINST THE TAX PAYABLE IN EXCESS OF THE MAT. IT IS ALSO APPARE NT THAT THE TAX CREDIT OBTAINED IN A PARTICULAR YEAR IS A PART OF THE MAT OF THAT YEAR. IT REPRESENTS TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE GOVERNME NT OF INDIA. IN THE YEAR IN WHICH SUCH TAX CREDIT IS SET OFF IN TERMS O F SECTION 115JAA, IT IS CLEAR THAT SUCH TAX CREDIT WAS AVAILABLE ON THE FIR ST DAY OF THAT YEAR. SO, IN SUCH A YEAR, THE TAX CREDIT, TO THE EXTENT IT CA N BE SET OFF, REPRESENTS TAX ALREADY PAID AND AVAILABLE AS CREDIT AT THE BEG INNING OF THE YEAR. CONSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE CHARGED INTERE ST ON SOMETHING WHICH IT HAD ALREADY PAID. ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 PG. 5 9. THAT THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATION OF HON'BLE SUPREM E COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. TULSYAN NEC LIMITED (SUPRA) IS AGAIN RELEVAN T FOR THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF INTEREST IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, WHICH ARE AS BEL OW:- '6.. ALTHOUGH THE RIGHT TO AVAIL TAX CREDIT GETS CRYSTALLIZED IN YEAR ONE, ON PAYMENT OF TAX UNDER SECTION 115JA AND THE SET OF THEREOF FOLLOWS STATUTORILY, THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT AVAILABLE AND THE AMOUNT OF SET OFF TO BE ACTUALLY ALLOWED AS IN ALL CASES OF DEDUC TIONS/ALLOWANCES UNDER SECTIONS 30-37, IS FLUID/INCHOATE AND SUBJECT TO FINAL DETERMINATION ONLY ON ADJUDICATION OF ASSESSMENT EI THER UNDER SECTION 143(1) OR UNDER SECTION 143(3). THE FACT THAT THE A MOUNT OF TAX CREDIT TO BE ALLOWED OR TO BE SET OF! IS NOT FROZEN AND IS AM BULATORY, DOES NOT TAKE AWAY/DESTROY THE RIGHT OF THE ASSESSEE TO THE AMOUN T OF TAX CREDIT. ' 10. THAT THEREFORE, LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTI ONS 234B AND 234C OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 AMOUNTING TO RS 36,64,620/- AN D RS 40,38,823/- RESPECTIVELY FOR SHORT PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX ON BO OK PROFITS AS DETERMINED UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT WHILE PRO CESSING THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY UNDER SECTION 143(1 ), IS BAD IN LAW AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED FOR THE SAKE OF PRINCIPLE EQUI TY, EQUALITY AND NATURAL JUSTICE. 4. PER CONTRA, IT IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD.DR TH AT IN VIEW OF THE CLEAR PROVISION U/S 234B(4) AND 234C(5) AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN JINDAL EXPORT LTD. 314 ITR 137 & TULSYAN NEC LTD. 330 ITR 226, MAT CREDIT CANNOT BE SOUGHT FOR SET OFF AGAINST THE MAT BUT THE SET OF IS ALLOWABLE ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE TAX CALCULATED UND ER THE NORMAL PROVISION OF THE ACT WHEN IT EXCEEDS THE MAT, OTHERWISE THE VERY PUR POSE OF INTRODUCTION OF THE PROVISION OF SECTION 115JB ARE DEFEATED INASMUCH AS AFTER THE PAYMENT OF MAT FOR THE FIRST YEAR FOR EVERY SUBSEQUENT YEAR EVERY ASSE SSEE CAN SEEK MAT CREDIT TO BE SET OFF AGAINST THE ADVANCE MAT LIABILITY. ACCORDI NG TO THE LD.DR, SECTION 115JB IS AS A SELF CONTAINED CODE AND IN VIEW OF THE FACT TH ERE IS NO EXCLUSION OF SECTION 115J & 115JA IN THE LEVY OF INTERESTS U/S 234B OR 2 34C AS HELD BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN ROLTA INDIA LTD. 330 ITR 470. ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 PG. 6 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTIONS O F THE PARTIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE APEX COURT IN CIT VS ROLTA INDIA LTD. (SUPRA) CIT VS TULSYAN NEC LTD. (SUPRA). VIDE PARAGRAPH NO.11 & 12 , LD.CIT(A) OBSE RVED AS UNDER:- 11. WHEN THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF JINDAL EXPORT LTD. AND THE TWO DECISIONS OF THE APEX COURT DISCUSSED ABOVE ARE READ WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB, 115JAA, 234B & 234C, THE SETTLED POSITION OF LAW EMERGES AS UNDER:- (A) IN ANY YEAR IF AN ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO PAY TAX U/S 115JB FOR THE REASON THAT THE SAID TAX EXCEEDS THE TAX AS PER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, THE LIABILITY TO PAY ADVANCE TAX, IS TO BE DETERMINED WITH RESPECT TO TAX PAYABLE U/S 115JB. (B) IN A YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO PA Y TAX AS PER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT FOR THE REASON THAT TH E TAX PAYABLE AS PER NORMAL PROVISIONS IS MORE THAT THE TAX PAYABLE ON B OOK PROFIT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 115JB, THE ADVANCE TAX LIABILITY WILL BE DETERMINED WITH RESPECT TO SUCH TAX PAYABLE AS PER THE NORMAL PROVI SIONS OF THE ACT. (C) THE CARRIED FORWARD MAT CREDIT U/S 115JAA OF E ARLIER YEARS SHALL BE ALLOWED AGAINST THE TAX PAYABLE ONLY IN THE SCEN ARIO (B) ABOVE AND NOT IN THE SCENARIO (A) ABOVE. THE QUANTUM OF CREDIT TO BE SET OFF IS GOVERNED BY SECTION 115JAA. 12. THE DISTINCTION MADE IN CLAUSE C ABOVE WAS NO T CONSIDERED IN THE ORDERS OF MY PREDECESSOR RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLA NT IN RESPECT OF A.Y. 10-11 AND 11-12. THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY CIT(A) AND ITAT I N EARLIER YEARS ALSO DO NOT HELP THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT IN VIEW OF THE DECIS ION OF THE APEX COURT (330 ITR 470) DISCUSSED ABOVE, HOLDING THAT INTEREST U/S 234B/234C IS PAYABLE IN RESPECT OF TAX PAYABLE UNDER MAT PROVISIONS. 6. IN CIT VS. TULSYAN NEC LTD. 330 ITR 226, THE HONBLE APEX COURT, VIDE PARAGRAPH NO.6, HELD IN UNEQUIVOCAL TERMS THAT MAT CREDIT IS AVAILABLE FOR SET OFF AGAINST THE TA X PAYABLE IN SUCCEEDING YEARS WHERE THE TAX PAYABLE ON INCOME COMPUTED UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT EXCEEDS THE TAX PAYABLE ON BOOK PROFITS COMPUTE D FOR THAT YEAR [SEE S.115JAA(4), (5)] ITA NO. 6068/DEL/2015 PG. 7 THUS, THE MAT CREDIT ALLOWABLE CAN BE SET OFF BY TH E ASSESSEE WHILE COMPUTING ADVANCE TAX/SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX PAYABLE FOR YEARS 2 TO 6 LIMITED TO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TAX PAYABLE ON INCOME COMPUT ED UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS AND TAX PAYABLE ON BOOK PROFITS IN EACH OF THOSE YEARS, AS PER ASSESSEES OWN COMPUTATION. NO DECISION IS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE TO SHOW THAT M AT CREDIT IS ALLOWABLE AS SET OFF IN RESPECT OF MAT TAX OR ADVANCE TAX TO BE CALCULAT ED ON THE BOOK PROFITS. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE UNABLE TO AGREE WITH THE SUBM ISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT INSOFAR AS THE INTEREST LIABILITY U/S 215B & 2 15C IS CONCERNED, THE MAT CREDIT MAY BE CONSIDERED ON EQUITABLE GROUNDS. WE, THEREF ORE, DO NOT FIND ANY MERITS IN THIS APPEAL AS SUCH THE SAME IS LIABLE TO BE DISMIS SED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 TH OCTOBER, 2017. SD/- SD/- (R.K.PANDA) (K.N.CHAR Y) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *AMIT KUMAR* DATE:-27.10.2017 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI