The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Jammu V. M/s. G.I. Power Corporation Ltd, Jammu

ITA 609/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8818 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 01-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: V K AGGARWAL
• Keywords: Bad and doubtful debts; Commercial expediency

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. A.D.JAIN, HONBLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. T.S. KAPOOR, HONBLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [ I.T.A NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2006-07 DCIT, CIRLCE-2 JAMMU. VS. M/S. G.I. POWER CORPORATION LTD. 77-KALI JANI, JAMMU. PAN:AABCG5354K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. TARSEM LAL (DR) RESPONDENT BY: SH. V.K. AGGARWAL DATE OF HEARING: 01.03. 2016 DATE OF PRONO UNCEMENT: 16.03.2016 ORDER PER T. S. KAPOOR (AM): THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY REVENUE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 16.07.2014 FOR ASST. YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY REVENUE ARE REPRO DUCED BELOW. (I) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER TH E LEARNED CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES BY HOLDING TH AT THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO THE BORROWER IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSIN ESS. (II) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. CIT( A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES BY NOT CONSIDERING THE JUDGMENT I N THE CASE M/S ABISHEK INDUSTRIES 286 ITR-1 (P&H) AS PER WHICH THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA HAD DECIDED THAT THE INTE REST HAS TO BE DISALLOWED U/S 36( 1)(III) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. (III) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 2 INTEREST EXPENSES BEING 6% OF THE ADVANCE TO M/S GT Z SECURITIES LTD. BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. (IV) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES BEING 6% OF THE ADVANCE TO M/S GT Z SECURITIES LTD. BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BY NOT CONSIDERING THE JUDG MENT IN THE CASE M/S ABISHEK INDUSTRIES 286 ITR-1 (P&H) AS PER WHICH THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA HAD DECIDED THAT THE INTE REST HAS TO BE DISALLOWED U/S 36(L)(III) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. (V) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER THE LD. CIT (A) WAS RIGHT IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS PREVIOUS PERIOD INCOME WHICH HAD NOT BEEN REFLECTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TAXATION AS THE A/R OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ACCEPTED THE SAID I NCOME TO BE ADDED BACK IN THE CURRENT A.Y. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE AS NOTED IN THE ASSE SSMENT ORDER ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 22. 11.2006. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT ASS ESSEE HAD ADVANCED AN AMOUNT OF RS.20,00,000/- TO M/S. ALLIED TRONICS AND A DEBIT BALANCE OF RS.20,00,000/- WAS OUTSTANDING AND ON WHICH NO I NTEREST WAS CHARGED. THEREFORE, ASSESSING OFFICER SHOW CAUSED T HE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY INTEREST WAS NOT CHARGED. THE ASSESSEE IN REPLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ADVANCE WAS MADE FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIAL SO TH EREFORE, NO INTEREST HAS BEEN CHARGED. THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CON SIDERED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND HE OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FILE MATERIAL EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT SUCH ADVANCE WAS GI VEN FOR THE PURPOSES OF PURCHASE OF MATERIALS, THEREFORE, HE RELIED UPON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ABHISHEK ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 3 INDUSTRIES LTD. 286 ITR 1 (P&H) AND APPLIED A RATE OF 12% ON THE INTEREST FREE ADVANCE MADE AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.2,40,0 00/-. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER OBSERVED THAT ASSE SSEE HAD MADE ADVANCE TO M/S. GTZ SECURITIES LTD. FROM WHICH INTE REST @ 6% WAS CHARGED, THEREFORE, ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED OVER TH IS ISSUE OF SHORT LEVY OF INTEREST TO THE TUNE OF 6%. IN RESPONSE THE ASSE SSEE DID NOT FURNISH ANY REPLY, THEREFORE, AGAIN RELYING UPON THE JUDGME NT OF ABHISHEK INDUSTIRES (SUPRA), THE ASSESSING OFFICER CALCULATE D THE INTEREST @ 6% FOR SHORT LEVY AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.38,30,129/-. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER OBSERVED THAT ASSE SSEE IN ITS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT HAD DECLARED PREVIOUS YEARS INCOM E WHICH IT HAD FAILED TO OFFER FOR TAXATION THEREFORE, ASSESSING O FFICER CONFRONTED THE ASSESSEE AND GETTING REPLY MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.1 ,75,843/- AS PREVIOUS YEARS INCOME. 6. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER THE ASSESSEE FILED AN A PPEAL BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) AND FILED VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS. IT WA S SUBMITTED THAT IN RESPECT OF INTEREST FREE ADVANCE OF RS.20,00,000/- THE ASSESSEE HAD PLACED AN ICD OF RS.20 LAC WAY BACK IN 1997-98 ON W HICH REGULARLY INTEREST WAS CHARGED UP TO FINANCIAL YEAR 2000-2001 AND IN RESPECT OF WHICH EVIDENCE WAS ALSO FILED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTE D THAT BORROWER WAS UNABLE TO PAY INTEREST AND THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY STOPPED PROVIDING THE INTEREST IN THE BOOKS. IT WAS ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 4 ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS A CASE WHERE AN ADVANCE WAS MADE BY ASSESSEE IN THE REGULAR COURSE OF ITS BUSINESS OF M ONEY LENDING AND WHICH BECOME BAD. 7. IN RESPECT OF SHORT CHARGING OF INTEREST FROM GT Z SECURITIES LTD., IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AS A PRUDENT BUSINESSMAN THE ASS ESSEE HAD SHORT CHARGED THE INTEREST WITH CERTAIN COMMERCIAL AND BU SINESS PURPOSE AND COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY IN MIND. IN FACT GTZ SECURITI ES HAD STOOD AS GUARANTOR WITH INDIAN RENEWAL ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AG ENCY LIMITED. (IREDA) FOR A LOAN OF APPROX 11 CRORES AND EVIDENCE IN THIS RESPECT WAS FILED IN THE FORM OF NOTES ATTACHED WITH BALANCE SH EET OF THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE C ONTENTIONS OF ASSESSEE ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 4.2 GROUND OF APPEAL NO 2 RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS 2,40,000/- OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES BEING 12% OF THE INTEREST FREE AD VANCE TO M/S ALLIED TRONICS BY THE APPELLANT . THE APPELLANT HAS ARGUED THAT THE APPELLANT COMPANY WAS EARLIER NAMED AS GOETHE' INDIA FINANCE COMPANY AND WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MONEY LENDING. IN THE CO URSE'OF ITS OPERATIONS AS FINANCE COMPANY, THE APPELLANT PLACED AN ICD OF RS 20 LAKHS IN 97-98 WHICH WAS AN INTEREST BEARING ASSET IN THE REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS. THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THE COMPANY CHARGED INTERE ST ON THIS AMOUNT TILL 2000-01 AFTER WHICH THE COMPANY FOUND THAT M/S ALLI ED TRONIC IS UNABLE TO PAY INTEREST AND PRINCIPAL AND ACCORDINGLY STOPPED DEBITING INTEREST ON SUCH BALANCE. THE BALANCE OUTSTANDING IN THE NAME O F M/S ALLIED TRONICS WAS ALSO WRITTEN OFF IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AS BAD DEBTS. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT, ASSES SMENT ORDER AND OTHER DOCUMENTS ON RECORD. AS THE LOAN WAS GIVEN TO A BOR ROWER IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS AND AS THE COMPANY FOUND THAT TH E BORROWER WAS UNABLE TO REPAY THE LOAN ALONG WITH INTEREST, THE A SSESSEE COMPANY STOPPED RECOGNIZING THE INTEREST INCOME AS PER THE NORMAL PROCEDURES. FURTHER, IT IS ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE BORROWER IS N EITHER A SISTER CONCERN OR A RELATED PARTY OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. IN MY OPIN ION, THE CONCLUSION MADE BY THE AO IN DISALLOWING THE INTEREST EXPENSES BY MAKING A NEXUS WITH THE INTEREST FREE ADVANCE IS NOT JUSTIFIED AS THE LOAN WAS GIVEN IN 1997-98 AND IT IS NOT ESTABLISHED THAT THE INTEREST EXPENSES DISALLOWED ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 5 WERE PAID ON THE LOANS TAKEN IN OR BEFORE 1997-98 A ND THE ADVANCES WERE GIVEN OUT OF SUCH LOANS. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS A LLOWED AND A RELIEF OF RS 2,40,000/- IS ALLOWED. 4.3. GROUND OF APPEAL NO 2 RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS 38,30,129/- OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES BEING 6% OF THE ADVANCE TO M/S GTZ SECURITIES LTD BY THE APPELLANT AT LOWER RATE OF INTEREST OF 6% . THE APPELLANT HAS ARGUED THAT AN ICD @ 6% WAS GIVEN ITS SISTER CONCERN GTZ S ECURITIES WITH A COMMERCIAL AND BUSINESS PURPOSE. IT WAS EXPLAINED B Y THE APPELLANT THAT M/S GTZ SECURITIES HAS GIVEN A GUARANTEE WITH INDIA N RENEWAL ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LIMITED FOR A LOAN OF RS 11 CROR ES IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY AND ACCORDINGLY THE LOAN WAS GIVE N TO THE SAID CONCERN AT A LOWER RATE AS A MATTER OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENC Y. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ADVANCE WAS GIVEN TO THE SISTER CONCERN AT LOWER RATE OF INTEREST OUT OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY AS THE SAID CONCERN PR OVIDED GUARANTEE FOR LOAN OF RS 11 CR IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT WITHOUT ANY OTHER CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOU NT OF ADVANCE AT LOWER RATE OF INTEREST IS NOT JUSTIFIED. THIS GROUN D OF APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT IS ALLOWED AND A RELIEF OF RS 38,30,129/- IS ALLOWE D 4.5 GROUND OF APPEAL NO 5 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS .1,75,483/- ON ACCOUNT OF PRIOR PERIOD INCOME. THE APPELLANT HAS ARGUED TH AT THE INCOME OF THE PRECEDING YEARS CANNOT BE TAXED IN THE YEAR UNDER C ONSIDERATION. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THERE WERE PRIOR PERIOD INCOMES OF RS .1,75,483/- & PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES OF RS 9,57,829/-. THE AO IGNORED TH E PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AND MADE ADDITION OF PRIOR PERIOD INCOME I N THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 8. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEA L BEFORE US. 9. LEARNED DR, AT THE OUTSET, SUBMITTED THAT RIGHT TO RECEIVE INTEREST HAD ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE, IT WAS I NCUMBENT ON BE PART OF ASSESSEE TO PROVIDE INTEREST AND THEREFORE, LEAR NED CIT(A) HAS WRONGLY DELETED THE ADDITION. 10. AS REGARDS SECOND DELETION MADE BY LEARNED CIT( A), THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT VERIFIED AS FOR HOW M ANY YEARS M/S GTZ SECURITIES LTD. HAD STOOD GUARANTOR FOR THE ASSESSE E COMPANY AND WITHOUT ELABORATING THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THE RELIEF. ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 6 11. AS REGARDS THE RELIEF GIVEN BY LEARNED CIT(A) I N RESPECT OF PREVIOUS YEAR INCOME THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE RELIE F ALLOWED BY LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. 12. THE LEARNED AR, ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED TH AT THE ASSESSEE HAD BEEN TAKING INTEREST INCOME AS INTEREST ACCRUED IN VARIOUS YEARS AND THE TOTAL OF ACCUMULATED INTEREST BECAME TO RS.7,24 ,416/- AND SINCE THE AMOUNT WAS NOT BEING RECOVERED, THEREFORE, THE ASSE SSEE HAD WRITTEN OFF THE SAME IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08. IN THIS RES PECT OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAPER BOOK PAGE 14. HE SUBMITTED THAT EV EN THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT WAS ALSO WRITTEN OFF IN THE YEAR 2007-08, AN D IN THIS RESPECT OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAPER BOOK PAGE 15. IN VIE W OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES LEANED AR SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE NON RECOVERY OF PREVIOUS INTEREST ARREARS THERE WAS NO POINT IN TAKING INTEREST AS INCOME AS WHAT TO TALK ABOUT RECOVERY OF INTEREST E VEN PRINCIPAL WAS NOT RECOVERABLE, THEREFORE, HE SUBMITTED THAT LEARNED C IT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ALLOWED THE RELIEF . 13. AS REGARDS SHORT CHARGING OF INTEREST FROM G TZ SECURITIES, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT GTZ SECURITIES HAD STOOD AS GUARANTOR WITH INDIAN RENEWAL ENERGY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY LTD (IREDA ) FOR A LOAN OF APPROX RS.11 CRORES WHICH THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NO TED IN HIS ORDER AND IN THIS RESPECT OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAPER BOOK PAGE 56 WHERE ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 7 NOTES TO ACCOUNTS FORMING PART OF BALANCE SHEET FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION WAS PLACED. 14. AS REGARDS DELETION ON ACCOUNT OF PREVIOUS YEAR INCOME, THE LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NETTED O FF PREVIOUS YEAR INCOME AND EXPENSES AND LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ALLOWED THE RELIEF. 15. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL PARTIES AND HAVE GONE T HROUGH THE MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT AS REGARDS THE DELETION OF RS.2,40,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ADDITION MADE BY ASSESS ING OFFICER, WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO RECOVER ACCUMULA TED INTEREST FOR THE EARLIER YEARS THE EVIDENCE OF WHICH IS EVIDENT FROM PAPER BOOK PAGE 14 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAD WRITTEN OFF THE ACCUMULATE D INTEREST OF EARLIER YEAR AS NOT RECOVERABLE AND SIMILARLY EVEN THE PRIN CIPAL AMOUNT WAS WRITTEN OFF DURING F.Y. 2007-08, THEREFORE, THE ASS ESSEE HAD FAIR INCLINATION OF NOT RECEIVING INTEREST FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THEREFORE, IT HAD RIGHTLY NOT PROVIDED FOR THE INTE REST INCOME AND THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDE R OF LEARNED CIT(A). IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, GROUND NO.1& 2 ARE DISMISSED. 16. AS REGARDS SHORT CHARGING OF INTEREST TO M/S GT Z SECURITIES LTD., WE FIND FROM PAPER BOOK PAGE 54 WHICH ARE NOTES TO THE BALANCE SHEET THAT M/S GTZ SECURITIES LTD. HAD STOOD GUARANTOR TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FOR LOANS OF APPROXIMATELY RS.11 CRORES FR OM (IREDA) WHICH IS APPARENT FROM NOTES NO.2(A)(B). THE PRINCIPAL AMOUN T WHICH WAS PAYABLE ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 8 IN THE NEXT TWELVE MONTHS AS NOTED IN THE ABOVE NOT ES IS TO THE TUNE ABOUT RS.3.5 CRORES, WHICH ITSELF PROVES THAT THE T OTAL AMOUNT OF APPROXIMATELY 11 CRORES WAS FOR A PERIOD OF ABOUT T HREE YEARS WHICH IS FAIRLY A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. ARGUMENT OF LEARNED D R THAT LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT EXAMINED THIS FACT AS TO FOR HOW MUCH PERIO D M/S GTZ SECURITIES HAD STOOD GUARANTOR FOR THE SAME, DO NO T HAVE ANY FORCE AS THE PERIOD OF LOAN IS APPROXIMATELY 3 YEARS, AND GU ARANTEE ONCE GIVEN CANNOT BE REVOKED TILL THE REPAYMENT OF ENTIRE LOAN . THEREFORE, ASSESSEE HAD RIGHTLY CHARGED LOWER INTEREST KEEPING IN VIEW THE COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY AND LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED T HE ADDITION, AND THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE SAME . THEREFORE, GROUND NO.3 & 4 ARE ALSO DISMISSED. 17. NOW COMING TO GROUND NO.5, WE FIND THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAD CLAIMED PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES TO THE TUNE OF RS.9,57,829/- WHEREAS THE INCOME OF PRIOR PERIOD IS ONLY RS.1,75,483/-. THE ASSESSEE HA D NOT CLAIMED PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AGAINST CURRENT YEAR INCOME AS IT H AS TAKEN IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME THE LOSS FIGURE AS PER P& L A CCOUNT BEFORE ADJUSTMENT OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AND PRIOR PERIO D INCOME. THESE FACTS ARE VERIFIABLE FROM PAPER BOOK PAGE 26 & 28 WHERE A COPY OF P&L ACCOUNT AND A COPY OF COMPUTATION SHEET IS ENCLOSED . THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT CONSIDER THE PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES AGAINST INCOME OF CURRENT YEAR BUT MADE ADDITION OF PRIOR PERIOD INCO ME WHICH IS NOT ITA NO.609 (ASR)/2014 ASST. YEAR: 2006-0 7 9 JUSTIFIED, THEREFORE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RIGHTL Y ALLOWED THE RELIEF. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, GROUND NO.5 IS ALSO DISMISSED. [ 18. IN NUTSHELL THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16 TH MARCH, 2016. SD/- SD/- (A.D. JAIN) (T. S. KAPOOR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT ME MBER DATED: 16.03.2016. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A), (4) THE CIT, (5) THE SR DR, I.T.A.T., TRUE COPY BY ORDER (ASSISTANT REGISTRAR) INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AMRITSAR BENCH: AMRITSAR.