THE ACIT, Eluru V. The Andhra Sugars Ltd, Tanuku

ITA 619/VIZ/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1164 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C V K PRASAD
• Assessee Lawyers: M K SETHI; P HARI PRASAD D RS
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Proportionate interest; Revenue expenditure; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 14A

Judgement Text

ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM . , . , $ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./I.T.A.NOS.244&245/VIZAG/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09) THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU VS. ADDL. CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY [PAN: AAACT 6357Q ] ( % / APPELLANT) ( &'% / RESPONDENT) ./I.T.A.NOS.246&247/VIZAG/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2007-08 & 2008-09) THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, RAJAHMUNDRY VS. THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU ( % / APPELLANT) ( &'% / RESPONDENT) ./I.T.A.NO.598/VIZAG/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY ( % / APPELLANT) ( &'% / RESPONDENT) ./I.T.A.NO.619/VIZAG/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2010-11) ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, ELURU VS. THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU ( % / APPELLANT) ( &'% / RESPONDENT) ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 2 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI C.V.K. PRASAD, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI M.K. SETHI & SHRI P. HARI PRASAD, D.RS / DATE OF HEARING : 27.04.2 016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.05.2016 / O R D E R PER BENCH: THESE CROSS APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE SEPARATE, BUT IDENTICAL ORDERS OF CIT(A), VISAKHAPATNAM DATED 28.3.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2010-11. SINCE, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL AND ISSUES ARE COMMON, THEY ARE CLUBBED, HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOS ED OFF, BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE EXTRACTED FROM ITA.NO.24 4/V/2012, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A DOMESTIC COMPANY WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF SUGAR AND OTHER CHEMICAL PR ODUCTS LIKE CAUSTIC SODA, ASPIRIN, ACETIC ACID, ETC AND ALSO INVOLVED I N GENERATION OF POWER. THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 56,39,17,148/-, BESIDES AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF ` 9,27,850/-. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS 'THE AC T'). SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE HAS BEEN SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND ACCORDI NGLY, NOTICES U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE ACT WERE ISSUED. IN RESPONS E TO THE NOTICES, THE ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 3 AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FURNISHED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, BILLS & VOUCHERS A ND OTHER REQUISITE INFORMATION CALLED FOR. THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT AND DETERMINED TOTAL INCOME OF ` 58,73,07,979/-, BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS AND DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE. AGGRIEVE D BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MAD E BEFORE THE A.O. THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATIONS FURNI SHED BY THE ASSESSEE, PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE. A GGRIEVED BY THE CIT(A) ORDER, THE REVENUE AS WELL AS ASSESSEE ARE IN APPEA L BEFORE US. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED COMMON GROUNDS FOR ALL T HE ASSESSMENT YEARS. FROM THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE H AS AGITATED THREE ISSUES, I.E. (I) DISALLOWANCE OF PROPORTIONATE EXPE NDITURE U/S 14A OF THE ACT, (II) REDUCING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE AC T AND (III) DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE REVENUE HAS RAISED COMMON GR OUNDS FOR ALL THE YEARS. FROM THESE GROUNDS, THE REVENUE HAS CHALLEN GED THE DELETION OF PROPORTIONATE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. U/S 14A OF THE ACT AND CHALLENGED THE DELETION OF ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A. O. UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE. ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 4 4. THE FIRST ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON IS DISALLOWANCE OF PROPORTIONATE INTEREST AND INDIRECT EXPENDITURE U/S 14A OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE A. O. NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED DIVIDEND INCOME OF ` 3,09,95,829/- FROM VARIOUS COMPANIES AND THE SAME HAS BEEN CLAIMED EXEMPT U/S 10(34) OF THE ACT. AGAINST THIS EXEMPT INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISALLOWED ANY EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO SAID EXEMPT INCOME, WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME FROM BUSINESS. THEREFORE, ISSUED A SHOW CAUS E NOTICE AND ASKED TO EXPLANATION WHY THE INTEREST AND OTHER INDIRECT EXPENDITURE SHALL NOT BE DISALLOWED U/S 14A OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE TO S HOW-CAUSE NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS FILED A WRITTEN SUBMISSION DAT ED 7.12.2009 AND CONTENDED THAT THE COMPANY HAS EARNED DIVIDEND INCO ME FROM VARIOUS COMPANIES AND THE INVESTMENT ON THESE SHARES WAS MA DE IN THE EARLIER FINANCIAL YEARS. THE DIVIDEND INCOME RECEIVED DURIN G THE ASSESSMENT YEAR RELATES TO MOST OF THE INVESTMENTS MADE LONG A GO AND ATTRIBUTING A PART OF THE EXPENDITURE DURING THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR AS RELATABLE TO ONE SUCH DIVIDEND INCOME IS NOT CORRECT. THE PROVISION S OF DISALLOWANCE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT IS A PPLICABLE TO INVESTMENT COMPANIES OR INVESTMENT TRUSTEES, WHOSE BUSINESS IS TO SELL AND PURCHASE SHARES BY BRINGING BORROWED CAPITAL. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS MANUFACTURING COMPANY WHICH IS MERELY IN VESTED A PART OF ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 5 ITS SURPLUS FUNDS IN THE SHARES OF SUBSIDIARY COMPA NY AND THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS NOT TO DEAL OR TRADE IN SHARES. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE INTENTION OF THE COMPANY IS NOT TO DEAL IN SHARES, THEREFORE, THE COMPANY HAS NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE BY WAY OF INTEREST IN THE YEAR OF INVESTMENT OR IN THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CO MPANY DID NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE BY WAY OF SALARY AND OTHER INDIRECT EXPENDITURE TO MAINTAIN THE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO, AS THE DECLARATI ON OF DIVIDEND IS THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY WHICH DECLARES THE DIVIDEND . THE ASSESSEE COMPANY NEED NOT TO MAINTAIN SEPARATE STAFF FOR MAN AGING THE INVESTMENT AFFAIRS AS THE DIVIDEND IS RECEIVED BY W AY OF WARRANTS AND WHICH IS CREDITED INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT DIRECTLY AN D HENCE, NO EXPENDITURE IS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE SAID INCOME EITH ER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY. 5. THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATIONS OF T HE ASSESSEE HELD THAT IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF TH E ACT, PRO-RATA EXPENSES ON INTEREST RELATABLE TO INVESTMENT IN SHA RES FOR EARNING EXEMPT DIVIDEND INCOME IS TO BE DISALLOWED AGAINST TAXABLE INCOME. THE A.O. FURTHER HELD THAT THE EXPRESSION EXPENDITU RE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RELATION TO INCOME WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME IN SECTION 14A OF THE ACT HAS TO BE GIVEN A WIDER MEANING AND WOULD INCLUDE BOTH DIRECT AND INDIRECT EXPENSES. T HEREFORE, THE INDIRECT ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 6 EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TO BE ALLOC ATED ON PRO-RATA BASIS. THE A.O. FURTHER HELD THAT ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT MAINTAINED ANY SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR ITS I NVESTMENT BUSINESS. THEREFORE, THE TOTAL INDIRECT EXPENDITURE INCURRED IN THE HEAD OFFICE IS TO BE ALLOCATED ON PRO-RATA BASIS BASED ON THE TOTAL I NCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE EXEMPT INCOME. WITH THESE OBSERVAT IONS, THE A.O. HAS WORKED OUT PRO-RATA DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST AND IN DIRECT EXPENDITURE AND ADDED BACK TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE A SSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE A.O. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE DIVIDEND INCOME RECEIVED RELATES TO THE IN VESTMENT MADE LONG AGO AND ATTRIBUTING A PART OF THE EXPENDITURE DURIN G THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS NOT CORRECT. IT IS FURTHER STAT ED THAT THE COMPANY DID NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE BY WAY OF INTEREST TO EARN THE SAID DIVIDEND EITHER IN THE YEAR OF INVESTMENT OR IN THE CURRENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE DIVIDEND IS RECEIVED BY WAY OF WARRANTS AND IT IS CREDITED TO THE BANK ACCOUNT AND HENCE NO EXPENDITURE IS ATTRIB UTABLE TO THE SAID INCOME EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, THEREFORE, TH E ALLOCATION OF EXPENDITURE ON PRO-RATA BASIS IS NOT CORRECT. THE C IT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HELD TH AT THE EARNING OF ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 7 DIVIDEND INCOME MUST NECESSARILY SHARE THE BURDEN O F CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO SALARIES OF EMPLOYEES, REPAIRS TO ASSETS, ETC. AND HENCE, THE ACTION OF THE A.O. IN A LLOCATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE ON PRO-RATA BASIS IS HEL D TO BE IN ORDER. HOWEVER, THE CIT(A) HELD THAT IN RESPECT OF PRO-RAT A DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST IS CONCERNED, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT HAS USED ITS OWN SURPLUS FUNDS FOR INVESTMENT IN EARNING THE DIVIDEN D INCOME. THE INVESTMENTS ARE NOT MADE DURING THE CURRENT FINANCI AL YEAR. THEREFORE, THE A.O. WAS NOT CORRECT IN DISALLOWING THE INTERES T RELATABLE TO THE EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME. THE CIT(A) FURTHER HELD THAT THE ITAT, IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR HELD THAT ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER EXPENDITURE HAS TO BE PROP ORTIONATELY ALLOCATED, WHEREAS THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE NEED NO T BE ALLOCATED AS THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVED THAT THE INVESTMENTS ARE NOT MA DE OUT OF BORROWED FUNDS. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE CIT(A) DELETED THE ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS PRO-RATA INTEREST AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITIO NS MADE TOWARDS ALLOCATION OF INDIRECT EXPENDITURE. 7. THE LD. A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) IS NOT CORRECT IN ATTRIBUTING PART OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE E XPENSES, SALARIES OF EMPLOYEES, REPAIRS TO ASSETS AND OTHER EXPENDITURE TOWARDS EARNING OF DIVIDEND INCOME, SINCE THE CORRESPONDING INVESTMENT IN SHARES WAS ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 8 MADE 15 TO 20 YEARS AGO AND NOT IN THE YEAR OF UNDE R QUESTION AND NO EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED IN THE YEAR OF EARNING OF INCOME. THE LD. A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS REGARDS THE ADDITIONS OF INTEREST ON PRO-RATA BASIS, THE ITAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR HAS HELD THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN IN VESTMENT IN SHARES AND BORROWED FUNDS, ADDITIONS CANNOT BE MADE U/S 14 A OF THE ACT. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT T HE LD. CIT(A) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS MADE ON ACC OUNT OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE U/S 14A OF THE ACT ALLOCATE D ON PRO-RATA BASIS TO THE EXEMPT INCOME. THE D.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAVING UPHELD THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE AN D OTHER EXPENDITURE TO THE EXEMPT INCOME, OUGHT TO HAVE SUSTAINED THE A DDITION ON ACCOUNT OF PRO-RATA INTEREST EXPENDITURE ALSO AS THE ASSESS EE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THAT IT HAS NOT UTILIZED THE BORROWED FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTMENTS IN SHARES. 9. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MA TERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE A.O. DISALLOWED INTEREST O N BORROWED CAPITAL AND INDIRECT EXPENDITURE OF HEAD OFFICE U/S 14A OF THE ACT ON PRO-RATA BASIS. THE A.O. DISALLOWED THE AMOUNT FOR THE REAS ON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED EXEMPT INCOME, HOWEVER, FAILED TO ALLOCA TE RELATABLE INTEREST AND OTHER INDIRECT EXPENDITURE ON PRO-RATA BASIS. THE A.O. WAS OF THE ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 9 OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THAT IT HAS NOT UTILIZED THE BORROWED FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTMENT IN SHA RES. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 14A OF THE ACT, THERE IS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN DIRECT AND INDIRECT EXPENDITURE. ONCE THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED EXEMPT INCOME, THE RELATABL E EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF INTEREST AND OTHER INDIRECT EXPENDITURE SHOULD BE DISALLOWED. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE A.O. WAS NOT CORRECT IN DISALLOWING INTEREST AND INDIRECT EXPENDITURE ON PR O-RATA BASIS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT THE INVESTMENTS IN SHARES OF COMPANIES HAVE BEEN MADE 15 TO 20 YEARS BACK AND ASSESSEE HAS NOT UTILIZED BORROWED FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVESTMENTS TO EA RN EXEMPT INCOME. IT IS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT EARNING OF DIVIDEND IN COME NEED NOT TO INCUR ANY EXPENDITURE. THE ASSESSEE A MANUFACTURING COMP ANY INVESTED ITS SURPLUS FUNDS IN ITS SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES, THEREFOR E, ITS CASE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED ON PAR WITH AN INVESTMENT COMPANY, WHICH IS INVOLVED IN THE MAIN BUSINESS OF DEALING IN SHARES AND SECURITIES. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT IS MEANT FOR DISALLOWING THE EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME, IN THE CASE OF COMPANI ES WHERE THE MAJOR BUSINESS IS TRADING IN SHARES AND SECURITIES WITH B ORROWED FUNDS. THEREFORE, THE A.O. WAS NOT CORRECT IN DISALLOWING THE INTEREST AND OTHER INDIRECT EXPENDITURE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT. ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 10 10. THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE A.O. IS R IGHT IS DISALLOWED INTEREST AND OTHER INDIRECT EXPENDITURE RELATABLE T O EARNING EXEMPT INCOME U/S 14A OF THE ACT. THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO EARNING EXEMPT INCOME. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED DIVIDEND INCOME, WHICH WAS CLAIMED EXEMPT U/ S 10(34) OF THE ACT. THE A.O. WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED THE FACT THAT IT HAS NOT UTILIZED THE BORROWED FUNDS FO R THE PURPOSE OF INVESTMENTS IN SHARES. THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE A MENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT, ANY EXPENDITURE RELATABLE T O EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME SHOULD BE DISALLOWED U/S 14A OF THE ACT. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAS NOT UTILIZED THE BORROWED FUNDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF EARNING OF EXEMPT INCOME. THERE ARE TWO ASPECTS IN THIS CASE, I.E. DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE AND DISALLOWAN CE OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE. THE A.O. INVOKED RULE 8D AND WORKED OU T THE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST AND INDIRECT EXPENSES OF HEA D OFFICE AS PROVIDED UNDER RULE 8D. AS FOR AS INTEREST EXPENDITURE IS CO NCERNED, THE ASSESSEE PROVED THAT IT HAS NOT UTILIZED BORROWED FUNDS AND ITS OWN SURPLUS FUND IS INVESTED IN ITS SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES, THAT TOO M ORE THAN 15 TO 20 YEARS BACK. THOUGH, THERE IS FURTHER INVESTMENT IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08, THE ASSESSEE PROVED THAT IT HAS SURPLUS FU NDS WHICH WAS INVESTED IN THE SHARES AND NO INTEREST BEARING FUND S ARE DIVERTED FOR ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 11 INVESTMENTS. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE A.O. WAS NOT CORRECT IN DISALLOWING THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE. AS REGARDS THE DISALLOWANCE OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE OF HEAD OFFICE, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO EXPENDITURE INCURRED TO EARN THE DIVIDEND INCOME. ALTHOUGH INVESTMENTS ARE MADE IN EARLIER YE ARS, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT GET AWAY WITH THE PLEA THAT IT DID NOT INCUR RED ANY ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE FOR DAY TO DAY MANAGEMENT AND MONITORIN G OF SUCH INVESTMENT PORTFOLIOS. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE OPI NION THAT ONCE THERE IS EXEMPT INCOME, THE RELATABLE INDIRECT EXPENDITUR E SHOULD BE DISALLOWED IN PROPORTION TO THE EXEMPT INCOME. 11. A SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN COME UP FOR CONSIDERA TION BEFORE THIS BENCH, IN ASSESSEE OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 IN ITA.NO. 162/VIZAG/2006 DATED 20-01-2011. WE FIND TH AT THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 HELD THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN INVESTM ENT IN SHARES AND BORROWED FUNDS, NO DISALLOWANCE CAN BE MADE TOWARDS INTEREST. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT GET AWAY WITH THE PLEA THAT THERE IS NO INDIRECT EXPENDITURE SUCH AS SALARY TO EMPLOYEES AN D OTHER INDIRECT EXPENSES TO MAINTAIN THE DAY TO DAY AFFAIRS OF THE INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO. THEREFORE, INDIRECT EXPENDITURE RELATABLE TO THE EA RNING OF EXEMPT ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 12 INCOME SHOULD BE DISALLOWED ON PRO-RATA BASIS. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER: HAVING GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVA L SUBMISSIONS AND FROM PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES B ELOW, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE AFTER HAVING HELD THAT IN THIS TYPE OF SITUATION IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND OUT WHETHER THE INVESTMENT IN SHARES WERE MADE OUT OF THE SURPLUS FUNDS OR THE BORROWED FUNDS FOR WHICH HE HAS GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT TO THE ASSE SSEES. BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF ` 1,85,79,015/- AS A DIVIDEND INCOME AND TO MAINTAIN THE INVESTMENT PORT FOLIOS AND OTHER THINGS ASSESSEE REQUIRES TO INCUR SOME ADMINISTRATI VE EXPENSES. THE CIT(A) HAS RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE TO ` 5.91 LAKHS TO WHICH WE DO NOT FIND ANY UNREASONABLENESS. WE ACCORDINGLY OF THE V IEW THAT CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY MADE THE DISALLOWANCE OF ` 5.91 LAKHS AND NO INFERENCE IS CALLED THEREIN. ACCORDINGLY WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A ). 12. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE COORDINATE BENCH DECISIO N IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE EARLIER PERIOD, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY DELETED THE ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS PROPORTI ONATE INTEREST AND UPHELD THE ADDITIONS MADE TOWARDS INDIRECT EXPENDIT URE. WE DO NOT SEE ANY ERROR OR INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE C IT(A). HENCE, WE INCLINED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) A ND REJECT THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE. 13. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON IS DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. DURING THE COURS E OF HEARING, THE LD. A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT GROUND RELATIN G TO REDUCING THE DEDUCTIONS U/S 80IA OF THE ACT FOR ALL THE YEARS IS NOT PRESSED. THE D.R. ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 13 DID NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTIONS. THEREFORE, WE DISMIS S THE GROUND RELATING TO REDUCING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT FOR A LL THE YEARS AS NOT PRESSED. 14. THE NEXT ISSUE THAT CAME UP FOR OUR CONSIDERATI ON IS DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENAN CE. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE A.O. DISALLOW ED VARIOUS EXPENDITURES UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE . THE A.O. DISALLOWED THE EXPENDITURES FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED CERTAIN ITEM OF EXPENDITURE AS REVENUE THOU GH, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED WAS IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURE G IVING ENDURING BENEFIT TO THE PLANT, WHICH CONSTITUTE CAPITAL OUTLAY. THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPLACED VARIOUS PLANTS AND MACHINERIE S IN THE EXISTING PLANT AND MACHINERY WHICH ARE IN THE NATURE OF INDE PENDENT MACHINES THOUGH ATTACHED TO THE CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE A.O. HAS GIVEN VARIOUS REASONS FOR DISALLOWING THE EXPENDITURE. ACCORDING TO THE A.O., THESE EXPENDITURES ARE IN TH E NATURE OF CAPITAL, THEREFORE, CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS DEDUCTION AS A REVE NUE EXPENDITURE U/S 31(I) OF THE ACT OR 37 OF THE ACT. THE A.O. HAS DIS CUSSED EACH AND EVERY ITEM OF DISALLOWANCE IN HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER AND GI VEN HIS OWN REASONS FOR NOT CONSIDERING THE PARTICULAR EXPENDITURE AS R EVENUE EXPENDITURE. THE A.O. HAS TAKEN THE SUPPORT FROM THE ORDERS OF H ONBLE SUPREME ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 14 COURT OF INDIA, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SARAVANA SPI NNING MILLS LTD., CIT VS. RAMARAJU SURGICAL COTTON MILLS LTD. AND CIT VS. SHRI MANGAYARKARSI MILLS PVT. LTD AND HELD THAT THE HONBLE SUPREME CO URT HAD LAID DOWN CERTAIN GUIDELINES TO CLASSIFY PARTICULAR EXPENDITU RE IS A REVENUE OR CAPITAL. ACCORDING TO THE A.O., ALL THE EXPENDITURE ARE CAPITAL IN NATURE AND REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING PLANT AND MACHINERY GIV ES ENDURING BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS DE DUCTION. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE EXPENDITURE INC URRED UNDER THE HARD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ARE CURRENT REPAIRS TO THE EXISTING PLANT AND MACHINERY, THEREFORE, CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS CAPIT AL EXPENDITURE. IT IS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPLACED TH E CERTAIN PARTS OF EXISTING PLANT AND MACHINERY WHICH ARE PARTS AND AC CESSORIES OF EXISTING PLANT & MACHINERY. THOUGH THESE ITEMS ARE INDEPEND ENT MACHINES, THEY ARE FIXED INTO THE CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT OF THE ASSESSEE AND WHICH CANNOT BE USED AS AN INDEPENDENT MACHINE IN THE ASS ESSEES BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE A.O. WAS NO T CORRECT IN RELYING UPON THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SARAVANA SPINNING MILLS LTD., AS THE FACTS ARE TOTA LLY DIFFERENT FROM THE PRESENT CASE. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT M /S. SARAVANA SPINNING MILLS LTD. IS INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE OF YARN, WHERE EACH MACHINE IS CONSIDERED AS INDIVIDUAL PLAN T, WHEREAS IN OUR ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 15 CASE WE ARE INVOLVED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE OF SUGAR AND THE PLANT AND MACHINERY IS A CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT, THEREFORE, THESE ITEMS CANNOT BE USED AS INDEPENDENT MACHINES. 15. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE A.O. DISALLOWED CERTAIN IT EMS OF REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ON THE GROUND THAT THE EXPENDITURE INCU RRED UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ARE CAPITAL IN NATURE AND CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE. THE A.O. WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPLACED THE EXISTING PLANT AND MACHIN ERY WITH NEW PLANT AND MACHINERY AND WHICH ARE GIVING ENDURING BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE, THEREFORE, THESE ITEMS CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE. IT WAS FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THESE ITEMS ARE INDEPENDENT M ACHINERIES, WHICH CAN FUNCTION INDEPENDENTLY. IT IS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE A.O. IS NOT CORRECT IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S GOT ENDURING BENEFIT BY REPLACING THE COMPONENTS OF MACHINERY. IT IS FUR THER CONTENDED THAT THESE ARE ITEMS OF CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT AND ASS ESSEE HAS REPAIRED OR REPLACED THE EXISTING PLANT AND MACHINERY TO KEE P THE PLANT IN A WORKING CONDITION. THEREFORE, THESE ITEMS CANNOT B E CONSIDERED AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 16 16. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ISSUE BEFORE US IS WHETHER THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE IS A CURRENT REPAIR IS IN THE NATURE OF REVENUE EXPENDITURE OR A CAPITAL EXPENDITURE WHICH GIVES ENDURING BENEF IT TO THE ASSESSEE. THE PARTICULAR EXPENDITURE IS A CAPITAL EXPENDITURE OR REVENUE EXPENDITURE HAS TO BE DECIDED BASED ON THE NATURE A ND TYPE OF ASSETS AND ITS USAGE IN THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. CAPI TAL EXPENDITURE REPRESENTS MAJOR INVESTMENTS OF CAPITAL THAT A COMP ANY MAKES TO MAINTAIN OR MORE OFTEN TO EXPAND BUSINESS AND GENER ATE ADDITIONAL PROFITS. CAPITAL EXPENSES ARE FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LONG TERM ASSETS, SUCH AS FACILITIES OR MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT, BECA USE SUCH ASSES PROVIDE INCOME GENERATING VALUE FOR A COMPANY FOR A PERIOD OF YEARS. ON THE OTHER HAND, REVENUE EXPENSES ARE SHORT TERM EXPENSES REQUIRED TO MEET THE ONGOING OPERATIONAL COST OF RUNNING A B USINESS AND THESE ARE ESSENTIALLY THE SAME AS OPERATING EXPENSES. UNL IKE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE, REVENUE EXPENSES CAN BE FULLY TAX DEDU CTED IN THE SAME YEAR OF EXPENSES INCURRED. IN RELATION TO THE MAJO R ASSETS PURCHASED THAT QUALIFY AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE, REVENUE EXPEND ITURE INCLUDE THE ORDINARY REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE COST THAT ARE NECES SARY TO KEEP THE ASSET IN WORKING ORDER WITHOUT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPRO VING OR EXPANDING THE ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 17 USEFUL LIFE OF THE ASSET. REVENUE EXPENSES RELATED TO EXISTING ASSETS INCLUDE REPAIRS AND REGULAR MAINTENANCE AS WELL AS REPAINTING AND OTHER MAINTENANCE AS WELL AS RENEWAL EXPENSES. REVENUE E XPENDITURE CAN BE CONSIDERED TO BE RECURRING EXPENSES IN NATURE IN CO NTRAST TO ONE OF NATURE OF MOST CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. IN SHORT, IF EX PENDITURE IS INCURRED FOR ACQUIRING OR BRINGING INTO EXISTENCE AN ASSET O R ADVANTAGE OF ENDURING NATURE, THE EXPENDITURE IS OF A CAPITAL NA TURE. BUT, IF FOR RUNNING THE BUSINESS OR TO PRODUCE PROFITS A RECURR ING EXPENDITURE IS INCURRED WHICH IS NOT OF ENDURING NATURE, THE EXPEN DITURE IS OF REVENUE NATURE. THEREFORE, WHERE A PARTICULAR EXPENDITURE IS OF CAPITAL IN NATURE OR REVENUE EXPENDITURE IS TO BE DECIDED BASED ON TH E FACTS OF EACH ITEM OF PLANT AND MACHINERY AND ITS USAGE IN THE ASSESSE E BUSINESS. 17. COMING TO THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. THE AS SESSEE HAS INCURRED CERTAIN EXPENDITURE FOR REPAIR OR REPLACEM ENT OF EXISTING PLANT AND MACHINERY. THE FACTS EMANATES FROM THE RECORDS INDICATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPLACED CERTAIN MACHINERIES SUCH AS M OTORS, NEFION MEMBRANE SHEETS, LEVEL TRANSMITTER, BOTTOM SHELL, B LOWER FR, AIR CONDITIONER, PUMPS, SS DSM SCREENER, MULTIFUNCTION CONTROL, PAPERLESS RECORDERS, GAS DETECTION SYSTEMS, PIPE CUTTING MACH INE, PAHARPUR COOLING TOWER, SENSORS, AIR DYING UNITS, HP PRINTER S, UPS, TRACTOR ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 18 TRUCKS WELDING MACHINE ETC., WHICH ARE CAPABLE OF F UNCTION INDEPENDENTLY WHETHER OR NOT FIXED TO A CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT. ON PERUSAL OF ITEMS OF EXPENDITURE DISALLOWED BY THE A .O. WE FIND THAT EXCEPT FEW ITEMS, MANY OF THE ITEMS ARE INDEPENDENT MACHINERIES (MOST OF THEM OR MOTORS AND PUMPS) HAVING DISTINCT CHARAC TERISTICS OF MACHINES AND ALSO CAPABLE OF INDEPENDENT FUNCTION W HETHER OR NOT FIXED TO CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT. JUST BECAUSE, THESE MA CHINERIES ARE PART OF CONTINUOUS PROCESS PLANT, THEY DO NOT LOSE THEIR IN DEPENDENT IDENTITY OR FUNCTION. IT MAY BE TRUE THAT EACH MACHINE IN A SUG AR FACTORY IS PART OF THE INTEGRATED PROCESS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEM AND IS INTEGRALLY CONNECTED TO THE OTHER MACHINES IN THE PLANT FOR PR ODUCTION OF THE FINAL PRODUCT. HOWEVER, THIS INTERCONNECTION DOES NOT TAK E AWAY THE INDEPENDENT IDENTITY AND DISTINCT FUNCTION OF EACH MACHINE. THUS, EACH MACHINE IN A PLANT SHOULD BE TREATED INDEPENDENTLY AS SUCH AND NOT AS A MERE PART OF AN ENTIRE COMPOSITE MACHINERY OF THE P LANT. IT CAN AT BEST BE CONSIDERED PART OF AN INTEGRATED MANUFACTURE PRO CESS EMPLOYED IN A FACTORY. THE ENTIRE PLANT AND MACHINERY CANNOT BE R EGARDED AS A SINGLE ASSET, REPLACEMENT OF PARTS OF WHICH CAN BE CONSIDE RED TO BE FOR MERE PURPOSE OF PRESERVING OR MAINTAINING THIS ASSET. ALL MACHINES PUT TOGETHER CONSTITUTE THE PRODUCTION PROCESS AND EACH SEPARATE MACHINE IS AN INDEPENDENT ENTITY. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO MERIT S IN THE ARGUMENTS OF ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 19 THE ASSESSEE THAT THESE ARE PARTS AND ACCESSORIES O F EXISTING PLANT & MACHINERY, WHICH COMES UNDER CURRENT REPAIRS. 18. COMING TO THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSE SSEE. THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF ITAT, VISAKHAP ATNAM BENCH, IN THE CASE OF CHODAVARAM CO-OPERATIVE SUGARS LIMITED VS. DCIT, (2003) 78 TTJ 236. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE CASE LAW RELIED U PON, IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. THE CO-ORDINATE BENC H, WHILE CONSIDERING THE ISSUE OF REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE OF PLANT AND MACHINERY IS CAPITAL OR REVENUE EXPENDITURE HELD TH AT REPLACEMENT OF PLANT AND MACHINERY OR ANY PARTS OF PLANT AND MACHI NERY ALREADY IN EXISTENCE CANNOT BE HELD TO BE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE. WITH DUE RESPECT, WE DO NOT PREFER TO FOLLOW THE CASE LAW CITED BY THE A SSESSEE, AS IT GOES AGAINST THE GUIDELINES OR TESTS LAID DOWN BY THE HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SARAVANA SPINNING MILLS REPO RTED IN (2007) 211 CTR 281 (SC) AND CIT VS. MANGAYARKARASI MILLS PVT L TD (2009) 315 ITR 114 (SC), WHEREIN THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD TH AT EACH ITEM OF MACHINERY IN A PLANT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED INDEPENDE NT MACHINERY. 19. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE A.O. WAS RIGHT IN DISALLOWING CERTAIN EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE BY DEPENDING UPON ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 20 THE FUNCTIONS AND CHARACTERISTICS OF EACH ITEM OF M ACHINERY. THE CIT(A) AFTER EXAMINING THE EACH ITEM, HAD GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ITEMS WHICH ARE CONSIDERED TO BE REVENUE IN NATURE AND UPHELD THE A CTION OF THE A.O. WHEREVER THE EXPENDITURE ARE IN THE NATURE OF CAPIT AL IN NATURE. THE CIT(A) HAS DISCUSSED EACH AND EVERY ITEM OF DISALLO WANCES MADE BY THE A.O. AND GIVEN HIS FINDINGS HOW A PARTICULAR ITEM I S PLANT AND MACHINERY WHICH CONSTITUTE CAPITAL IN NATURE OR A PARTICULAR ITEM IS REPLACEMENT OF PARTS OF EXISTING MACHINERY WHICH CONSTITUTE REVENU E IN NATURE. WE DO NOT SEE ANY ERROR OR INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A). HENCE, WE INCLINED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND R EJECT THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE. 20. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IN ITA NOS.244 & 245/VIZAG/2012 AND ITA NO.598/VIZAG/2014 ARE DISMIS SED AND THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE IN ITA NOS.246 & 247/V IZAG/2012 AND ITA NO.619/VIZAG/2014 ARE ALSO DISMISSED. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20 TH MAY16. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) (V. DURGA RAO) (G. MANJUNATHA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /VISAKHAPATNAM: ' /DATED : 20.05.2016 VG/SPS ITA NOS.244 TO 247/VIZAG/2012 & 598,619/VIZAG/2014 THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., TANUKU 21 )# *# /COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / THE APPELLANT THE ANDHRA SUGARS LTD., VENKATAR AYAPURAM-534 215, TANUKU, W.G. DIST. 2. / THE RESPONDENT THE ACIT, RAJAHMUNDRY RANGE, RA JAHMUNDRY 3. / THE RESPONDENT THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY 4. + / THE CIT, RAJAHMUNDRY 5. + ( ) / THE CIT (A), VISAKHAPATNAM 6. # . , . , # / DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM 7 . / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // 12 . (SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY) . , # / ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM