ORBIT POLYTECH(INDIA) LTD., Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 638/JPR/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6292 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-07-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SEEMA MEENA JCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: DILIP SHIVPURI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Reassessment proceedings; Borrowed satisfaction
• Section: 143(3); 147; 68; 148

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKWO] U;KF;D LNL; ,O A JH HKKXPUN ] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI BHAGCHAND, A M VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06. M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH 9INDIA) LTD., JEEN MATA NAGAR-5, KALWAR ROAD, JHOTWARA, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. AAACO 3228 K VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DILIP SHIVPURI (ADVOCATE) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. SEEMA MEENA (JCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 29.05.2018. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12/07/2018. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER DATED 18 TH MAY, 2015 OF LD. CIT (A)-1, JAIPUR FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2005-06. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1(A) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147 OF IN COME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ACTION OF LD. AO IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTI FIED, ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEAS E BE GRANTED BY QUASHING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEING ILLE GAL AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS. 2 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. (B) IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE OF VALI DITY OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS RAISED DURING APPELLATE PR OCEEDINGS. THE ACTION OF LD. CIT (A) IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED, ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED BY QUASHING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEING ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT ANY BASIS. 2. IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE LD. A O ERRED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 10,18,358/- AS ALLEGED UNEXP LAINED CASH CREDIT UNDER SECTION 68 OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. TH E ACTION OF LD. CIT (A) IS ILLEGAL, UNJUSTIFIED, ARBITRARY AND AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE CASE. RELIEF MAY PLEASE BE GRANTED BY DELET ING THE SAID ADDITION OF RS. 10,18,358/-. 3. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CRAVES ITS RIGHT TO ADD, AM END OR ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS ON OR BEFORE THE HEARING. GROUND NO. 1 IS REGARDING VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT. 2. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF SPRINKLER SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENTS. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RET URN OF INCOME ON 28.12.2005 DECLARING NIL INCOME. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED UND ER SECTION 143(1) ON 26.07.2006. SUBSEQUENTLY, AS PER THE OUT-COME OF T HE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AFT ER TWO ROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE AO REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SEC TION 148 ON 26 TH MARCH, 2012. THE AO PROPOSED TO REASSESS THE INCOME ON ACCOUNT O F LOAN OF RS. 18,27,583/- GIVEN TO M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LT D. AS IT WAS GIVEN AFTER DEPOSIT OF CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE AO C OMPLETED THE REASSESSMENT BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 10,18,358/- ON ACCOUNT OF THE CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED T HE ACTION OF THE AO BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) AND THEREAFTER THE ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF REOPENING BUT COULD NOT SUCCEED. 3 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD. A/R OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY THE AO ON THE BASIS OF THE COMMUNICATIO N DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND, THEREFORE, THE REOPENING IS BASED ON THE BORROWED S ATISFACTION AND NOT THE AOS OWN SATISFACTION OF FORMING BELIEF THAT THE INCOME ASSE SSABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE LD. A/R HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISI ON OF HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN CASE OF SKY VIEW CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. VS. ITO, 397 ITR 673 (DELHI) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS FAILED TO SATISFY THE REASONS TO BE LIEVE THAT THE INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AS THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED ON THE BA SIS OF THE SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENT IN CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS & DEVELO PERS PVT. LTD. AND AS PER THE LETTER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 THE LD. CIT (A) ASKED THE AO TO TA KE THE ACTION IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. HE HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. BALDEV PLAZA, 225 TAX MAN 276 (ALLAHABAD) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE OPINION OF THE OTHER AUTHORITY C ANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS AN INFORMATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF REOPENING OF THE ASS ESSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. THE AO HAS TO APPLY HIS MIND TO THE INFORMATI ON, IF ANY COLLECTED AND MUST FORM BELIEF THEREON. THE REOPENING BASED ON THE DI RECTIONS OF THE LD. CIT (A) IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. THE LD. A/R HAS ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION IN CASE OF SMT. KAUSHALYA DEVI & ORS. VS. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, URBAN LANDS & B UILDINGS TAX, JODHPUR & ORS., RLR 1988(2) 800. THUS, THE LD. A/R HAS SUBMITTED T HAT THE REOPENING IN THIS CASE IS BAD IN LAW AND, THEREFORE, THE SAME MAY BE QUASHED. 3.1. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. D/R HAS SUBMITTED T HAT THOUGH THE AO RECEIVED A COMMUNICATION FROM THE LD. CIT (A) DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011, HOWEVER, THE 4 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO ARE INDEPENDENT OF THE S AID COMMUNICATION AND, THEREFORE, THE REOPENING IS BASED ON THE REASONS IN DEPENDENTLY RECORDED BY THE AO BY APPLICATION OF MIND AND NOT AS PER THE LETTER DA TED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT (A). THE LD. D/R HAS RELIED UPON TH E ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE AO PROPOSED TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT B Y RECORDING THE REASONS AS UNDER :- THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 2 8.12.2005 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. NIL. THE RETURN OF IN COME WAS PROCESSED U/S 143(1) OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ON 26.07.2006 AT THE RETURNED INCOME. LATER ON ASSESSMENT FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 WAS COMPLE TED U/S 143(3) ON 28.12.2007 IN THE CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUIL DERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR BY MAKING ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE IT ACT, 1961 OF RS. 15,80,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED C REDITS IN THE NAME OF UNSECURED LOAN RECEIVED FROM M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH PVT. LTD. IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. FURTHER IN THE CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVE LOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR FOR THE A.Y. 2005-06 THE HONBLE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR HAD SET ASIDE THE ASSESSMENT VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 2 4.04.2009. THE SET ASIDE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3)/250/SET A SIDE ON 06.12.2010. DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDI NGS SHRI RAGHUVEER SINGH WHO IS DIRECTOR OF M/S. RASAL BUILD ERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD. HAS ADMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) THAT M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD. W AS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF SPRINKLER SET S DURING THE YEAR. FURTHER THERE WAS NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCES FOR TH E CASH DEPOSITS OF RS. 10,18,358/- OUT OF THE TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS OF R S. 18,27,583/- SHOWN IN THE CASH BOOK OF M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD . FURTHER HE 5 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. ADMITTED THAT NO MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY WAS CARRIED OUT DURING THE A.Y. 2005-06 OR IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS AND FINALLY THE FACT ORY WAS SOLD IN F.Y. 2010-11. FURTHER IT WAS SEEN THAT THE COMPANY WAS CLAIMING D EPRECIATION ON PLANTS AND MACHINERY. BESIDES, THE LD. CIT (A) H AS DELETED THE ADDITION IN THE CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEV ELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR STATING THAT M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH PVT. LTD. IS A COMPANY WHICH HAS A DISTINCT ENTITY FROM THE APPELLANT COMPANY. FROM THE STATEMENT OF ITS DIRECTOR IT IS CLEAR THAT ITS ACCOUNTS COULD NOT BE EXPLAINED PROPERLY. IN SUCH CASE THE DEPARTMENT IS FREE TO P ROCEED TO REOPEN THE INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT OF THE SAID COMPANY CONSIDERI NG THE CASH DEPOSITS REMAINED UNEXPLAINED IN HIS BOOK. MOREOVER THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ALSO FORWARDED AN INFO RMATION VIDE HER LETTER NO. 340 DATED 23.09.2011 REGARDING ABOVE FACTS AND FOR TAKING APPROPRIATE ACTION IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED CA SE. THUS IT IS CLEAR THAT THE REOPENING IS BASED AS PER THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) IN CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. WHO HA S SHOWN THE LOAN FROM THE ASSESSEE OF RS. 15,80,000/-. THE AO DISALLOWED THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 15,80,000/- WHILE COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT IN CASE OF M/S. RAS AL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THE MATTER WAS CARRIED TO THIS TRIBUNAL BY M/ S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. IN ITA NO. 1500/JP/2008 AND THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 24 TH APRIL, 2009 SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE RECORD OF THE AO FOR FU RTHER EXAMINATION AND VERIFICATION OF CORRECTNESS OF THE CLAIM AND THEN TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS, THE AO REPEATED THE ADDITION AND THEREAFTER WHEN M/S. RASA L BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AGAIN FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A), THE LD. CIT (A) VIDE ORDER DATED 19 TH 6 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. SEPTEMBER, 2011 DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO . HOWEVER, A LETTER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 WAS WRITTEN TO THE AO FOR TAKING AP PROPRIATE ACTION IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ITO WARD 3(1), JAIPUR IS HAVING JURISDICTION OVER THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS M/ S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. HENCE, THIS FACT OF MAKING THE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. UNDER SECTION 68 ON ACCOUN T OF CASH CREDIT FROM ASSESSEE WAS KNOWN TO THE AO AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT COMPL ETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) IN CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD . AT THE TIME OF MAKING THE SAID ADDITION OF CASH CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT IT WAS THE MONEY OF M/S . RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND THE TRANSACTION WAS NOT GENUINE. EVE N IN THE SECOND ROUND OF LITIGATION AND IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS, THE AO REPEATED T HE ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. OF THE SAID AMOUNT SHOWN AS UNSECURED LOANS FROM THE ASSESSEE. ONLY WHEN THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE SECOND ROUND OF APPEAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. SENT A LETTER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 AND ON THE BASIS OF THE STATEMENT O F THE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE, THE AO PROPOSED TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT. THEREFOR E, IT IS A CLEAR CASE OF FORMING THE OPINION ON BORROWED SATISFACTION AS EVIDENT FRO M THE LETTER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 AS WELL AS THE REASONS RECORDED BY THE AO. WE FURTHER NOTE THAT THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF LOAN OF RS. 15,80,000/ - TAKEN FROM THE ASSESSEE ON THE REASON THAT THE TOTAL SALE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS WAS RS. 11,51,805/- ONLY AND, THEREFORE, THE AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE CLAI M OF LOAN FOR WANT OF THE SOURCE 7 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. OF THE SAID CREDIT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. T HE AO FURTHER NOTED THAT THE CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE CREDITOR J UST BEFORE GIVING THE LOAN TO M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AND NO EVID ENCE WAS PRODUCED TO PROVE THAT THE SAID CASH WAS OUT OF SALES OF THE ASSESSEE COMP ANY. THUS ALL THE MATERIAL AND FACTS AS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE LETT ER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 AS WELL AS THE FACTS RECORDED IN THE REASONS FOR REOPE NING OF THE ASSESSMENT WERE ALREADY KNOWN TO THE AO AT THE TIME OF FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT IN CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. AS WELL AS AT THE TIME OF COMPLETING THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS BY THE AO. HENCE THE SUBSEQUENT REOPEN ING OF THE ASSESSMENT IN COMPLIANCE OF THE LETTER DATED 23.09.2011 OF LD. CI T (A) CLEARLY A CASE OF REOPENING ON THE BASIS OF THE SATISFACTION OF THE LD. CIT (A) THAT THE ADDITION SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT IN THE HA NDS OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THE POWERS TO REOPEN THE ASSE SSMENT UNDER SECTION 147 CAN ONLY BE EXERCISED BY THE AO AND CANNOT BE ABDICATED BY ANY OTHER AUTHORITY. HENCE THE AO HAS NO JURISDICTION TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT IN COMPLIANCE OF THE LETTER DATED 23.09.2011 OF LD. CIT (A). THE AO HAS MAINTA INED A STAND AND TAKEN A VIEW IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF M/S. RASAL BUILDER S AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THAT THE AMOUNT OF LOAN OF RS. 15,80,000/- SHOWN IN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT EXPLAINED SATISFACTORILY AND, THEREFORE, IT WAS CON SIDERED AS THE INCOME OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. THE ONLY FRESH MATERIAL AFTER TWO ROUNDS OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. WAS THE LETTER ISSUED BY LD. CIT (A) DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011. THEREFORE, WHEN THE SAME AO REPEATED THE ADDITION OF CASH CREDIT IN THE SET ASIDE PROCEEDINGS IN CASE OF M/S. 8 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. VIDE ORDER DATED 06.12.2010, THE REOPENING AFTER THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) IS NOTHING BUT BASED ON THE SATISFACTION OF THE LD. CIT (A). THEREFORE, THE AO REAFFIRMING ITS STAND IN TH E CASE OF M/S. RASAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. IN TWO ROUNDS OF PROCEEDINGS C ANNOT BE ALLOWED TO RESORT TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 148 OF THE ACT WHEN HIS STAND WAS REVERSED BY THE LD. CIT (A) IN THE SECOND ROUND OF LITIGATION. WHAT THE AO FAI LED TO DO ON HIS OWN CANNOT BE DONE ON THE BASIS OF THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE AUT HORITY IN THE CASE OF OTHER ASSESSEE. THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 148 WAS ONLY AFTER RECEIVING THE LETTER DATED 23 RD SEPTEMBER, 2011 AND, THEREFORE, THE REOPENING IS O NLY IN COMPLIANCE OF THE SAID LETTER AND NOT BASED ON THE OPINION AND IN DEPENDENT APPLICATION OF MIND OF THE AO. HENCE, IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRC UMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE SET ASIDE AND QUASH THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT BEI NG NOT SUSTAINABLE IN LAW AND CONSEQUENTLY THE REASSESSMENT ORDER IS SET ASIDE. 5. GROUND NO. 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE MERIT S OF THE ISSUE BECOMES INFRUCTUOUS. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12/07/201 8. SD/- SD/- HKKXPUN FOT; IKY JKWO (BHAGCHAND) ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 12/07/2018. DAS/ 9 ITA NO. 638/JP/2015 M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAIPUR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT-M/S. ORBIT POLYTECH (INDIA) LTD., JAI PUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-THE ITO, WARD 3(1), JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {ITA NO. 638/JP/2015} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR