SHRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGRAWAL, BHILWARA V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

ITA 674/JPR/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6101 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VARINDAR MEHTA
• Keywords: Salary income; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 147; 148; 56; 139

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S A JAIPUR JH FOT; IKY JKO] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA. NO. 674 & 675/JP/2019 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 & 2012-13 SHRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, 18, MAHESH COLONY, SEVA SADAN ROAD, BHILWARA CUKE VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ACSPA7547E VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI RAJENDRA JAIN (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI VARINDAR MEHTA (CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 01/08/2019 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 05/08/2019 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THESE ARE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDERS OF LD. CIT(A), UDAIPUR DATED 18.03.2019 FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 & 2012-13 RESPECTIVELY. SINCE THE COMMON IS SUES ARE INVOLVED, BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AN D ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. 2. IN ITA NO. 674/JP/2019, THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION WHICH WAS OUTSI DE THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 153A OF THE ACT AS NO DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCES OR ANY OTHER MATERIAL IN RESPECT OF ADDITION MADE W ERE FOUND OR SEIZED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 2 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF RS. 2,14,211 /- IN RESPECT OF UNRECORDED INCOME U/S 56 OF THE ACT. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION WITHOUT CONSIDE RING EXPLANATION FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY T HE LD. AO IN LIGHT OF DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT A ND OTHER HIGH COURTS REFERRED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). 5. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN RECORDING VARIOUS FINDINGS IN THE O RDER ARE CONTRARY TO THE JUDICIAL DECISIONS RELIED BY THE AS SESSEE. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND DERIVES INCOME FROM SALARY FROM ARIH ANT HOSPITAL & RESEARCH SANSTHAN, BHILWARA, PENSION FROM GOVERNMEN T OF RAJASTHAN, INCOME FROM MEDICAL PRACTICE, AND ALSO EARNING INTE REST, DIVIDEND AND AGRICULTURE INCOME. HE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139 ON 14.10.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 15,20,610/ - AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF RS. 2,53,942/-. A SEARCH & SEIZURE OPERAT ION U/S 132(1) OF ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON 02.07.2015 AT RESIDENCE OF T HE ASSESSEE SITUATED AT 18, MAHESH COLONY, SEWA SADAN ROAD, BHI LWADA, RAJASTHAN. CONSEQUENT TO SEARCH, NOTICE U/S 153A OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE U /S 153A, THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 13.08.20 16 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 15,20,610/- AND AGRICULTURAL THE INCO ME OF RS. 2,53,942/- AS DECLARED EARLIER IN THE RETURN FILED U/S 139. THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A WAS COMPLETED AT TOTAL INCOME O F ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 3 RS. 18,05,903/- WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER BROUG HT TO TAX INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 2,14,211/- AND HAS ALSO DISALLOWED VA RIOUS EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 71,085/-. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE ASS ESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 71,085/-. HOWEVER, INTEREST INC OME OF RS. 2,14,211/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INTEREST HAS B EEN CONFIRMED AGAINST THE SAID FINDING. THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN AP PEAL BEFORE US. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITT ED THAT NO INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WERE FOUND DURING THE COURS E OF SEARCH IN RELATION TO INTEREST INCOME AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY I NCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS, NO ADDITIONS CAN BE MADE WHILE COMPLETIN G THE ASSESSMENT U/S 153A. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT TIME LIM IT FOR ISSUE OF NOTICE U/S 143(2) HAS EXPIRED WELL BEFORE THE DATE OF SEARCH AND THE ASSESSMENT IN RESPECT OF RETURN ORIGINALLY FILED WA S NOT PENDING AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. IN SUPPORT, THE RELIANCE WAS PL ACED ON THE HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT DECISION IN CASE OF PR. CIT, J AIPUR VS. SMT. DAKSHA JAIN, SIROHI IN D. B. ITA NO. 125/2017 DATED 04.07.2019 WHEREIN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS CONFIRMED THE AP PROACH OF THE TRIBUNAL OF SETTING ASIDE THE SEARCH ASSESSMENT ON THE GROUND THAT NO FRESH MATERIAL WAS SEIZED OR DISCERNED IN COURSE OF SEARCH FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT (CENTRAL)-III VS. KABUL CHAWLA REPORTED IN 380 ITR 673 AND WHICH HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY VARIOUS OTHER HIGH COURTS. FURTHER, REL IANCE WAS PLACED ON THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN CASE OF SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA, KOTA VS. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA IN ITA NO. 593 & 594 /JP/2018 DATED 25/04/2019 WHEREIN THE SIMILAR PROPOSITION HAS BEEN LAID DOWN BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPORTED THE INTEREST INCOME AT THE TI ME OF MATURITY OF ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 4 THE FIXED DEPOSITS AND ON RECEIPT OF INCOME TAX REF UND IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS RESULTED IN DOUBLE TAXATION WHICH CANNOT BE SUSTAIN ED IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. 5. PER CONTRA, THE LD. DR DRAWN OUR REFERENCE TO TH E FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE HIMSELF STATED THAT THE INTEREST INCOME COULD NOT BE KNOWN BEFORE AND THEREFORE, BY OVERSITE WITHOUT MALAFIDE INTENTION AND SAME COULD NOT BE SHOWN IN T HE RETURN OF INCOME. IT WAS ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS THAT HE HAS NOT SHOWN INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED FROM SBBJ AC COUNT AS WELL AS INTEREST ON INCOME TAX REFUND TOTALING TO RS. 2,14, 211/-, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHE RE HE HAS BROUGHT THE INTEREST INCOME TO TAX U/S 56 OF THE ACT. IT WAS FU RTHER SUBMITTED BY THE LD DR THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ON RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED THE INTEREST INCOME IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSES SMENT YEAR. 6. FURTHER, OUR REFERENCE WAS DRAWN TO THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS CONTAINED AT PARA 7.1 OF THE ORDER WHICH IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- 7.1 AS REGARDS GROUND NO. 1 OF APPEAL, AT THE OUT SET, IT IS TO BE EMPHASIZED THAT IT IS NOT AT ALL CONTESTED BY TH E ASSESSEE THAT IN THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, HE HAD EARNED INTERE ST INCOME OF RS.2,14,211/- WHICH WERE OMITTED FROM BEING DISCLOS ED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED U/S 139(1) OR U/S 153A. IN A PPEAL ALSO, THE FACT OF EARNING SUCH INCOME IS NOT DISPUTED, TH E ADDITION OF INTEREST INCOME ARE CONTESTED ONLY ON THE GROUND TH AT IT IS NOT ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 5 BASED ON INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH AND THEREFORE OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT U/S 153A. 7.1.1. UNDISPUTEDLY, AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, 02.0 7.2015, NOTICE U/S 143(2) COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ISSUED FOR TH E A.Y 2010- 11, AND, IN VIEW OF THE VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEM ENTS ON THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT U/S 153A, INCLUDING THE DECISIO N OF THE HON. RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF JAI STEELS, U/ S 153A THE A.O WOULD NOT HAVE THE POWERS AS IN ORIGINAL ASSESS MENT U/S 143(3) AND COULD ONLY MAKE ADDITIONS TO INCOME BASE D ONLY ON INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH. HOWEVER , THE QUESTION OF THE SCOPE OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A, IN A CASE WHERE, ON THE DATE OF THE SEARCH, ACTION U/S 148 (THOUGH N OT U/S 143(3)), COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN AS PER LAW, BUT CANN OT BE TAKEN ONLY FOR THE REASON THAT SEARCH HAS BEEN CONDUCTED AND THE ONLY SECTION UNDER WHICH ASSESSMENT CAN BE MADE IS SECTI ON 153A, HAS NOT BEEN RAISED BEFORE THE HON. COURTS. IN MY V IEW, IN SUCH A CASE, WHILE IN THE PREVAILING POSITION OF CASE LA WS, THE A.O DOES NOT HAVE POWERS AS IN ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3), HE WOULD HAVE SUCH JURISDICTION AS HE WOULD HAVE WHILE COMPLETING ASSESSMENT U/S 147. 7.1.2 IN THE INSTANT APPEAL, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR U NDER CONSIDERATION IS A.Y 2010-11. ON THE DATE OF SEARCH , I.E 02.07.2015, FOUR YEARS HAD LAPSED FROM THE END OF T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR BUT SIX YEARS HAD NOT LAPSED. THERE WAS ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME ABOVE RS. 1,00,000/-, NAMELY I NTEREST INCOME ALONE IS RS.2,14,211/-, THUS, FOR THE ASSESS MENT YEAR ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 6 UNDER CONSIDERATION, A.Y 2010-11, ACTION U/S 148, W AS LEGALLY SUSTAINABLE ON THE DATE OF SEARCH. 7.1.3 HOWEVER, SEARCH HAVING BEEN CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON 02.07.2015, THE ONLY SECTION UNDER WHIC H THE ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMENT COULD BE MADE FOR A.Y 20 10-11, UNDER CONSIDERATION, IS U/S 153A. HOWEVER, AS DISCU SSED ABOVE, REASSESSMENT U/S 148, WAS LEGALLY POSSIBLE ON THE D ATE OF SEARCH, THEREFORE IT IS HELD THAT THE SCOPE OF PROC EEDINGS U/S 153A, THOUGH NOT SAME AS THE SCOPE OF PROCEEDINGS U /S 143(3) WOULD BE THE SAME AS THE SCOPE OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 1 47. 7.1.4 FURTHER, THERE BEING NO DISPUTE THAT INTEREST INCOME HAD ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, THE ADDITION TO INCOME OF RS.2,14,211/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INTEREST IS WELL WITHIN T HE SCOPE OF AN ASSESSMENT U/S 147, AND CONSEQUENTLY, WITHIN THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT U/S 153A. 7.1.5 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, THE ADDITIO N TO INCOME OF RS.2,14,211/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNDISCLOSED INTEREST IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE QUESTION THAT ARISES FOR C ONSIDERATION IS WHETHER THE ADDITION CAN BE MADE BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER WHILE PASSING THE ORDER U/S 153A OF THE ACT FOR THE IMPUG NED ASSESSMENT YEAR. IN THIS REGARD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS ORIGINALLY FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 14.10.2010 AND THE TIME LIMIT F OR ISSUANCE OF NOTICE HAS EXPIRED ON 31.07.2011 AND THEREFORE, AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH WHICH IS 2.07.2015, THE ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT PENDING ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 7 AND THUS NOT ABATED. THEREFORE, IT IS A CASE OF RE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE ADDITIONS COULD BE MADE BASIS A NY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. ADMITT EDLY, IN THE INSTANT CASE, THERE IS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURI NG THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND IT IS ONLY DURING THE REASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER BASIS REVIEW OF FORM 26AS HAS COM E TO KNOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED INTEREST INCOME FROM BANK. THEREFORE, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSEESEE I N THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR AND WE THUS AGREE WITH THE FOLLOWIN G FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A) WHERE SHE STATED AS FOLLOWS: UNDISPUTEDLY, AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH, 02.07.2015 , NOTICE U/S 143(2) COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ISSUED FOR THE A.Y 2010- 11, AND, IN VIEW OF THE VARIOUS JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS ON THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT U/S 153A, INCLUDING THE DECISION OF THE HON. RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN CASE OF JAI STEELS, U/S 153 A THE A.O WOULD NOT HAVE THE POWERS AS IN ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) AND COULD ONLY MAKE ADDITIONS TO INCOME BASED ONLY ON INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING SEARCH. 8. AT THE SAME TIME, IT MAY BE NOTED THAT THE ASSE SSING OFFICER IS NOT WITHOUT RECOURSE TO BRING THIS INTEREST INCOME TO TAX. THE REASON FOR THE SAME IS THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS EARNED THIS INTEREST INCOME AND THERE IS ALSO NO DISPUTE T HAT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE IMPUGNE D ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE, IN A SCENARIO, WHERE DURING THE CO URSE OF REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 153A, THE ASSESSING OF FICER IS CEASED OF THE MATERIAL AND INFORMATION THAT THE INCOME HAS ES CAPED TAXATION, SUCH MATERIAL AND INFORMATION CAN FORM THE BASIS FO R INITIATING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE ACT. AT THE SAME TIME, THE ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 8 CONTENTIONS WHICH HAS BEEN RAISED BY THE LD AR, THA T THE ASSESSEE HAS REPORTED THE INTEREST INCOME AT THE TIME OF MATURIT Y OF THE FIXED DEPOSITS AND ON RECEIPT OF INCOME TAX REFUND IN SUB SEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND THEREFORE, THE ACTION OF THE AS SESSING OFFICER HAS RESULTED IN DOUBLE TAXATION WHICH CANNOT BE SUSTAIN ED IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, HAS TO BE CONSIDERED AND EXAMINED OBJECTIV ELY AS THE LAW PERMITS THE ASSESSEE TO REPORT INTEREST INCOME UNDE R THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES EITHER ON THE CASH OR M ERCANTILE BASIS WHICH IS REGULARLY EMPLOYED BY THE ASSESSEE. WHERE THE ASSESSEE CONTENDS THAT IT HAS OFFERED THE INTEREST INCOME ON MATURITY OF FIXED DEPOSITS AND ON RECEIPT OF INCOME TAX REFUND, BASIC ALLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS FOLLOWED THE CASH BASIS OF ACCOUNTING WHICH IS PERMISSIBLE UNDER LAW. IN THE SCENARIO, WHERE IT IS FOUND ON EXAMINAT ION THAT THE INTEREST INCOME HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED TO TAX AS SO CLAIMED B Y THE ASSESSEE EVEN IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO TAKE ACTION AS PER LAW TO BRING SUCH INTEREST INCOME TO TAX. 9. HOWEVER, UNDER THE PRESENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH HAS BEEN INITIATED U/S 153A, GIVEN THAT THE ORIGINAL PROCEED INGS WERE NOT ABATED AS ON THE DATE OF SEARCH AND IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCR IMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME IS HEREBY DIRECT ED TO BE DELETED. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSE E IS ALLOWED IN LIGHT OF AFORESAID DIRECTIONS. 11. IN ITA NO. 675/JP/2019, BOTH THE PARTIES FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ARE EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO FACTS ITA NO. 674 & 675 /JP/2019 S HRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWARA VS. DCIT, KOT A 9 AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF APPEAL IN ITA NO. 674/JP/2019 AND THEREFORE, OUR FINDING AND DIRECTIONS CONTAINED IN ITA NO. 674 /JP/2019 SHALL EQUALLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO THIS APPEAL AS WELL. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESS EE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 05/08/2019. SD/- SD/- FOT; IKY JKO FOE FLAG ;KNO (VIJAY PAL RAO) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 05/08/2019. *GANESH KR VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI MAHAVEER PRASAD AGARWAL, BHILWA RA 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA 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. 674 & 675/JP/2019} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR