ACIT, Circle-5(2), Kolkata, Kolkata V. M/s Navkar Nivesh Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 729/KOL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6415 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-05-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR P K SRIHARI
• Assessee Lawyers: S M SURANA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Reason to believe; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 133A; 147; 68; 148; 144

Judgement Text

, C , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH C KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 729 / KOL / 20 17 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2007-08 ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHE SQUARE, 8 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA-69 V/S . M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD., (FORMERLY M/S PINGLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD., 81, METCALF STREET, KOLKATA-700 013 [ PAN NO.AABCP 4879 K ] /APPELLANT .. / RESPONDENT /BY APPELLANT DR. P.K SRIHARI, CIT-DR /BY RESPONDENT SHRI S.M. SURANA, ADVOCATE /DATE OF HEARING 23-04-2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08-05-2019 / O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS REVENUES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 A RISES AGAINST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-2, KOLKATAS O RDER DATED 30.01.2017 PASSED IN CASE NO.2412/CIT(A)-2/2015-16, INVOLVING PROCEEDINGS U/S 144 R.W.S. 147 R.W.S.143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ; IN SHORT THE ACT. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 2. LEARNED CIT-DR VEHEMENTLY CONTENDS DURING THE C OURSE OF HEARING THAT CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS BOTH IN ANNULLING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT / RE-ASSESSMENT DATED 31.03.2015 FRAMED ON U/S 144/147/143(3) AS WELL AS IN DELETING THE UNEXPLAINED SHARE APPLIC ATION / PREMIUM ADDITION AMOUNTING TO 54,72,75,000/- MADE IN ASSESSMENT ORDER ON MERITS. HIS ARGUMENT IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RIGHTLY TAKEN RECOURSE TO IMPUGNED ITA NO.729/KOL/2017 A.Y.2007-08 ACIT CIR-5(2), KOL. VS. M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD. PAGE 2 RE-OPENING THEREBY TREATING THE ABOVE SUM IN ISSUE AS UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS LIABLE TO BE ADDED SEC. 68 OF THE ACT. HE F URTHER PLEADS THAT CIT(A)S FINDING UNDER CHALLENGE ARE TOTALLY NON-SPEAKING ON BOTH VALIDITY AS WELL AS ON MERITS. 3. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO RI VAL CONTENTIONS. CASE FILE SUGGESTS THAT WE ARE DEALING WITH ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2007-08 WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FRAMED HIS REGULAR ASSESSMENT IN ASSESSEES CASE ( FORMERLY KNOWN M/S PINGLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD. ) ON 16.04.2009. A PERUSAL OF SAID REGULAR ASSESSMENT MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HAD DULY DISCUSSED THE ISSUE OF ASSESSEES SHARE APPLICATION / PREMIUM RECEIVED WHICH WAS ACCEPTED AS CORRECT IN THE SAID FIRST ROUND. 4. CASE FILE INDICATES THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER T HEREAFTER ISSUED SEC. 148 NOTICE DATED 31.03.2014 AFTER FORMING REASONS TO BE LIEVE THAT ASSESSEES TAXABLE ICOME LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED HAD ESCAPED ASS ESSMENT. HIS REASONS OF RE-OPENING RECORDED TO THIS EFFECT READ AS UNDER:- AS PER LETTER OF THE ITO, WARD-5(4), KOLKATA ALONG WITH PHOTOCOPIES OF RELEVANT DETAILS AND THAT OF SOME IMPUGNED DOCUMENT S, AS RECEIVED BY HIM FROM THE ACIT,CC-1(3), AHMEDABAD ON 26.03.2012 AND SUBSEQUENTLY FORWARDED TO THIS END ON 27.03.2012, I T IS LEARNED THAT A SURVEY OPERATION U/S. 133A OF THE IT ACT, 1961 WAS CONDUCTED BY THE ADIT(INV), UNITE-I(3), KOLKATA ON 27.08.2009 IN THE GROUP CASES IN KOLKATA RELATING TO M/S AUSTRAL GROUP IN WHICH A SE ARCH WAS MADE AT AHMEDABAD. IN THE COURSE OF SURVEY, SOME PAPER AND DOCUMENTS MARKED AS SKH-1 TO SKH-4 WERE IMPOUNDED, WHICH, AS PER THE LETTER NO. ACIT/CC-1(3)/SPOXY & OTHERS/2011-122 DATED 16.0 3.2012, ARE LEARNT TO BE RELATING TO THE CASE OF M/S PINGLE (SU PRA)-PLIERS PVT. LTD. PAN-AABCP4879L, ASSESSED UNDER THIS JURISDICTION. O N PERUSAL OF THE INITIAL IMPOUNDING ORDER VIDE DATED 27.08.2009, IT REVEALS THAT THE INSTANT ASSESSEE COMPANY IS ALLEGEDLY INVOLVED IN THE CIRCL E OF OPERATION WHILE INVESTING IN SHARE CAPITAL WITH SO HIGH PREMIUM IN LOW POTENTIAL UNQUOTED SHARE. DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2006-07 R ELEVANT TO AYR. 2007-08, THE INSTANT ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD A TOTAL I NVESTMENT OF RS.65,09,46,000/-. ON FURTHER SCRUTINY OF BANK BOOK OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FOR THE FINANCIAL PERIOD OF 2006-07, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE INSTANT ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD HUGE TRANSACTIONS THRO UGH UNION BANK OF INDIA AND ABN ABMRO BANK WHICH REQUIRES THOROUGH VERIFICATION. UNDER THE ABOVE FACTUAL CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS IMPERA TIVE ON THE PART OF THE UNDERSIGNED TO VERIFY THE SOURCE OF THE SAID HU GE INVESTMENT WHICH REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AND MAY LEAD TO A CASE OF INCO ME ESCAPING ITA NO.729/KOL/2017 A.Y.2007-08 ACIT CIR-5(2), KOL. VS. M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD. PAGE 3 ASSESSMENT IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY DUR ING THE FYR. 2006-08 RELEVANT TO A.YR. 2007-08. 5. MR. SURANA REFERS TO THE ABOVE EXTRACTED RE-OPEN ING REASONS. HE SUBMITS THAT ASSESSING OFFICERS REASON RECORDED ME RELY SOUGHT TO VERIFY THE SOURCE OF ASSESSEES HUGE INVESTMENT IN ISSUE WHICH REMAINED UNEXPLAINED AND MIGHT LEAD TO A CASE OF INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSM ENT. LEARNED COUNSELS CASE IS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICERS REASONABLE BEL IEF OF THE ASSESSEES TAXABLE INCOME HAVING ESCAPED ASSESSMENT IS TOTALLY MISSING IN THE ABOVE EXTRACTED REASONS. WE FIND MERIT IN ASSESSEES INST ANT ARGUMENTS. LEARNED CIT-DR FAILS TO REBUT THE CLINCHING RE-OPENING REAS ONS EXTRACTED IN PRECEDING PARAGRAPH THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SOUGHT TO VERI FY SOURCE OF ASSESSEE HUGE INVESTMENTS IN THE NATURE OF SHARE APPLICATION / PR EMIUM AFTER EXPIRY OF MORE THAN FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESS MENT YEAR 2007-08 WHICH MIGHT LEAD TO A CASE INCOME ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. HON 'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN HINDUSTAN LEAVER LTD. VS. B. SWADEKAR (2004) 268 ITR 339 (BOM) MADE IT CLEAR THAT RE-OPENING REASONS RECORDED BY THE ASSES SING OFFICER HAVE TO BE READ AS IT IS WITHOUT ANY ADDITION OR SUBSTITUTION. APPLYING THE SAID SETTLED PREPOSITION, WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICERS INSTANT CASE HAS NOWHERE MADE OUT A CASE OF THE ASSESSEES TAXABLE INCOME HA VING ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AS HE MERELY SOUGHT TO VERIFY THE SOURCE OF THE SHARE CAPITAL / PREMIUM WHICH MIGHT LEAD TO A CASE OF TAXABLE INCOM E ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THIS CO-ORDINATE BENCHS DECISION IN BIR BAHADUR SINGH SIJWALI VS. ITO IN ITA NO.3814/DEL/2011 DECIDED ON 20.01.2015 HOLDS A SIMILAR RE-OPENING R E- ASSESSMENT NOT FORMING ANY BELIEF OF TAXABLE INCOME HAVING ESCAPED ASSESSMENT AS NOT SUBSTAINABLE AS FOLLOWS:- 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED TH E MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF T HE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 6. A PLAIN LOOK AT THE REASONS FOR REOPENING THE AS SESSMENT, AS PRODUCED BEFORE US, SHOW THAT THESE REASONS WERE RECORDED AF TER THE NOTICE WAS SERVED ON 14TH SEPTEMBER 2009 AS A MENTION ABOUT THE FACT OF SERVICE OF NOTICE IS SET OUT IN THE RECORDED REASONS ITSELF. IT IS ONLY ELEM ENTARY THAT THE REASONS ARE TO BE RECORDED BEFORE ISSUANCE OF NOTICE, AND IN THE A BSENCE OF ANY REASONS FOR REOPENING HAVING BEEN RE~ PRIOR TO REOPENING OF ASS ESSMENT, THE ITA NO.729/KOL/2017 A.Y.2007-08 ACIT CIR-5(2), KOL. VS. M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD. PAGE 4 REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FAIL FOR THIS SHORT REASON ALONE. HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT, IN THE CASE OF PRASHANT S. JOSHI VS. IT O [2010) 230 CTR (BOM) 232.] HAS OBSERVED: 'THE AO MUST HAVE REASONS TO BE LIEVE THAT SUCH IS THE CASE (I.E. ANY INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR A PARTICULAR YEAR) BEFORE HE PROCEEDS TO ISSUE NOTICE UNDER S. 147'. IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN NO REASONS ARE RECORDED FOR REOPENING T HE ASSESSMENT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE, THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS MU ST FAIL FOR THAT REASON ALONE. HOWEVER, FOR THE REASONS WE WILL SET OUT NOW , THE CONCLUSIONS WILL BE NO DIFFERENT EVEN IF IT IS PRESUMED THAT THIS COMMU NICATION, EXTRACTS FROM WHICH ARE REPRODUCED BEFORE, ONLY CONVEYS THE REASO NS ALREADY RECORDED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF NOTICE. 7. IT IS WELL SETTLED IN LAW THAT REASONS, AS RECOR DED FOR REOPENING THE REASSESSMENT, ARE TO BE EXAMINED ON A STANDALONE BA SIS. NOTHING CAN BE ADDED TO THE REASONS SO RECORDED, NOR ANYTHING CAN BE DELETED FROM THE REASONS SO RECORDED. HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT, IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD. VS. R.B. WADKAR [(2004) 268 ITR 332], HA S, INTER ALIA, OBSERVED THAT ' .IT IS NEEDLESS TO MENTION THAT THE REASONS ARE R EQUIRED TO BE READ AS THEY WERE RECORDED BY THE AO. NO SUBSTITUTION OR DELETIO N IS PERMISSIBLE. NO ADDITIONS CAN BE MADE TO THOSE REASONS. NO INFERENC E CAN BE ALLOWED TO BE DRAWN THE BASIS OF REASONS NOT RECORDED. IT IS FOR THE AO TO DISCLOSE AND OPEN HIS MIND THROUGH THE REASONS RECORDED BY HIM. HE HA S TO SPEAK THROUGH THE REASONS.' THEIR LORDSHIPS ADDED THAT 'THE REASONS R ECORDED SHOULD BE SELF- EXPLANATORY AND SHOULD NOT KEEP THE ASSESSEE GUESSI NG FOR REASONS. REASONS PROVIDE LINK BETWEEN CONCLUSION AND THE EVI DENCE .... '. THEREFORE, THE REASONS ARE TO BE EXAMINED ONLY ON THE BASIS OF THE REASONS AS RECORDED. THE NEXT IMPORTANT POINT IS THAT EVEN THOUGH REASON S, AS RECORDED, MAY NOT NECESSARILY PROVE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME AT THE STAGE OF RECORDING THE REASONS, SUCH REASONS MUST POINT OUT TO AN INCOME E SCAPING ASSESSMENT AND NOT MERELY NEED OF AN INQUIRY WHICH MAY RESULT IN D ETECTION OF AN INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT. UNDOUBTEDLY, AT THE STAG OF RE CORDING THE REASONS FOR REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT, ALL THAT IS NECESSARY IS THE FORMATION OF PRIMA FACIE BELIEF THAT AN INCOME HAS ESCAPED THE ASSESSMENT AN D IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT THE FACT OF INCOME HAVING ESCAPED ASSESSMENT I S PROVED TO THE HILT. WHAT IS, HOWEVER, NECESSARY IS THAT THERE MUST BE SOMETH ING, WHICH INDICATES, EVEN IF NOT ESTABLISHES, THE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME FROM A SSESSMENT. IT IS ONLY ON THIS BASIS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER CAN FORM THE BELIEF THAT AN INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. MERELY BECAUSE SOME FURTHER INV ESTIGATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN CARRIED OUT, WHICH, IF MADE, COULD HAVE LED TO DETECTION TO AN INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT, CANNOT BE REASON ENOUGH TO HOL D THE VIEW THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO BEA R IN MIND THE SUBTLE BUT IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN FACTORS WHICH INDICAT E AN INCOME ESCAPING THE ASSESSMENTS AND THE FACTORS WHICH INDICATE A LEGITI MATE SUSPICION ABOUT INCOME ESCAPING THE ASSESSMENT. THE FORMER CATEGORY CONSISTS OF THE FACTS WHICH, IF ESTABLISHED TO BE CORRECT, WILL HAVE A CA USE AND EFFECT RELATIONSHIP WITH THE INCOME ESCAPING THE ASSESSMENT. THE LATTER CATEGORY CONSISTS OF THE FACTS, WHICH, IF ESTABLISHED TO BE CORRECT, COULD L EGITIMATELY LEAD TO FURTHER INQUIRIES WHICH MAY LEAD TO DETECTION OF AN INCOME WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THERE HAS TO BE SOME KIND OF A CAUSE AN D EFFECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN REASONS RECORDED AND THE INCOME ESCAPING AS SESSMENT. WHILE ITA NO.729/KOL/2017 A.Y.2007-08 ACIT CIR-5(2), KOL. VS. M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD. PAGE 5 DEALING WITH THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER, IT IS USEFU L TO BEAR IN MIND THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS MADE BY HORI'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ITO VS LAKHMANI MEWAL DAS [(1976) 103 ITR 437], THE REASONS FOR THE FORMATION OF THE BELIEF MUST H AVE RATIONAL CONNECTION WITH OR RELEVANT BEARING & ON THE FORMAT ION OF THE BELIEF. RATIONAL CONNECTION POSTULATES THAT THERE MUST BE A DIRECT NEXUS OR LIVE LINK BETWEEN THE MATERIAL COMING TO THE NOTICE OF T HE ITO AND THE FORMATION OF THIS BELIEF THAT THERE HAS BEEN ESCAPE MENT OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM ASSESSMENT IN THE PARTICULAR Y EAR BECAUSE OF HIS FAILURE TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FA CTS. IT IS NO DOUBT TRUE THAT THE COURT CANNOT GO INTO SUFFICIENCY OR ADEQUA CY OF THE MATERIAL AND SUBSTITUTE ITS OWN OPINION FOR THAT OF THE ITO ON THE POINT AS TO WHETHER ACTION SHOULD BE INITIATED FOR REOPENING AS SESSMENT. AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE TO BEAR IN MIND THAT IT IS NOT AN Y AND EVERY MATERIAL, HOWSOEVER VAGUE AND INDEFINITE OR DISTANT, REMOTE A ND FARFETCHED, WHICH WOULD WARRANT THE FORMATION OF THE BELIEF REL ATING TO ESCAPEMENT OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM ASSESSMENT. 8. LET US, IN THE LIGHT OF THIS LEGAL POSITION, REV ERT TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE BEFORE US. ALL THAT THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING IND ICATE IS THAT CASH DEPOSITS AGGREGATING TO RS.10,24,100 HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE B ANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE, BUT THE MERE FACT THAT THESE DEPOSITS HAV E BEEN MADE IN A BANK ACCOUNT DOES NOT INDICATE THAT THESE DEPOSITS CONST ITUTE AN INCOME WHICH HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPEN ING THE ASSESSMENT DO NOT MAKE OUT A CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED I N SOME BUSINESS AND THE INCOME FROM SUCH A BUSINESS HAS NOT BEEN RETURN ED BY THE ASSESSEE. AS WE DO NOT HAVE THE LIBERTY TO EXAMINE THESE REASONS ON THE BASIS OF ANY OTHER MATERIAL OR FACT, OTHER THAN THE FACTS SET OUT IN T HE REASONS SO RECORDED, IT IS NOT OPEN TO US TO DEAL WITH THE QUESTION AS TO WHET HER THE ASSESSEE COULD BE SAID TO BE ENGAGED IN ANY BUSINESS; ALL THAT IS TO .BE EXAMINED IS WHETHER THE FACT OF THE DEPOSITS, PER SE, IN THE BANK ACCOUNT O F THE ASSESSEE COULD BE BASIS OF HOLDING THE VIEW THAT THE INCOME HAS ESCAP ED ASSESSMENT. THE ANSWER, IN OUR HUMBLE UNDERSTANDING, IS IN NEGATIVE . THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS OPINED THAT AN INCOME OF RS.10,24,100 HAS ESCAP ED ASSESSMENT OF INCOME BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS RS.10,24,100 IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT BUT THEN SUCH AN OPINION PROCEEDS ON THE FALLACIOUS ASSUMPTI ON THAT THE BANK DEPOSITS CONSTITUTE UNDISCLOSED INCOME, AND OVERLOOKS THE FA CT THAT THE SOURCES OF DEPOSIT NEED NOT NECESSARILY BE INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE. OF COURSE, IT MAY BE DESIRABLE, FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF REVENUE AUTHOR ITIES, TO EXAMINE THE MATTER IN DETAIL, BUT THEN REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS CANNOT BE RESORTED TO ONLY TO EXAMINE THE FACTS OF A CASE, NO MATTER HOW DESIRABL E THAT BE, UNLESS THERE IS A REASON TO BELIEVE, RATHER THAN SUSPECT, THAT AN INC OME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. 6. WE ADOPT THE ABOVE DETAILED REASONING MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO UPHOLD THE CIT(A)S FINDINGS ANNULLING THE RE-OPENING / RE-ASS ESSMENT IN ISSUE. ITA NO.729/KOL/2017 A.Y.2007-08 ACIT CIR-5(2), KOL. VS. M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD. PAGE 6 7. COUPLED WITH THIS, WE THEREFORE REITERATE THAT S EC. 147(1) FIRST PROVISO MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO AT TRIBUTE REASON OF TAXABLE INCOME ESCAPING ASSESSMENT TO THE ASSESSEE IN NOT D ISCLOSING FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN ISSUE . THERE IS NO SUCH FAILURE QUOTED IN THE ASSESSING OFFICERS RE-OPENING REASON S. WE HAVE ALREADY MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD FRAMED A RE GULAR ASSESSMENT IN ERSTWHILE ASSESSEE ( M/S PINGLE SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.S CASE) ON 16.04.2009 (SUPRA). THE REVENUE HAS THEREFORE NO CASE ON VALID ITY OF THE IMPUGNED RE- OPENING / RE-ASSESSMENT ESCAPE IN THE LATTER ASPECT AS WELL SINCE THE ASSESSING OFFICERS RE-OPENING REASONS HAVE NOWHERE QUOTED ASSESSEES FAILURE IN NOT FILING ITS RELEVANT DETAILS FULLY OR TRULY DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT. THE REVENUES OTHER CONDITION ON MERITS ARE RENDERED INFRUCTUOUS. 7. THIS REVENUES APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT 08 /05/2019 SD/- SD/- ( %) (' %) (DR.A.L. SAINI) (S.S.GODARA) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) KOLKATA, *DKP, SR.P.S (- 08 / 05 /201 9 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. /APPELLANT-ACIT, CIRCLE-5(2), AAYAKAR BHAWAN, P-7, CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, 8 TH FLOOR, KOLKATA-69 2. /RESPONDENT-M/S NAVKAR NIVESH PVT. LTD., 81, METCAL F STREET, KOLKATA-13 3. 3 4 / CONCERNED CIT KOLKATA 4. 4- / CIT (A) KOLKATA 5. 7 ''3, 3, / DR, ITAT, KOLKATA 6. < / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , /TRUE COPY/ 3,