M/s Tata Elxsi Ltd., Bangalore V. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

ITA 738/BANG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8567 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS NEERA MALHOTRA CITII
• Assessee Lawyers: PADAMCHAND KHINCHA
• Keywords: Gift; Services rendered outside India; Wrong claim; Bad and doubtful debts
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 10AA; 80HHC; 234B; 10B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH B, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.738(BANG) 2014 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06) M/S TATA ELXSI LTD., ITPB ROAD, HOODY, WHITE FILED, BANGALORE-560 048 APPELLANT PAN NO.AAACT7872Q VS THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX RANGE-12, BANGALORE RESPONDENT AND ITA NO.939/(BANG) 2014 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06) THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRLCE-12(4), BANGALORE APPELLANT VS M/S TATA ELXSI LTD., NO.ITPB ROAD, HOODY, WHITEFILED, BANGALORE-560 048 NO.AAACT7872Q RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI PADAMCHAND KHINCHA, CA REVENUE BY : MRS NEERA MALHOTRA, CIT-II DATE OF HEARING : 07-03-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18-03-2016 O R D E R PER SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JM: A. THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REV ENUE RESPECTIVELY DIRECTED AGAINST AN ORDER DATED 28-03-2014 OF CIT(A ), MYSORE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06. B. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS; 1. T HE ORDER P A SSED B Y THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TA X ( APPEAL S) - M Y SORE TO THE EXTENT PREJUDIC I AL TO THE APPELL A NT IS BAD I N LA W AND LIABLE TO B E QUASHED . 2 . THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) - MYSORE HAS ERRED ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 2 IN CONFIRMING THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF STAFF WELFA RE EXPENSES AT RS . 36 , 19 , 315/- COMPUTED AT 25 % OF TOTAL STAFF WELFARE EXPENSES OF RS . 1 , 44 , 77 , 261 / -. 3 . THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ) - MYSORE HAS ERRED IN CONFIRM I N G TH E D I SALLO W ANC E O F BAD DEBT S R ELATABLE T O LO A UNITS TO THE E X TENT OF RS. 80 . 75 LAKH S. 4 . THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS ) - MYSORE HAS ERRED IN C ON F IRM I N G THE A DHOC DISALLO W ANCE OF COMMISSION PAID AMOUNTING T O RS . 5 , 00 , 000/- 5. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEA L S) - M Y SORE HAS ERRED IN CONFI R MING THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF MOTOR V EHI C LE HIRING EXPENSES A MOUNTIN G T O RS . 5 , 00 , 000/- 6. THE LEARNED COMM I SSIONE R O F I N COME TAX (APP E A L S) - MYSORE HAS ERRED IN CON F IRMING THE REDUCTION OF E X POR T TURNO V ER O F R S . 3 8 , 79 , 909 / - FROM THE FIGURE OF E X PORT TURNO V ER FOR THE REASON THAT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN R ECEIV E D O R BROU G HT INTO INDIA . 7. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TA X ( APPEALS ) - M Y SORE HA S ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE REDUCTION OF EXPORT TURNOVER OF R S . 2 , 00 , 00 , 000/- FROM THE FIGURE OF EXPORT TURNOVER FOR THE REASON THAT T HE SAME HAS NOT BEEN RECEI V ED OR BROUGHT INTO INDIA . 8. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME T AX (A PPEALS ) - MYSO R E H AS ER R E D IN NOT ADJUDICATIN G THE GROUNDS THAT TELECOMMUNICATION CHARGES OF RS. 2 CRORES , EXPENSES INCURRED ON O V ERSEAS TRA V EL AMOUNTING TO R S . 10 CR ORE S , AN AMOUNT OF RS . 15 LAKHS BEING EXPENDITURE INCUR R ED ON PAYMENT O F COMMISSION TO ONE MR . LES LAWRENCE , A FOREIGN NAT I ONAL AND A SUM OF RS. 2 , 94 , 75 , 520/- BEING 20 % O F RS . 14 , 73 , 77 , 601/- BEIN G CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FOR SO F T W ARE DE V ELOPMENT TO O V ERSEAS C LIENT S, S HOULD NO T BE REDUCED FROM E X PORT TURNO V ER W HILE COMPUTIN G DEDUCTION UND E R SECTION 10A . 9. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER O F INCOME TA X ( APPEALS ) - M Y SORE HAS ERRED IN NOT ADJUDICATIN G THE GROUND RELATING TO LE VY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 2 34B . ON FACT S AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , INTEREST UNDE R S ECTI O N 2 3 4B I S NOT LEVIABLE . THE APPELLANT DENIES ITS LIABILITY TO PA Y INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B . 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND OTHER GROUNDS T O BE ADDUCED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPELLANT COMPANY PRAYS THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS ), M Y SORE , IN SO F AR IT IS PREJUDICIAL TO THE APPELLANT , BE QUASHED . OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE (I) STAFF WELFARE EXPENSES BE ALLOWED AS A DEDUCTION IN ITS ENTIRETY ; (II) BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF BE COMPLETELY ALLOWED AS A DE DUCTION; (III) COMMISSION PAYMENTS BE ALLOWED AS A DEDUCTION IN IT S ENTIRET Y ; ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 3 (IV) MOTOR VEHICLE EXPENSES BE FULLY ALLOWED AS A DEDUCT ION ; (V) EXPORT TURNOVER OF RS. 38,79 , 909 / - BE INCLUDED IN THE FIGURE OF EXPORT TURNOVER FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDE R SECTION LOA ; (VI) ENTIRE REALIZATION OF EXPORT TURNOVER DEPOSITED OUT SIDE INDIAN IN THE FOREIGN BANK AMOUNTING TO RS. 2 , 00 , 00 , 000/- BE CONSIDERED AS REALIZATION OF 'EXPORT TURNOVER' AND AS A PART OF EXPORT TURNOV ER FOR THE PURPOSE OF A COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 1OA AND NO E XCLUSION BE MADE; (VII) EXPENDITURE IN THE NATURE OF TELECOMMUNICATION CHAR GES OF RS . 2 CRORES BE NOT EXCLUDED FROM EXPORT TURNOVER ; (VIII) O V ERSEAS TRAVELLING EXPENDITURE , PAYMENT O F COMMISSION AND THE SUM OF RS . 2 , 94 , 75 , 520/- BE HELD AS NOT INCURR E D FOR PROVIDING TECHNICAL SERVICES OUTSIDE INDIA AND THE SAME BE NOT REDUCED FROM EXPO RT TURNO V ER ; (IX) THE APPELLANT BE HELD AS NOT ENGAGED IN PR O VIDING TECHNICAL SERVICES OUTSIDE INDIA. (X) THE ASSESSING OFFICER BE DIRECTED TO MAKE A CORRECT COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10A ; (XI) INTEREST LEVIED UNDER SECTION 234B BE DELETED. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS ; 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS OPPOSED TO LAW A ND FACTS OF THE CASE. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, LD.CITA) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE WRONG CLAIM OF 75% OF EXPENDI TURE INCURRED FOR SUPPLYING LUNCH COUPONS, EVENT MANAGEM ENT, FOREIGN COUNTRIES, GIFT COUPONS ETC.DESPITE THE ASS ESSEE NOT BEING ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE SAME HAS BEEN INCURRED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES. 3. ON FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, T HE LD,.CT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE TRAVEL EXPENDITURE CANNOT BE DISALLOWED BECAUSE THE SAME HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN EAR LIER YEARS. 4.. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, THE LD.CIT (A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE FOREX GAIN IS TO BE P ART OF EXPORT TURNOVER FOR COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S 10A DESPI TE IT NOT BEING ERRED FROM THE BUSINESS OF SOFTWARE EXPORT BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CASE OF INFOSYS TECHNOLOGIES PVT.LTD WHICH HAS NOT REACH ED FINALITY IN VIEW OF PENDING SLP OF THE DEPARTMENT. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD.C IT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN DIRECTING THE AO TO EXCLUDE THE REIMBURSE MENT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES BOTH FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER AS W ELL AS ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 4 FROM TOTAL TURNOVER FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S 10A, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT TH AT THE STATUTE ALLOWS EXCLUSION OF SUCH EXPENDITURE ONLY F ROM EXPORT TURNOVER BY WAY OF SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF EXPORT TU RNOVER AS ENVISAGED BY SUB-CLAUSE(4) OF EXPLANATION-2 BELOW S UB- SECTION(8) OF SEC.10A AND THE TOTAL TURNOVER HAS NO T BEEN DEFINED IN THIS SECTION. 6. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD.C IT (A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO COMPUTE DEDUCTION U/S 10A IN THE ABOVE MANNER BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CASE OF M/S TATA ELXSI LTD., WHICH HAS NOT BECOME FINAL SINCE THE SA ME HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND SLPS ARE PE NDING BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. 7. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SOFAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND TH T OF THE AO MAY BE RESTORED. C. WE SHALL TAKE UP THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FIRST. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER :- THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY ENGAG ED IN THE BUSINESS OF DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF COMPUTER SOFT WARE, ENGINEERING SERVICES, VISUAL COMPUTING LABS AND SYSTEMS INTEGRA TION. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.9,34,65,814/-. AN AMOUNT OF RS.19,81,80,819/- WAS CLAIMED AS DEDUCTION U/S 10A IN THE PROCESS OF TOTAL INCOME. NOTICE U/S 142(1) AND 142(2) WERE IS SUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETE D U/S 143(3) ON 20-12- 2007. THE AO WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALL OWED SOME OF THE EXPENDITURE CLAIM AND DISALLOWED THE REST CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. D. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER OF THE AO, ASSESSEE P REFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A), WHO HAS GIVEN PARTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. E. AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LD CI T(APPEAL), THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED THE INSTANT APPEAL . 1. GROUND NO.1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY SPECI FIC ADJUDICATION AS ITS RESULT DEPENDS UPON ADJUDICATIO N OF SUBSEQUENT GROUNDS. ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 5 2. GROUND NO.2 PERTAINS TO AD HOC DISALLOWANCE OF STAFF WELFARE EXPENSES OF RS.36,19,315/- CONFIRMED AT 25% OF THE TOTAL STA FF WELFARE EXPENSES OF RS.1,44,77,261/- BY LD CIT(A) . IT WAS ARGUED BY TH E LD AR THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO CALLED FOR THE DETAI LS WHICH WERE DULY FURNISHED AND IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. AO FAIL ED TO BRING ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL ON RECORD TO JUSTIFY THE ADH OC DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE. THE LEARNED AR FORCEFULLY ARGUED THA T THE DETAILS CALLED FOR WERE PRODUCED DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE IMPUGNED EXPENDITURE SATISFIES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF SEC.3 7 OF THE IT ACT, 1061 , THEREFORE, THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES CANNOT DECIDE HO W MUCH IS THE REASONABLE EXPENDITURE.. EVEN OTHERWISE STILL THE E XPENDITURE UNDER INSTANT HEAD IS CONTINUING AND CONSISTENCE. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED DR VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THA T THE STAFF WELFARE EXPENSES ARE IN HIGHER SIDE AND SEEMS TO BE PERSONAL IN NATURE AND THE OBSERVATION OF THE AO IS RIGHT IN NOT SUSTAININ G THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO TH E FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE O N RECORD AND ALSO THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. T HE LD. AO HAD DISALLOWED THE EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF 50% OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT AND IN APPEAL THE LEARNED CIT(A) RESTRICTED TO THE EXTENT OF 25% ON THE GROUND THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES ARE PERSONAL IN NATURE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO MENTION HEREIN THAT FROM THE O RDER OF THE AO, THE DETAIL OF THE EXPENDITURE REFLECTS THAT THERE I S NO MATERIAL TO SHOW THAT THE SAID EXPENDITURES WERE NOT INCURRED. WE HAVE AL SO GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTS OF SEC.37 OF IT ACT, WHERE THERE ARE CERTA IN BARS FOR ALLOWING THE EXPENDITURES DESCRIBED IN SECTION 31-36 OF THE IT A CT. THE WORDINGS OF SEC.37 REFLECTS THAT IF THE EXPENDITURE NOT BEING C APITAL OR PERSONAL EXPENDITURE BUT INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FO R THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION, IT SHALL BE ALLOWED TO BE E XCLUDED IN COMPUTING THE INCOME ELIGIBLE UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS O F BUSINESS OR PROFESSION. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, BOTH THE AUT HORITIES BELOW HAVE ACTED ON PRESUMPTION AND ON THEIR NOTIONS AS SEEN FROM TH E AOS ORDER, HE ALSO ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 6 CONSIDERS THE EXPENDITURE AS PERSONAL IN NATURE . A SSESSEE BEING A CORPORATE BODY SO QUESTION OF EXPENDITURE BEING PER SONAL IN NATURE DOES NOT ARISE. IT IS CLEAR THAT THE SAID STAFF WELFARE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED DIRECTLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINES S, BECAUSE THE STAFF WELFARE IS THE PARAMOUNT IN SOCIAL ARENA FOR THE GR OWTH AND DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS THEREFORE, WE ARE THE CONSIDERED VIEW TO A LLOW 100% EXPENDITURE QUA STAFF WELFARE EXPENDITURE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE . 3. GROUND NO.3 , THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) E RRED IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF BAD DEBTS RELATABLE TO SEC.10A UNITS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.80.75 LAKHS. IT IS ARGUED BY THE LEAR NED AR THAT THE COMPANY IS ENTITLED FOR THE DISALLOWANCE OF BAD DEBTS BECAU SE, IN ANY SENSE, THEY ARE UNABLE TO RECOVER. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT WHAT IS REQUIRED IS MERE WRITE OFF IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, AS RELIED ON TH E DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S TRF LIMITED VS CIT (2010) 323 ITR 397 AND THE INSTANT SUBMISSION IS FORTIFIED BY SEVERAL DECISION S. LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES. IN OUR VIEW, ALTHOUGH, THE PROVISIONS OF IT ACT, DOES PERMIT WRITTEN OFF OF BAD DEBTS BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO ESTABLISH THAT THE DEBTS SHOULD ACTUALLY BECAME BAD, MEANING THEREBY, IRRECOVERABLE. HOWEVER BEFORE COMING TO CONCLUSION THE RATIO OF JU DGMENT REFERRED BY THE LEARNED AR IS IMPORTANT TO ENUMERATE. M/S TRF LIMITED VS CIT (2010) 323 ITR . IN THESE APPEALS, WE ARE CONCERNED WITH ASSESSMENT YEAR 1990-1991 AND ASSESSMENT YEAR 1993-1994. PRIOR TO 1ST APRIL, 1989, EVERY ASSESSEE HAD TO ESTABLISH, AS A MATTER OF FACT, THAT THE DEBT ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE HAD , IN FACT, BECOME IRRECOVERABLE. THAT POSITION GOT ALTERED BY DELETION OF THE WORD ' ESTABLISHED', WHICH EARLIER EXISTED IN SECTION 36(1)(VII) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [`ACT', FOR SHORT]. FOR THE SAKE OF CLARITY, WE RE-PRODUCE HEREIN BELOW PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(1)(VII) OF THE ACT, BOTH PRIOR TO 1ST APRIL, 1989 AND POST-1ST APRIL, 1989: 'PRE-1ST APRIL, 1989: OTHER DEDUCTIONS. 36.(1) THE DEDUCTIONS PROVIDED FOR IN THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES SHALL BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT OF THE MATTERS DEALT WITH HEREIN, IN COMPUTING THE INCOME REFERRED TO IN SECTION 28- - (I) TO (VI) XXXX XXXX XXXX (VII) SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (2), THE AMOUNT OF ANY DEBT, OR PART THEREOF, WHICH IS ESTABLISHED TO HAVE BECOME A BAD DEBT IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR. POST-1ST APRIL, 1989: OTHER DEDUCTIONS. 36.(1) THE DEDUCTIONS PROVIDED FOR IN THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES SHALL BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT OF THE MATTERS DEALT WITH THEREIN, IN COMPUTING THE INCOME REFERRED TO IN SECTION 28- - ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 7 (I) TO (VI) XXXX XXXX XXXX VII) SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (2), THE AMOUNT OF ANY BAD DEBT OR PART THEREOF WHICH IS WRITTEN OFF AS IRRECOVERABLE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR T HE PREVIOUS YEAR.' THIS POSITION IN LAW IS WELL-SETTLED. AFTER 1ST APR IL, 1989, IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO E STABLISH THAT THE DEBT, IN FACT, HAS BECOME IRRECOVERABLE. IT IS ENOUGH IF THE BAD DEBT IS WRITTEN OFF AS IRRE COVERABLE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING JUDGMENT OF APEX COURT (SUPR A), WE ARE INCLINED TO ALLOW DEDUCTION OF RS.80.75 LAKHS UNDER THE HEAD OF BAD DEBT. 4. GROUND NO.4 , THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED ON THE GROUND THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRM ING THE AD HOC DISALLOWANCE OF COMMISSION TO THE TUNE OF RS.5.00 L AKHS. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THE COMMISSION WAS PAID FOR PROCURING ORDERS AND THE COMMISSIONS WERE PAID TO AGENTS TO H ELP THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN EXPANDING ITS BUSINESS AND TO DERIVE INC OME AND THE DETAILS OF THE COMMISSION PAID AND THE AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO ONE OF THE RECIPIENTS WAS ALSO FURNISHED TO THE AO. IT WAS FURTHER ARGU ED THAT THE COMMISSION EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED WHOLLY OR EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND THERE IS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL AND/OR EVIDE NCE AVAILABLE BEFORE THE AO FOR DISALLOWANCE. LEARNED DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT IS EVIDENT THAT BEFORE THE AO, ASSES SEE HAD CLAIMED AN AMOUNT OF RS.20,77,760/- UNDER THE HEAD COMMISSION. THE AO CONSIDERED THE DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SAME HE DISALLOWED A SUM OF RS.5.00 LAKHS FROM THE SAID AMO UNT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) AFTER VERIFYING THE CLAIM FELT THAT THE SALE PROCEEDS HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT INTO INDIA IN CONVERT IBLE FOREIGN EXCHANGE WITH IN THE STATUTORY TIME PERIOD AND HENCE, HE CON FIRMED THE ADDITION. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO SU BMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES. AS THE AO ALLOWED MORE THAN 75% OF TH E CLAIMED AMOUNT UNDER THE HEAD COMMISSION, BUT DISALLOWED TO THE TUNE OF RS.5.00 LAKHS ONLY ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT WHAT WAS THE NECESSITY OF PAYING THE COMMISSION TO UNKNOWN PERSONS AND IT WAS ALSO NOT C LEAR AS TO WHAT ARE THE NATURE OF SERVICES RENDERED BY THE RECIPIENTS T O THE COMPANIES. WHEN ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 8 THE MAJOR PORTION OF THE AMOUNT OF COMMISSION HAS B EEN ALLOWED BY THE AO, THERE IS NO MATERIAL/EVIDENCE TO PROVE CONTRARY TO THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THEREFORE, WE FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW 100% UNDER THE HEAD COMMISSION. 5. GROUND NO.5, RELATES TO THE CONFIRMATION OF AD HOC DISALLOWANCE ON MOTOR VEHICLE HIRING EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS.5.00 LAKHS. IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE MO TOR VEHICLE HIRING EXPENSES WERE OF RS.80,69,000/-. THE AO HAD DISALL OWED TO THE EXTENT OF RS.5.00 LAKHS ONLY ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE ELEME NT OF PERSONAL USE CANNOT BE TOTALLY DENIED. EVEN OTHERWISE, LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT GIVEN ANY SPECIFIC REASON, WHILE UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE O F RS.5.00 LAKHS. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION A ND FOUND THAT THE AO ADDED RS.5.00 LAKHS OUT OF RS.80,69,000/- JUST ON T HE ASSUMPTION AND ON WRONG PRESUMPTION THAT THE ELEMENT OF PERSONAL USE CANNOT BE TOTALLY DENIED. EVEN OTHERWISE, LEARNED CIT(A) ALSO FAILED TO GIVE ANY SPECIAL REASON WHILE CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE. THEREFO RE, WE FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO ALLOW THE CLAIMED AMOUNT OF RS.80,69 ,000/- UNDER THE HEAD MOTOR VEHICLE HIRING EXPENSES AS DEDUCTION IN ITS E NTIRETY . 6 GROUND NO. 6 , THE ASSESSEE ARGUED THAT THE EXPORT TURNOVER OF RS.38,79,909/- SHOULD NOT BE REDUCED FROM THE FIGUR E OF EXPORT TURNOVER IN COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION U/S 10A OF THE IT ACT, 196 1. LEARNED DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THI S ISSUE. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS RELATING TO THESE GROU NDS, AS THE AO WAS PLEASED TO REDUCE THE AFORESAID AMOUNT FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER FOR THE REASON THAT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN BROUGHT INTO INDIA, TILL THE DATE OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT, OR EVEN DURI NG THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO BRING ON RECORD ANY EVIDENCE TO SUBSTANTIATE THE ABOVE AMOUNT THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVE D IN OR BROUGHT INTO INDIA. HENCE WE ARE INCLINED TO DISMISS THE INSTANT GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 7. GROUND NO.7 RELATES TO THE CONFIRMATION OF REDUCTION OF EXPORT TURNOVER OF RS.2.00 CRORES FROM THE FIGURE OF EXPOR T TURNOVER IN COMPUTING ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 9 DEDUCTION U/S 10A, FOR THE REASON THAT THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN RECEIVED OR BROUGHT INTO INDIA. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR THAT LETTER OF APPROV AL WAS OBTAINED FROM RBI FOR OPENING A BANK ACCOUNT OUTSIDE INDIA F OR DEPOSITING THE AMOUNTS OF EXPORTS TURNOVER AND THE COMPETENT AUTHO RITIES HAS BEEN ACCEPTING AND HAVE HAD NO OCCASION TO QUESTION OR D ISPUTE THE PROCEDURE ADOPTED BY THE APPELLANT AND THIS PRACTICE HAS BEEN ACCEPTED ALL ALONG BOTH BY THE INCOME TAX AS WELL AS THE COMPETENT AUT HORITY. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE SUBMISSION OF THE LD AR AND PERUSED THE SECTION 80HHC OF THE ACT, THE REFORE ACCORDING TO US, THE SAID AMOUNT DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED AN D BROUGHT IN INDIA, HENCE WE ARE INCLINED TO ALLOW THE INSTANT GROUND I N FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE. 8. GROUND NO 8 , THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE FINDINGS OF THE LEAR NED CIT(A) NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUND QUA TELECOMMUNIC ATION EXPENSES OF RS.2.00 CRORES AND EXPENSES INCURRED TOWARDS OVERSE AS TRAVELLING OF RS.10.00 CRORES AND AN AMOUNT OF RS . 15 LAKHS BEING EXPENDITURE INCUR R ED ON PAYMENT O F COMMISSION TO ONE MR . LES LAWRENCE , A FOREIGN NAT I ONAL AND EXPENSES INCURRED TOWARDS RENDERING SERVICES OUTSID E INDIA A SUM OF RS.2,94,75,502/- BEING 20% OF RS.14,73,77,60 1/- CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FOR SERVICES RENDERED TO OVERSEAS CLIENTS OUTSIDE INDIA . RE: TELECOMMUNICATION EXPENSES OF RS.2.00 CRORES IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE LD AR THAT THE ASESSEEE HAS CONSIDERED ONLY AN AMOUNT OF RS. 73,73,107/- UNDER THE HEAD OF TELE COMMUNICATION EXPENDITURE AS AGAINST THE EXPENSES OF RS. 2,72,440 00/- UNDER THE HEAD TELEPHONE DATA LINK, COURIER AND POSTAGE IN RESPECT OF 10A UNIT ALONE. , HOWEVER, THE LD AO ADOPTED THE EXPENDITURE TO THE T UNE OF RS. 2,00,00,000/- AND REDUCED OUT OF THE EXPORT TURNOVE R , WHILE COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION U/S 10A OF THE ACT. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION THE SU BMISSIONS OF THE ASESSSEE AND ALSO TO THE ORDER PASSED BY AUTHORITIE S BELOW AS THE LD AO FELT THAT MAJOR AMOUNT WOULD HAVE BEEN INCURRED IN RESPECT OF EXPORT THAN FOR OTHER PURPOSE, THEREFORE HE HAD TAKEN THE VALUE OF TELECOMMUNICATION ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 10 AT RS. 2,00,00,000/- AS ADOPTED. THE LD CIT (A)N FA ILED TO ADJUDICATE THIS HEAD. WE FEEL THAT THE LD AO ADOPTED VALUE AT THE HIGHER RATE ONLY ON THE ASSUMPTION BUT NOT ON ANY BASIS RELEVANT TO, HENCE WE RESTRICT THE AMOUNT UNDER HEAD OF TELECOMMUNICATION TO RS. 73,73,107/- ONLY AND THE SAME CAN BE EXCLUDED BUT NOT OTHERWISE. RE : EXPENSES INCURRED TOWARDS OVERSEAS TRAVELLING OF R S.10.00 CRORES. AND AN AMOUNT OF RS . 15 LAKHS BEING EXPENDITURE INCUR R ED ON PAYMENT O F COMMISSION TO ONE MR . LES LAWRENCE , A FOREIGN NAT I ONAL IT WAS ARGUED BY THE LD AR THAT THE ASSESSEE THAT T HE AFORESAID CHARGES WERE NOT INCURRED FOR PROVIDING TECHNICAL S ERVICE OUT OF INDIA AS THE APPELLANT ALL TIME DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEARS WAS NOT ENGAGED IN THE PROVIDING TECHNICAL SERVICES OUTSIDE INDIA. EVEN OTHERWISE, SAID EXPENDITURES WERE THOUGH, BEING INCURRED IN FOREIGN CURRENCY AND CAN NOT BE EXCLUDED ON ESTIMATED AND ADHOC BASIS. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE RELEVANT PART OF ASSESSMEN T ORDER PASSED BY THE LD AO IN WHICH , HE HELD PARA 11.4 (V) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED AS EXPENDITURE OF RS. 15,53,85000/- ON OVERSEAS TRAVEL , APART FROM RS. 94.85 LACS AS INLA ND TRAVEL IN RESPECT OF 10A UNIT . THE MAJOR EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF OVERSEAS TRAVEL HAS BEEN INCURRED ON BOARDING, LODGING DAILY ALLOWANCE, OVERSEAS CONV EYANCE, TELEPHONE AND OTHER CHARGES PAID IN FOREIGN CURRENCIES OVERSEAS. AS DISCUSSED ABOVE, THIS EXPENDITURE WILL COME UNDER THE AMBIT OF EXPENDITUR E INCURRED FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES IN FOREIGN CURRENCY OUTSIDE INDIA. EVIDENT LY, THE COMPANY EXECUTIVES ARE TRAVELLING ABROAD FOR PROVIDING TECHNICAL SERVI CES TO THEIR CLIENTS IN NATURE SETTING UP OF SOFTWARE AND OPERATIONALISING IT. OUT OF TOTAL EXPENDITURE OF RS. 15.53 CRORES, I HOLD THAT EXPENDITURE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 10 CRORES IN RESPECT OF SUCH TECHNICAL SERVICES AND THEREFORE, THIS AMOU NT SHALL ALSO BE EXCLUDED OUT OF THE EXPORT TURNOVER. PARA 11.4 (VI) THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON COMMISSION AMOUNT TO RS . 20.77 LACS HAS BEEN PAID LARGELY TO LES LAWRENCE , A FOREIGN NATIONAL F OR PROCURING EXPORT ORDERS AND THUS, FOR RENDERING SERVICES OUTSIDE INDIA. A CCORDINGLY, I HOLD THAT OUT OF THIS EXPENDITURE, A SUM OF RS.15.00 LAKHS IS PUR ELY RELATING TO TECHNICAL SERVICES AND THEREFORE, IT SHALL BE EXCLUDED OUT OF THE EXPORT TURNOVER. WE REALIZE, AS IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE OPERATIVE PAR T OF ORDER THAT THE LD AO ONLY ON ASSUMPTION HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS PROVIDING TECHNICAL SERVICES AND COMING TO THIS CONCLUSION, FAILED TO P OINT OUT ANY MATERIAL IN SUPPORT OF THE CONCLUSION. THE LD. AO ALSO TAKEN EX PENSES INCURRED TOWARDS OVERSEAS TRAVELLING OF RS.10.00 CRORES AND AN AMOUNT OF RS . 15 ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 11 LAKHS BEING EXPENDITURE INCUR R ED ON PAYMENT O F COMMISSION TO ONE MR . LES LAWRENCE , A FOREIGN NAT I ONAL ONLY ON ESTIMATE BASIS. WE FEEL IT APPROPRIATE THAT BECAUSE THE LD AO FAILED TO BRING ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD QUA PROVIDING OF TECHNICAL SERVICE BY THE ASSESSEE AND EVEN OTHERWISE , THE AMOUNT WORKED OUT ALSO TO BE ON ESTIMATE BASIS WHIC H SEEMS TO BE ON ASSUMPTIONS THEREFORE THE SAID AMOUNT OF RS. 10 CRO RES AND 15.00 CRORES UNDER THE HEAD OF EXPENSES INCURRED TOWARDS OVERSEA S TRAVELLING AND EXPENDITURE INCURRED TOWARDS COMMISSION, RESPECTIVE LY ARE NOT TO BE EXCLUDED, HENCE, EXCLUSIONS MADE BY THE LD. AO ARE SET ASIDE. RE : A SUM OF RS.2,94,75,502/- BEING 20% OF RS.14,73,77, 601/- CONSIDERATION RECEIVED FOR SERVICES RENDERED TO OVE RSEAS CLIENTS OUTSIDE INDIA. IT WAS HELD BY THE LEARNED AO THAT THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY HAD RENDERED SERVICES TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 14,73,77,601/-OUTSIDE INDIA TO ITS OVERSEAS CLIENTS AND RECEIVED THE ABOVE AMOUNT FOR SUCH SERVICES. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AS SESSEE WAS ASKED AS TO HOW MUCH IS THE EXPENDITURE RELATING TO SUCH SERVICES RENDERED OUTSIDE INDIA. THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT SUCH EXPENDITURE MAY BE ABOVE 5% OF THE RECEIPTS. HOWEVE R, I FEEL THAT 5% IS TOO LOW A FIGURE. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, I ADOPT THIS FIGURE AT 20% OF THE ABOVE RECEIPTS WHICH WORKS OUT TO RS.2,94,75,502/- AND SHALL BE REDUCED OUT OF THE EX PORT TURNOVER, AS IT IS IN THE NATURE OF TECHNICAL SERVICE RENDERED O UTSIDE INDIA. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION ON THE F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AS WELL AS THE ORDERS PA SSED BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. AS IT REFLECTS FROM THE RELEVANT PART OF TH E ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED AO THAT HE ADOPTED THE FIGURE UNDER THE AFO RESAID HEAD AT THE RATE OF 20% OF THE ABOVE RECEIPTS AND WORKED OUT TO RS.2,94,75,502/-. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE CLARIFICATORY CIRCULAR NO.1/201 3 DATED 17-01-2013 ISSUED BY CBDT TO ADDRESS VARIOUS CONTENTIOUS ISSUE S LEADING TO TAX DISPUTE IN CASES OF ENTITIES ENGAGED IN EXPORT OF C OMPUTER SOFTWARE WHICH ARE AVAILING TAX BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 10A, 10AA AN D 10B OF THE IT ACT, 1961. HENCE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE SAID AMOU NT CANNOT BE EXCLUDED FROM EXPORT TURNOVER, HENCE EXCLUSIONS MADE BY THE LD. AO UNDER THE INSTANT HEAD IS SET ASIDE. ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 12 9. GROUND NO.9 , THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION IS THAT THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE GROUND RELATING TO LE VY OF INTEREST U/S 234B OF THE IT ACT, 1961. THE LEVY OF INTEREST, IN OUR VI EW CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE LIABLE TO PAY THE I NTEREST U/S 234B OF THE IT ACT, 1961 ACCORDING TO THE AMOUNT PAYABLE. F. ITA NO.939(B)/2014 (BY THE REVENUE) IN THE REVENUES APPEAL , THE REVENUE CHALLENGED TH E IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(APPEAL) ON THE GROUNDS STATE D SUPRA . WE FEEL IT APPROPRIATE TO ADJUDICATE OR REPLY TO GR OUNDS OF REVENUE :- GROUND NO. 1 : THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS OPPOSED TO LAW AND F ACTS OF THE CASE IS ACCORDINGLY ANSWERED IN ASESSEE APPEAL . GROUND NO. 2 : THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, LD.CITA) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE WRONG CLAIM OF 75% O F EXPENDITURE INCURRED FOR SUPPLYING LUNCH COUPONS, EVENT MANAGEMENT, FOREIGN COUNTRIES, GIFT COUPONS E TC. DESPITE THE ASSESSEE NOT BEING ABLE TO PROVE THAT T HE SAME HAS BEEN INCURRED FOR BUSINESS PURPOSES . QUESTION OF THIS GROUND HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASESSEEE VIDE GROUND NO. 2 OF ASSESSEEE APPEAL AND CONCLUSION OF THE SAME IS NOT REPEATED HEREIN FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. GROUND NO. 3 : ON FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD,.CT(A) ERRED IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE TRAVEL EXPENDITURE CANNOT BE DISALLOWED BECAUSE THE SAME HAS BEEN ALLOWED IN EARLIER YEARS. QUESTION OF THIS GROUND HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASESSEEE VIDE GROUND NO. 5 OF ASSESSEEE APPEAL AND CONCLUSION OF THE SAME IS NOT REPEATED HEREIN FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. HOWEVER, IT IS CLARIFIED THAT TRAVEL EXPENDITURE IS ALSO SIMILAR TO MOTOR CAR EXPENSES ON ADHOC BASI S. GROUND NO. 4 : ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.CIT (A) ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE FOREX GAIN IS TO BE PART OF EXPORT TURNOVER FOR COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTIO N U/S 10A DESPITE IT NOT BEING EARNED FROM THE BUSINE SS OF SOFTWARE EXPORT BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CASE OF INFOSYS ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 13 TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD WHICH HAS NOT REACHED FINALIT Y IN VIEW OF PENDING SLP OF THE DEPARTMENT. CONTROVERSY OF THIS GROUND HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE GROUND NO. 8 OF ASSESSEE APPEAL AND CONCLUSION OF THE SAME IS NOT REPEATED HEREIN FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. GROUND NO. 5 : ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD.CIT( A) ERRED IN LAW IN DIRECTING THE AO TO EXCLUDE THE REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN EXPENSES BOTH FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER AS WELL AS FROM TOTAL TURNOVER FOR THE PURPOSES OF COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S 10A, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE STATUTE ALLO WS EXCLUSION OF SUCH EXPENDITURE ONLY FROM EXPORT TURNOVER BY WAY OF SPECIFIC DEFINITION OF EXPORT TURNOVER AS ENVISAGED BY SUB-CLAUSE(4) OF EXPLANATION-2 BELOW SUB-SECTION(8) OF SEC.10A AND T HE TOTAL TURNOVER HAS NOT BEEN DEFINED IN THIS SECTION . CONTROVERSY OF THIS GROUND HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASESSEEE AND CONCLUSION OF THE SAM E IS NOT REPEATED HEREIN FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. GROUND NO. 6 : ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD.CIT (A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO COMPUTE DEDUCTION U/S 10A IN THE ABOVE MANNER BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA IN THE CASE OF M/S TATA ELXSI LTD., WHICH HAS NOT BECOME FINAL SINCE THE SAME HAS NOT BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND SLPS ARE PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. CONTROVERSY OF THIS GROUND HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASESSEEE VIDE GROUND NO. 8 OF ASSESSEEE APPEAL AND CONCLUSION OF THE SAME IS NOT REPEATED HEREIN FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. GROUND NO. 7 : FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT TH E TIME OF HEARING, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND THAT OF THE AO MAY BE RESTORED. ITA NOS.738& 939(BANG)/2014 14 ORDER PASSED BY THE LD CIT(APPEAL) IS PARTLY ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASESSEEE AND CONCLUSION OF THE SAME IS NOT REPEATED HEREIN FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. WE FINALLY HOLD THAT AS WHILE DECIDING THE ASSESSEE APPEAL , ALL THE SAME AS WELL AS THE OTHER GROUNDS HAVE BEEN ELABORA TELY DISCUSSED AND ADJUDICATED UPON AND RESULT OF THE SAME IS DIRECT E FFECT ON THE REVENUE APPEAL, HENCE THE INSTANT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STA NDS DISMISSED. G. TO SUMMARIZE THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS A LLOWED, HOWEVER THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT O 18 TH MARCH, 2016. SD/- SD/- (BOMMARAJU RAMAKOTAIAH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (NARENDRA KUMAR CHOUDHURY) JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE: D A T E D : 18-03-2016 AM* COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 2 RESPONDENT 3 CIT(A)-II BANGALORE 4 CIT 5 DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6 GUARD FILE BY ORDER, AR, ITAT, BANGALORE