Shri Warana Sah. Bank Ltd., Kolhapur V. Income-tax Officer,

ITA 748/PUN/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0642 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 03-10-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P L KUREEL
• Keywords: Business income; Earning of tax free income; Bad and doubtful debts; Revised return
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B , PUNE , , BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM . / ITA NO. 748 /PN/20 1 4 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 20 1 0 - 1 1 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD., WARANANAGAR, TAL. PANHALA, DIST. KOLHAPUR. . / APPELLANT PAN: A A AAS1033L VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 1 (4), KOLHAPUR . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : NONE / RESPOND ENT BY : SHRI P.L. KUREEL / DATE OF HEARING : 03 . 1 0 .201 6 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07 .1 0 .201 6 / ORDER / ORDER PER SUSHM A CHOWLA, JM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST ORDER OF CIT (A) , KOLHAPUR , DATED 25 . 0 2 .201 4 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 0 - 1 1 AGAINST ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) . 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAI SED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAI SED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : - 1. ON FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON MERIT IN CONFIRMING PROVISIONS FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS UNDER SECTION 36(VIIA) OF RS.2,31,92,845/ - . ITA NO . 748 /PN/201 4 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD. 2 2. ON FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON MERIT IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE INCOME FROM SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS OF RS.7,51,339/ - IS COVERED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 10(3 5 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. NOTICE OF HEARING WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON VARIOUS DATES AND THERE WAS AN APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT ON 07.09.2015 AND THEREAFTER, ON 04.02.2016. HOWEVER, IN BETWEEN DATES OF 10.11.2015 AND 28.04.2016, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND EVEN ON T HE APPOINTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 03.10.2016, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION WAS MOVED FOR ADJOURNMENT. THE REGISTRY HAD ISSUED NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE LISTED DATE OF HEARING I.E. 03.10.2016 AND IN THE ABSENC E OF ANY REPRESENTATION BY THE ASSESSEE, WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE PRESENT APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE. 4. BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE WAS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSIN ESS OF BANKING. FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED RETURN OF INCOME AT NIL AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION UNDER CHAPTER VIA OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER, REVISED RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WHEREIN THE INCOME DERIVED FROM MU TUAL FUNDS OF RS. 7,51,340/ - WAS DEDUCTED WHILE COMPUTING TOTAL INCOME. THE SAID RETURN WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE ACT AND THEREAFTER, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS LIST. NOTICE FOR APPEARING WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND DU RING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT , WHICH W ERE VERIFIED ON TEST CHECK BASIS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT AT RS. 2,92,49,196/ - AS AGAINST PROVISION OF RS.60 LAKHS MADE IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD AND POINTED OUT THAT IN ORDER TO CLAIM THE AFORESAID DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, THE PRO VISION WAS TO BE MADE TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 2,92,49,196/ - . HOWEVER, PROVISION WAS MADE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF RS.60 ITA NO . 748 /PN/201 4 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD. 3 LAKHS. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE EXCESS DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF TH E ACT AT RS. 2,32,49,196/ - SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED. REFERENCE WAS ALSO MADE TO THE CBDT S CIRCULAR NO.F.NO.228/3/2008 - ITA - II REPORTED IN (2008) 220 CTR (ST) 41 FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE DEDUCTION FOR PROVISION OF BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS SHOULD BE RESTRI CTED TO THE AMOUNT OF SUCH PROVISION ACTUALLY CREATED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IN THE RELEVANT YEAR OR THE AMOUNT CALCULATED AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, WHICHEVER WAS LESS. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN STATE BANK OF PATIALA VS. CIT & ANR. REPORTED IN 272 ITR 54 (P&H) , WHERE IN IT WAS HELD THAT MAKING OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT WAS MUST FOR CLAIMING SUCH DEDUCTION. IN RESPONSE THERETO, THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED ITS CASE AND POINTED OUT THAT IT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION AND ALSO POINTED OUT THAT SINCE IT WAS OPERATING THROUGH RURAL BRANCHES, IT HAD MADE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT SINCE IT WAS OPERATING THROUGH RURAL BRANCHES, IT HAD MADE SUFFICIENT COMPLIANCE TO THE PROVISIONS O F THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE WORD USED IN THE SAID SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT WAS ANY PROVISION MEANING THEREBY THAT THE QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION AS PER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, THE SAID CLAUSE (A) WAS INDEPENDENT OF NOT SUB JECT TO THE RESTRICTION TO THE AMOUNT OF PROVISION MADE IN THE ACCOUNT FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS. RELYING ON THE DECISION OF CIT(A), KOLHAPUR IN ANOTHER CASE, ASSESSING OFFICER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO THE EXTENT OF PROVISION MADE OF RS.60 LAKHS AND THE EXCESS DEDUCTION CLAIMED AT RS. 2.31 CRORES WAS DISALLOWED UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT. 5. THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER, AGAINST WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL. ITA NO . 748 /PN/201 4 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD. 4 6. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE RAISED VIDE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 IS SQUARELY COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER S OF TRIBUNAL . 7. ON PERUSAL OF RECORD AND AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE, THE ISSUE WHICH NE EDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT. THE SAID SECTION READS AS UNDER: - 36(1) . (VII A) IN RESPECT OF ANY PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS MADE BY (A) A SCHEDULED BANK NOT BEING A BANK INCORPORATED BY OR UNDER THE LAWS OF A COUNTRY OUTSIDE INDIA OR A NONSCHEDULED BANK, AN AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING FIVE PER CENT OF THE TOTAL INCOME (COMPUTED BEFORE MAKING ANY DEDUCTION UNDER THIS CLAUSE AND CHAPTER VIA) AND AN AMOUNT NOT EXCEEDING TEN P ER CENT OF THE AGGREGATE AVERAGE ADVANCES MADE BY THE RURAL BRANCHES OF SUCH BANK COMPUTED IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER; 8. IN VIEW OF CLEAR CUT PROVISION OF SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, IT IS CLEAR THAT 8. IN VIEW OF CLEAR CUT PROVISION OF SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM THE SAID DEDUCTIO N IN CASE PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS IS MADE TO THE EXTENT OF THE AMOUNT CLAIMED AS EXPENDITURE. THE PUNE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN PARSHWANATH CO - OP BANK LTD. VS. ITO IN ITA NO.674/PN/2015, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10, ORDER DATED 22.07.2016 , WHICH IN TURN, RELYING ON THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN SHRI MAHALAXMI CO - OP. BANK LTD. VS. ITO IN ITA NO.1658/PN/2011, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09, VIDE ORDER DATED 29.10.2013 HAD LAID DOWN THE PROPOSITION OBSERVING AS UNDER: - 8. THE ISSUE ARISING I N THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IN RESPECT OF AFORESAID ADDITION OF RS.18,79,285/ - . AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, COMPUTATION OF ALLOWABLE DEDUCTION IS CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS PER PARA 9.4 AT PAGE 6 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VII) OF THE ACT ALSO INCLUDED AMOUNT OF RS.1,42,118/ - , WHICH WAS WRITTEN OFF AS BAD DEBTS BY ITS RURAL BRANCH. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAD DEBITED SUM OF RS.5,52,000/ - BEING PROVISI ON FOR BDDR OF RURAL BRANCH, FOR WHICH SEPARATE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT AT 10% OF AVERAGE RURAL ADVANCES AMOUNTING TO RS.5,52,000/ - WAS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE BANK. THEREFORE, IT WAS HELD BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR SEPARATE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VII) OF THE ACT FOR SUM OF RS.1,42,118/ - AS PER THE PROVISO TO SAID SECTION. FURTHER, THE ALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT WAS DEPENDENT ON THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME, BEFO RE MAKING ANY DEDUCTION UNDER THE SAID CLAUSE AND UNDER CHAPTER VIA OF THE ACT. IN ITA NO . 748 /PN/201 4 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD. 5 VIEW THEREOF, THE COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VII) AND 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT WAS RE - WORKED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS UNDER: - GROSS TOTAL INCOME AS PER ASSESSEES COMPUTATION OF INCOME 5,86,022 ADD: (1) PROVISION FOR BDDR 1,17,50,000 LESS: ALREADY ADDED BACK BY THE ASSESSEE IN COMPUTATION 7,000 1,17,43,000 ADD: (2)PROVISION FOR RURAL BDDR 5,52,000 1,22,95,000 1,28,81,022 LESS: DEDUCTION ALLO WABLE U/S 36(VII) AS DISCUSSED ABOVE 97,61,187 LESS : BAD DEBTS WRITTEN OFF BY RURAL BRANCHES NOT ALLOWABLE AS DISCUSSED ABOVE 1,42,118 96,19,069 96,19,069 GROSS TOTAL INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S 36(1)(VIIA) 32,61,953 LESS: DED UCTION U/S 36(1)(VIIA) 7 OF G.T.I. 2,44,646 10% OF AVERAGE RURAL ADVANCES RESTRICTED TO THE ACTUAL PROVISION MADE 5,52,000 7,96,646 GROSS TOTAL INCOME AFTER DEDUCTION U/S 36 24,65,307 LESS: GROSS TOTAL INCOME AS PER COMPUTATION OF INCOME 5, 86,022 DISALLOWANCE OF EXCESS CLAIM OF DEDUCTION 18,79,285 DEDUCTION 9. THE PUNE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN SHRI MAHALAXMI CO - OP. BANK LTD. VS. ITO IN ITA NO.1658/PN/2011, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 09, VIDE ORDER DATED 29.10.2013 HAD HELD THAT WHERE THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT MADE A PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF DEDUCTION SOUGHT TO BE CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT, THEN THE DEDUCTION IS TO BE RESTRICTED UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT. 10. I N VIEW THEREOF, WHERE THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN WORKED OUT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CONTROVERTED THE SAME, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD AND THE ADDITION CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A) IS UPHELD. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS, DISMISSED. 9. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE US IS SQUARELY COVERED BY ORDER S OF PUNE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL AND FOLLOWING THE SAME PARITY OF REASONING, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN RESTRICTING THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(VIIA) OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.60 LAKHS I.E. TO THE AMOUNT OF PROVISION MADE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS. THE GROUND OF APPEAL N O.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THUS, DISMISSED. 10. THE ISSUE IN GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST ASSESSABILITY OF GAIN ARISING ON SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS AT RS. 7,51,339/ - . ITA NO . 748 /PN/201 4 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD. 6 11. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCE EDINGS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SOLD MUTUAL FUNDS OF DIFFERENT COMPANIES AND HAD MADE GAIN OF RS. 7,51,339/ - . THE DETAILS OF PURCHASE AND SALE AND THE GAIN ARISING ON DIFFERENT SECURITIES HELD BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE TOTAL PROFIT EARNED ON SALE OF MUTUA L FUNDS AT RS. 7,51,339/ - IS TABULATED AT PAGE 18 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CONCLUDED AS UNDER: - ON GOING THROUGH THE SAID CHART, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE BANK HAD PURCHASED ABOVE MUTUAL FUNDS ON 03/1/2010, 08/01/2010, 11/01/2 010, 19/01/2010. THE TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE COMES TO RS.12,00,02,980/ - AND SOLD THE SAID MUTUAL FUNDS ON 19/01/2010, 25/03/2010 & 26/03/2010 FOR RS.12,07,54,320/ - AND EARNED PROFIT ON SALE OF MUTUAL FUND OF RS.7,51,340/ - WHICH HAS BEEN CLAIMED AS EXEMPT U /S 10(35) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 12. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSED TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF ENTRIES SINCE THAT THE SAID GAIN ARISING ON SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS WAS TREATED AS EXEMPT BY THE ASSESSEE AS EXEMPT INCOME. THE PLEA OF ASSESSEE WAS THAT IN VIEW OF SECTION 10(35) OF THE ACT, THE INCOME WAS NOT TAXABLE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REFERRED TO THE PROVISO UNDER SECTION 10(35) OF THE ACT AND POINTED OUT THAT IN VIEW OF THE SAID PROVISO, THE INCOME EARNED FROM PURCHASE AND SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS WAS ON ACCOUNT OF TRANSFER OF MUTUAL FUNDS WITHIN ONE YEAR AND WAS TO BE TREATED AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND TAXED ACCORDINGLY. 13. THE CIT(A) HELD AS UNDER: - 5. GROUND NO. 2 IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF EXEMPTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF INCOME ON SA LE OF MUTUAL FUNDS. THE APPELLANT HAS ARGUED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM NOT APPRECIATING THAT DIVIDEND RECEIVED FROM MUTUAL FUND IS EXEMPT UNDER SECTION 10(35) OF THE ACT. ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED INCOME FROM SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS. THIS I NCOME WAS CLAIMED AS EXEMPT INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CALLED FOR DETAILS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE STATEMENT SHOWING DETAILED CALCULATION OF PROFIT ON SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS. A CHART OF COMPUTATION OF PROFIT ON SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS HAS BEEN REPRODUCED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AT PAGE 18 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. FROM THE CHART IT IS SEEN THAT THE BANK HAS PURCHASED LIC, MF, LIQUID FUND, RELIANCE MONEY, MANAGER FUND AND SBI MUTUAL FUND ON VARIOUS DATES OF JANUARY, 2010. THESE INVESTMENTS WERE S OLD ON VARIOUS MONTHS IN JANUARY AND MARCH, 2010 AND A TOTAL PROFIT OF RS.7,51,339.99 WAS EARNED IN THESE TRANSACTIONS. AS PER SECTION 10(35), ANY INCOME BY WAY OF INCOME RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF THE UNITS OF A MUTUAL FUND SPECIFIED UNDER CLAUSE 23D SHALL NO T BE INCLUDED IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE INCOME RECEIVED IS NOT THE INCOME RECEIVED IN RESPECT OF UNITS OF MUTUAL FUNDS BUT IT IS CAPITAL GAIN ON PURCHASE AND SALE OF MUTUAL FUNDS AND SINCE THIS CAPITAL GAIN WAS RECEIVED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE WHOSE BUSINESS IS BANKING, THEREFORE, THE INCOME IS BUSINESS INCOME. ITA NO . 748 /PN/201 4 SHRI WARANA SAH. BANK LTD. 7 14. THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO CONTROVERT THE FINDING OF CIT(A), WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD / TRANSFERRED THE MUTUAL FUNDS AND REALIZED EXCESS GAIN S ON ITS SALE, THE PROFIT EARNED IN THIS BEHALF IS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE PROVISO TO SECTION 10(35) OF THE ACT, IT IS CLEARLY PROVIDED THAT THE PROVISION OF CLAUSE SHALL NOT APPLY TO ANY INCOME ARISING FROM TRANSFER OF UNITS OF M UTUAL FUNDS AND / OR AS PROVIDED THEREIN. I T IS ONLY THE INCOME ARISING ON HOLDING MUTUAL FUNDS WHICH IS EXEMPT FROM TAX UNDER SECTION 10(35) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, THE GAIN ARISING ON TRANSFER OF ASSETS IS TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF CIT(A), WE DISMISS THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS, DISMISSED. 15 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 7 TH DAY OF OCTO BER , 201 6 . SD/ - SD/ - ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ( SUSHMA CHOWLA ) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE ; D ATED : 7 TH OCTO BER , 201 6 . GCVSR / COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT ; 2. / THE RESPONDENT ; 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A), KOLHAPUR ; 4. / THE CIT - I / II, KOLHAPUR / CIT (CENTRAL), PUNE ; 5. , , / DR B, ITAT, PUNE ; 6. / GUARD FI LE . / BY ORDER , // TRUE COPY // / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE