SATISH KUMAR YADAV, Alwar V. ITO, Alwar

ITA 845/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4876 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NEENA JEPH JCIT DHK
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Source of fund; Corroborative evidences

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES , JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,O JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D L NL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHAR AT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV S/O SHRI LATE. SHRI NAND RAM YADAV VPO GUNTI, BEHROR CUKE VS. THE ITO BEHROR ALWAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: ADBPY 8665 M VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 846/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 SHRI RAJ KUMAR YADAV S/O SHRI LATE. SHRI NAND RAM YADAV VPO GUNTI, BEHROR CUKE VS. THE ITO BEHROR ALWAR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: CCVPK 4767 R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY: SHRI P.C. PARWAL, CA JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY :MS. NEENA JEPH, JCIT LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 08/12/2016 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21/12/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER BHAGCHAND, AM BOTH THESE APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY DIFFERENT ASS ESSEE AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR DATED 20-0 7-2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 RAISING GROUND OF APPEAL A S UNDER:- ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 2 ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SATISH KUMAR YADAV. 1. THAT THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 50.00 LACS WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 69A O THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR HAS ERRED IN SUSTAIN ING THE SAME. ITA NO. 846/JP/2016 RAJ KUMAR YADAV. 1. THAT THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 1,17,12,000/- WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 69A O T HE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR HAS ERRED IN SU STAINING THE SAME. 2.1 THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS EMERGES FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV IS AS UNDER:- 4.5 I HAVE PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL A S REMAND REPORT OF THE AO, SUBMISSIONS AND CROSS REPLY OF TH E APPELLANT INCLUDING THE JUDICIAL CITATIONS GIVEN THEREIN AND FIND THAT AN ADDITION OF RS. 50 LAKHS HAS BEEN MADE BY THE AO ON ACCOUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF TH E APPELLANT U/S 69A OF THE I.T. ACT. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS, THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS REG ARDING SOURCE OF FUNDS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE, THE DEPOSITS MADE IN CASH WERE HELD B Y THE AO AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT U/S 69A OF THE I.T. ACT. 4.6 IN THE COURSE OF PRESENT PROCEEDINGS, IT IS SUB MITTED THAT APPELLANTS FATHER LATE SHRI NAND RAM ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH SHRI PRATAP SINGH SON OF SHRI NAHAR SINGH RESIDENT OF KHILONA BAGH NEAR PRATAP NAGAR, 129/47, MODEL TO WN, NEW DELHI, FOR SALE OF HIS AGRICLUITURE LAND SITUATED A T GRAM KESHWANA RAJPUT, PATWAR MALPURA, TEHSIL KOTPUTLI, DISTT. JAI PUR VIDE KHASRA NO 180 AREA 1.04 HECTARE, KHASRA NO. 182 ARA 470 HE CTAE, KHASRA NO. 183 AREA 1.09 HECTARE, KHASRA NO. 187 AREA 1.45 HECTARE TOTAL AREA 8.28 HECTARE, VIDE AGREEMENT TO SALE DATED 28 TH NOV. 2008. ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 3 THIS AGREEMENT WAS EXECUTED IN THE PRESENCE OF SHRI SHEO CHAND SAINI S/O GANPAT RESIDENT OF MOHALLA SABALPUR TEHSI LE BEHROR DISTT. ALWAR AND SHRI PAWAN SHARMA SON SHRI BHAGWAN DAS SHARMA MOHALLA SABALPUR TEHSIL BEHROR DISTRICT ALWA R AND SHRI PAWAN SHARMA SON OF SHRI BHAGWAN DASS SHARMA MOHALL A BUCHAKHEDA TEHSIL KOTPUTLI DISTT. JAIPUR AND WAS DU LY ATTESTED BY NOTARY ON THAT DATE. A COPY OF THE AGREEMENT TO SAL E WAS FILED ON RECORD. 4.7 IT IS STATED IN THE AGREEMENT THAT IT IS A VALI D FOR A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AND SALE REGISTRY WILL BE EXECUT ED IN THE FAVOUR OF SHRI PRATAP SINGH OR IN THE NAME OF ANY OTHER PE RSON AS MAY BE DIRECTED BY HIM. ACCORDINGLY, A SALE DEED WAS EXECU TED BY ASSESSEE'S FATHER FOR KHASRA NO. 180 & 182 ON 21-11 -2008FOR KHASRA NO. 183 ON DATED 22-11-2008 AND HAS GIVEN PH YSICAL POSSESSION OF KHASRA NO. 189 (IN PLACE OF KHASRA NO . 187) IN FAVOUR OF / TO SHRI SOMNATH BUILDTECH PRIVATE LTD., NEW DELHI. A COPY OF THESE DEEDS HAS BEEN FILED. 4.8 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT CASH AMOUNTING TO RS. 50,0 0,000/- WAS DEPOSITED ON 24-11-2008 AND DEMAND DRAFT AMOUNT ING TO RS. 31,00,000/- IN THE JOINT BANK ACCOUNT FORM PROCEEDS RECEIVED ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF AGRICULTURE LAND. THIS SALE DEE D IN RESPECT OF KHASRA NUMBER 180 AND 182 EXECUTED ON 21-11-2008 WA S REGISTERD ON 24-11-2008. THE DETAILS OF DATEWISE RECEIPT OF A MOUNT AS PER AGREEMENT TO SALE IS AS FOLLOWS. DATE AMOUNT MODEL 28-11-2007 27,00,000 CASH 10-01-2008 15,00,000 DEMAND DRAFT 21-11-2008 1,57,00,000 CASH 21-11-2008 31,00,000 DEMAND DRAFT TOTAL 2,30,00,000 4.9 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 50,00,000 /- DEPOSITED ON 24-11-2008 BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BAN K ACCOUNT IS OUT OF THE SALE PROCEEDS OF RS. 1,57,00,000/- RECEIVED ON 21-11-208, 22-11-208 AND 23-11-2008 BEING SATURDAY AND SUNDAY, THEREFORE, THE MONEY COULD BE DEPOSITED ON THE NEXT BANKS WOR KING DAY I.E. 24-11-2008. IT IS FURTHER STATED BY THE APPELLANT T HAT ONLY SOURCE OF ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 4 INCOME OF ASSESSEE'S FATHER SHRI NAND RAM WAS AGRIC ULTURE ACTIVITY AND AGRICULTURE OPERATION. THE ASSESSEE'S FATHER SH RI NAND RAM WAS NOT HAVING ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME. THE BANK ACC OUNT IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IS A JOINT BA NK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF HIS FATHER SHRI NAND RAM AND HIMSELF I.E. S HRI RAJ KUMAR. 4.10 THE DETAILED SUBMISSION FILED BY THE APPELLANT WERE TO THE AO FOR EXAMINATION AND AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUN ITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT. THE AO IN HIS REMAND REPORT HAS CATEGORICALLY GIVEN A FINDING THAT SOURCES FOR DEPO SIT OF CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT COULD NOT BE SUBSTANT IATED WITH EVIDENCE. THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO ATTEND THE PR OCEEDINGS FOR RECORDING OF STATEMENTS FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CONT ENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED IN THE COURSE OF PRESENT PROCEEDING S. AO HAS GIVEN A NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES IN THE COURSE OF REMAND PRO CEEDINGS BUT NO FURTHER EVIDENCE COULD BE FILED BY THE APPELLANT . THE APPELLANT ALSO FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY WITNESS TO THE SALE AGRE EMENT BEFORE THE AO IN THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS. 4.11 HAVING CONSIDERED THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS MAD E ON THIS ISSUE INCLUDING JUDICIAL CITATIONS. I FIND THA T A NUMBER OF OPPORTUNITIES WERE GIVEN TO THE APPELLANT IN THE CO URSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BUT NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE W AS FILED AT THAT STAGE. IN THE COURSE OF APPELLANT PROCEEDINGS, WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ALONGWITH COPY OF SALE DEEDS, AGREEMENT S, RECEIPT, AFFIDAVIT WAS FILED TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH D EPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, IN THE COURSE OF REMAND PROC EEDINGS, THE APPELLANT HAS AGAIN FAILED TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDING S FOR EXAMINATION OF THE EVIDENCE AND AVERMENTS MADE IN THE AFFIDAVIT FILED. THE APPELLANT IN THE CROSS REPLY FILED HAS REITERATED T HE SUBMISSIONS FILED EARLIER AND HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY FURTHER EVIDENCE. 4.12 I HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE EVIDENCE PLACED ON RECORD AND FIND THAT AS PER AGREEMENT TO SELL DATED 28-1-2007 FOR SALE OF LAND AT A TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 2 .30 CRORES, EXECUTED BY SHRI NAND RAM FATHER OF THE APPELLANT, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 1,60,00,000/- WAS RECEIVED IN CASH BY HIM ON TH E SAME DATE. THEREFORE, DEPOSIT OF CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF T HE APPELLANT ON 24-11-2008 OF RS. 50,00,000/- REMAINS UNEXPLAINED. THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE APPELLANT TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CAS H DEPOSIT ON 24- ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 5 11-2008 DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE FACTS AS PER THE RE CEIPT AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED IN NOV. 2008 STAT ES THAT A CONSIDERATION OF RS. 92,00,000/- HAS BEEN PAID VIDE DEMAND DRAFTS DRAWN IN THE NAME OF TWO CO-OWNERS OF THE LAND SHRI NAND RAM AND HIS BROTHER (1/2 SHARE EACH). THE AGREEMENT DAT ED 28-11-2007 ONLY SPECIFIES THE RECEIPT OF CASH OF RS. 1.60 CROR ES. 4.13 FURTHER, I FIND THAT APPELLANT HAS TIME AND OV ER AGAIN FAILED TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO FAILED TO PRODUCE THE WITNESS BEFORE THE AT THE ASSESSMENT STAGE AND AGAI N IN THE COURSE OF REMAND PROCEEDINGS. THE BEST EVIDENCE APPELLANT HAS FILED IS ONLY AN AFFIDAVIT BY HIMSELF AND HIS BROTHER AND OF ONE OF THE WITNESSES SHRI PAWAN SHARMA. BUT APPELLANT HAS NEIT HER HIMSELF ATTENDED THE PROCEEDINGS NOR COULD PRODUCE ANY OF T HE WITNESSES. FURTHER, THERE ARE HUGE GAPS IN THE DATES OF DEPOSI TION OF CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE DATES OF RECEIPT OF CASH AS PE R THE SALE AGREEMENT FILED. THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY E VIDENCE OTHER THAN THE SELF SERVING STATEMENTS, I HOLD THAT AO WA S JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE AMOUNT OF RS. 50,00,000/- AS UNEXPLAIN ED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT U/S 69A OF THE I.T. ACT . 2.2 DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION WITH THE PRAYER THAT THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS. 50.00 LACS IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV AND THE SAME SHOU LD BE DELETED. 2.3 THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AU THORITIES. 2.4 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOTED FROM THE RECORDS T HAT THE AO HAD MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 50.00 LACS U/S 69A OF THE ACT ON AC COUNT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. T HE AO OBSERVED THAT ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 6 THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH ANY DETAILS REGA RDING SOURCES OF FUNDS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS ALSO NOTED FRO M THE RECORDS THAT AN AMOUNT OF RS. 50.00 LACS WAS DEPOSITED ON 24-11-208 BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT OUT OF SALE PROCEEDS OF RS. 1,57,0 0,000/- RECEIVED ON 21- 11-2008, 22-11-2008 AND 23-11-2008 BEING SATURDAY A ND SUNDAY. THEREFORE, THE MONEY COULD BE DEPOSITED BY THE ASSE SSEE ON THE NEXT BANKS WORKING DAY I.E. 24-11-2008. IT IS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO THAT HIS FATHER SHRI NAND RAM HAD ONLY SOURC E OF INCOME FROM AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITY AND HIS FATHER SHRI NAND RAM WAS NOT HAVING ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT TH E BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT WAS A JOINT BANK ACCOUNT IN THE NAME OF HIS FATHER SHRI NAND RAM AND THE ASSESSEE H IMSELF. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE WERE FORWARDED TO THE AO FOR EXAMINATION OF THE CASE OF THE ASSESS EE AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE AO IN HIS REMAND REPORT HAD CATEGORICALLY GIVEN A FINDING THAT SOURCES OF C ASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATED WIT H EVIDENCE. THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO ATTEND THE PROCEEDINGS FOR R ECORDING OF STATEMENTS FOR SUBSTANTIATING THE CONTENTS OF THE AFFIDAVIT FI LED IN THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS. THE AO CONCLUSIVELY CAME TO THE CONCLU SION DURING REMAND ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 7 PROCEEDINGS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY WITNESSES AS TO THE SALE AGREEMENT, BEFORE HIM. IN APPELLATE PROCE EDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT AS PER AGREEMENT TO SELL DATED 28-11- 2007 FOR SALE OF LAND AT A TOTAL SALE CONSIDERATION OF RS. 2.30 CRORES EXECU TED BY SHRI NAND RAM FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 1.60 CRORE S WAS RECEIVED IN CASH BY HIM ON THE SAME DATE. ACCORDING TO HIM, THE CASH DEPOSIT OF RS. 50.00 LACS ON 24-11-2008 IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSES SEE REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED THAT THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSIT ON 24-11-2008 DID NOT CONFORM TO THE FACTS AS PER THE RECEIPT AVAILABLE O N RECORD. THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE AGREEMENT DATED 28-11-2007 ONLY S PECIFIED THE RECEIPT OF CASH OF RS. 1.60 CRORES. THE LD. CIT(A) THUS OBS ERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO PRODUCE THE WITNESSES AT THE ASSESSME NT STAGE AND IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THUS THE LD. CIT( A) HELD THAT THE AO WAS JUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE AMOUNT OF RS. 50.00 L ACS AS UNEXPLAINED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 69A OF THE ACT. WE HAVE ALSO PONDERED THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO SOURCE OF INCOME OTHER THAN THE AGRICULTURAL. EVEN THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE N OT FOUND ANY OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 8 CIT(A) AT PARA 4.9, IT SHOWS THAT THE BANK ACCOUNT IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAD DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IS A JOINT ACCOUNT IN NAME OF HIS FATHER SHRI NAND RAM AND ASSESSEE HIMSELF. THUS IN SUCH A SITUA TION, IT WILL BE IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE TO RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO DECIDE IT AFRESH BY PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE TO ASCERTAIN THE MONEY WHETHER IT PERTAINS TO HIS FATHER OR THE ASSESSEE . THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO SUBMIT ALL THE RELEVANT RECORDS AND PAPERS CONCERNING THE ISSUE IN QUESTION BEFORE THE AO. THUS THE SOLITARY ISSUE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATI STICAL PURPOSES. 3.1 NOW WE TAKE UP THE APPEAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI R AJ KUMAR YADAV ASSESSEE (ITA NO. 846/JP/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE AR 2009-10) WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE SOLITARY GROUND AS UNDE R:- 1. THAT THE LD. AO HAS ERRED IN LAW AS WELL AS O N THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN MAKING A N ADDITION OF RS. 1,17,12,000/- WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 69A O THE I.T. ACT, 1961 AND THE LD. CIT(A), ALWAR HAS ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE SAME. 3.2 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT IS NOTED THAT THE ISSUE IN QUESTION IS SIMILAR TO THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV (ITA N O. 845/JP/2016) WHEREIN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSES. SINCE THE ISSUE IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAJ KUAMR YADAV (ITA NO. ITA NO. 845/JP/2016 SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV VS. ITO, BEHROR, ALWAR . 9 846/JP/2016) IS SIMILAR, THEREFORE, THE DECISION TA KEN IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV SHALL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS IN THE CASE OF SHRI RAJ KUAMR YADAV ALSO. THUS THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . 4.0 IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ABOVE ASSESSE ES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 -12- 2016. DQY HKKJR HKKXPUN (KUL BHARAT) ( BHAGCHAND) U;KF;D LNL; / JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 21/12/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1-2. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- SHRI SATISH KUMAR YADAV & SHRI RAJ KUMAR YADAV BEHROR 3. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD-BEHROR 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 5. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 6. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 7. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 845 & 846/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR