M/s. Ambica Coal Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT.,Circle-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 855/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1289 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 25-04-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: C S SHARMA
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Depreciation; Income from undisclosed sources; Loose papers; Peak credit; Retraction; Capital expenditure
• Section: 40A(3); 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH (BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA. NO: 855/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08) M/S. AMBICA COAL PVT. LTD. 502,DEVPATH COMPLEX OPP:NAVRANGPURA TELEPHONE EXCHANGE C.G. ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD V/S THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AADCA6430A APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANJAY R. SHAH, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI C.S. SHARMA, SR. D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 25 -04-201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23 -06-2016 PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. WITH THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE C ORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-VI, AHMEDABAD DATED 17.01.2 011 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2007-08. ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 2 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE REVOLVES AROUND THE F OLLOWING ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE A.O. IN THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.12.2009 MADE U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT- (I) PEAK CREDIT RS. 48,41,351/- (II) DISALLOWANCE U/S.40A(3) RS. 19,44,585/- (III) ADDITION IN RESPECT OF UNEXPLAINED TRANSACTIO NS RS. 28,47,300/- (IV) ADDITION IN RESPECT OF UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE RS. 4,76,396/- 3. BRIEFLY STATED, IN THIS CASE A SURVEY U/S.133A OF T HE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT AT BUSINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 08.12.2006. VARIOUS DOCUMENTS AND BOOKS WERE IMPOUNDED DURING THE COURS E OF SURVEY WHICH WERE INVENTORISED. STATEMENT OF SHRI JAIKISHA N BANWANI WAS RECORDED U/S.133A OF THE ACT, THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMEN TS WERE CONFRONTED TO THE DIRECTOR WHO EXPRESSED HIS INABIL ITY TO PROVIDE FULL DETAILS AT THAT TIME, HOWEVER, THE DIRECTOR ADMITTE D HAVING UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF RS. 1 CRORE. 4. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE SAID DIRECTOR FILED AN AFFIDAVIT WHEREIN HE RETRACTED THE DISCLOSURE OF UNACCOUNTED INCOME MADE DURING TH E COURSE OF SURVEY. HOWEVER, IN THE SAID AFFIDAVIT, THE DIRECTO R ADMITTED THAT CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS NOTED IN THE IMPOUNDED BOOKS W ERE NOT RECORDED IN THE NORMAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. ALONG WITH THE AFF IDAVIT, A DETAILED WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT WAS ALSO FURNISHED AND AS PE R THE WORKING FURNISHED THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME ON PEAK BASIS WORK ED OUT TO RS. 29,08,148/- AND ACCORDINGLY THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT TO REVISE THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME FROM 1 CRORE TO RS. 29,08,138/-. 5. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO JUSTIFY ITS STAND. THE ASSESS EE FILED A DETAILED ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 3 REPLY ONCE AGAIN JUSTIFYING THE WORKING OF PEAK CRE DIT AT RS. 29,08,148/-. 6. THE SUBMISSIONS AND THE WORKING OF THE PEAK CREDIT BY THE ASSESSEE WERE RUBBISHED BY THE A.O. WHO WAS OF THE FIRM BELI EF THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED RS. 1 CRORE DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, THE RETRACTION IS NOT JUSTIFIABLE. 7. THEREAFTER, THE A.O. PROCEEDED BY CALCULATING THE PEAK CREDIT AS PER THE IMPOUNDED DOCUMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN MARKED BY H IM AS ANNEXURE F WHICH CONTAINS TABULATION OF UNACCOUNTED PURCHASE AND SALES. FURTHER, WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT IS MADE AS P ER ANNEXURE E AND WORKED OUT THE PEAK CREDIT AT RS. 48,41,351/-. 8. ASSESSEE STRONGLY AGITATED THIS WORKING OF PEAK CRE DIT BY THE A.O BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY BUT WITHOUT AN Y MUCH SUCCESS. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERA TED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE LD. COUNSE L VEHEMENTLY SUBMITTED THAT THE WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT BY THE A. O. IS NOT BASED ON FACTS. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE WO RKING OF PEAK CREDIT GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND ALSO BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUT HORITY IS BASED ON ACTUAL FACTS AND SHOULD BE ACCEPTED. 9. PER CONTRA, THE LD. D.R. HEAVILY RELIED UPON THE FI NDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND THE SUBMISS IONS MADE BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELO W AND HAVE CAREFULLY ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 4 PERUSED THE ANNEXURES APPENDED TO THE ASSESSMENT OR DER. WE FIND THAT THE A.O. HAS BASED HIS WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT AT RS. 48,41,351/- AS PER ANNEXURE E ATTACHED WITH THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R. 11. WE FIND THAT THE BONE OF CONTENTION IS RELATING TO THE OPENING AMOUNT TAKEN BY THE A.O. AT RS. 19,34,186/- AS AGAI NST RS. 2 LACS TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE BASIS OF THE A.O. IS THA T THE ASSESSEE MUST BE HAVING UNACCOUNTED STOCK OF COAL. HE TOOK THE UN ACCOUNTED FIGURE OF PURCHASES OF COAL AS PER TRANSACTIONS RECORDED I N ANNEXURE-A-1 WHICH COMES TO RS. 1,16,05,115/- OVER A PERIOD OF S IX MONTHS. THE A.O. FURTHER ASSUMED THAT THE ASSESSEE MUST BE KEEP ING ONE MONTHS AVERAGE STOCK, THEREFORE, HE DIVIDED THE UNACCOUNTE D PURCHASED MENTIONED HEREINABOVE BY SIX AND TOOK THE OPENING F IGURE AT RS.19,34,186/-. 12. THIS WORKING OF THE A.O. ITSELF IS FOUND TO BE ERRO NEOUS BECAUSE AS PER THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE YEAR END ED ON 31.03.2007 AS EXHIBITED AT PAGE 14 OF THE PAPER BOOK TOTAL COA L PURCHASES IS SHOWN AT RS. 6,06,72,979/- AND THE CLOSING STOCK OF COAL AS ON 31.03.2007, AS EXHIBITED AT PAGE 16 OF THE PAPER BO OK IS SHOWN AT RS. 10,81,256/- WHICH COMES TO 56 DAYS OF TOTAL PURCHAS ES MADE DURING THE YEAR. 13. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE OPENING FIGURE OF RS .19,34,186/- IS NOT WORKED OUT ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE. FURTHER , THERE IS NO FINDING THAT AT THE TIME OF SURVEY UNEXPLAINED STOCK/EXCESS STOCK WAS FOUND OVER AND ABOVE THE BOOK STOCK. FURTHER, NO UNEXPLAI NED/UNRECORDED TANGIBLE ASSETS WERE FOUND. THEREFORE, THE WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT BASED ON OPENING FIGURE OF RS. 19,34,186/- IS UNWAR RANTED AND ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 5 DESERVED TO BE IGNORED. IF, THIS OPENING FIGURE IS REMOVED FROM THE WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT AS WORKED OUT BY THE A.O. TH EN THE PEAK CREDIT AS PER A.OS CALCULATION MINUS OPENING FIGURE COMES TO RS. 29,07,167/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED RS. 29,08,148 /- , THEREFORE, THE WORKING OF THE ASSESSEE DESERVES TO BE ACCEPTED. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO ACCEPT THE WORKING OF THE PEAK CREDIT COMPUTED AT RS. 29,08,14 8/-. THE FIRST GRIEVANCE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 14. THE SECOND GRIEVANCE RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCES M ADE U/S.40A(3) OF THE ACT. 15. THE BASIS FOR THE DISALLOWANCES MADE BY THE A.O. IS ENTRIES FOUND AS PER ANNEXURE F. ACCORDING TO THE A.O., SIN CE THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PURCHASES IN CASH EXCEEDING THE PERMISSIBL E MONETARY LIMIT, THEREFORE, PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) SQUARELY AP PLY. 16. DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ITS ELF, THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT ALL THE ENTRIES RELATING TO PURCHASES HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED FOR WORKING OUT THE PEAK CASH CREDI T, THEREFORE, THE SAME SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ONCE AGAIN FOR MAKING DISALLOWANCES U/S.40A(3) OF THE ACT. THIS CONTENTION OF THE ASSES SEE DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE A.O. WHO WAS OF THE FIRM BELIEF THA T DISALLOWANCE U/S. 40A(3) IS A TECHNICAL DISALLOWANCE WHICH IS REQUIR ED TO BE MADE AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. THE A.O. COMPUTED THE DISALL OWANCE ON THE PURCHASES OF RS. 1,16,05,115/- AND MADE THE ADDITIO N OF RS. 19,44,585/-. ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 6 17. ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) B UT WITHOUT ANY SUCCESS. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASS ESSEE REPEATED THAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND TH E LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE FINDINGS OF THE A.O. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND HAVE CAR EFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 18. BEFORE PROCEEDING FURTHER, LET US, FIRST CONSIDER T HE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT.:- 40A(3) WHERE THE ASSESSEE INCURS ANY EXPENDITURE I N RESPECT OF WHICH A PAYMENT OR AGGREGATE OR PAYMENTS MADE TO A PERSON I N A DAY, OTHERWISE THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DRAWN ON A BANK OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT, EXCEEDS TWENTY THOUSAND RUPEES, NO DEDU CTION SHALL BE ALLOWED IN RESPECT OF SUCH EXPENDITURE. 19. A PERUSAL OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE MUST HAVE INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE WHICH MEANS THAT THE SAID PAYMENT MUST HAVE BEEN CLAIMED AS EXPENDITURE BY TH E ASSESSEE. THE FACTS IN HAND SHOW THAT THE A.O. HAS COMPUTED THE D ISALLOWANCE BASED UPON UNACCOUNTED PURCHASES AS PER ANNEXURE-F WHICH MEANS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED THE IMPUGNED PAYMENTS AS E XPENDITURE IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE LAW, SINCE, NO EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN CLAIMED, NO DISALLOWANCE CAN B E MADE U/S.40A(3) OF THE ACT. 20. FURTHER, THE IMPUGNED ENTRIES IN ANNEXURE-F HAVE BE EN TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR WORKING OUT THE PEAK CREDIT, THEREFORE, DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE A.O. AMOUNTS TO DOUBLE ADD ITION ON THE SAME SET OF FACTS WHICH IS UNCALLED FOR. ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 7 21. FURTHER, THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME MADE BY THE ASSESSE E AT RS. 29 LACS SHOULD COVER ANY FURTHER DISALLOWANCES. WE ACC ORDINGLY DIRECT THE A.O. TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 19,44,585/- MADE U/S.40A(3) OF THE ACT. THE SECOND GRIEVANCE IS ALSO ALLOWED. 22. THE THIRD GRIEVANCE RELATES TO THE ADDITIONS IN RES PECT OF UNEXPLAINED TRANSACTIONS AMOUNTING TO RS. 28,47,300 /-. 23. DURING THE COURSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, TH E A.O. FOUND THE FOLLOWING TRANSACTIONS NOT PROPERLY EXPLAINED. SL. NO. ANN PG NO. DATE PERSON AMOUNT NARRATION 1 A1 6 09.05.2006 NILESHBHAI 67000 FREIGHT SURAT 2 A1 7 11.05.2006 NILESHBHAI 10000 SURAT FREIGHT 3 A1 8 12.05.2006 NILESHBHAI 5000 FREIGHT ACCOUNT 4 A1 3 03.05.2006 NARESHBHAI SHAH 280000 NARRATION IN THE CONCERNED DOCUMENT READS AS TO BUILDERS AGAINST PARAS BUNGLOWS. 5 A1 32 30.06.2006 R K SINGHAL 500000 LOAN 6 6 A5 6 - R K SINGHAL 500000 SAME AS IN ANNEXURE A1 PG 32 ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 8 7 A6 4 - PRITAMBHAI 250000 8 A10 3 - 550000 NOT EXPLAINED 9 A16 54 - 200000 NOT EXPLAINED 10 A16 62 - 25000 NOT EXPLAINED 11 A16 73 - 580000 NOT EXPLAINED: CHEQUE ENTRIES OF 5 LAKHS NOT TRACEABLE, RS. 2,35 LAKHS IN CASH REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS: 80000CASH NOT REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS 12 A16 75 - JEETUBHAI 390000 24. THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF AFO REMENTIONED TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSEE FILED A DETAILED REPLY WH ICH WAS NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE BY THE A.O. WHO WENT ON TO MAKE AN ADDIT ION OF RS. 28,47,300/- WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 25. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL ONCE AGAIN REPEATED WHAT HAS BEEN STATED BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE LD. D.R. C OULD NOT ADD ANYTHING NEW TO WHAT HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE A.O . AND THE LD. CIT(A). 26. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORI TIES BELOW. WE FIND THAT ENTRIES AT SERIAL NO. 1 & 2 HEREINABOV E ARE ALREADY ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 9 CONSIDERED AS INCOME IN THE HANDS OF OTHER GROUP CO MPANY AND, THEREFORE, CANNOT BE CONSIDERED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN. WE FURTHER FIND THAT ENTRIES AT SERIAL NO. 3 TO 6 HEREINABOVE ARE ALREADY CONSIDERED FOR THE CALCULATION OF PEAK CRED IT ON THE BASIS OF WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED RS. 29,08,148/-. FUR THER, CONSIDERATION UNDER THIS HEAD WOULD AMOUNT TO DOUBLE ADDITION. EN TRIES IN ITEM AT SERIAL NO.7 TO 12 TOTALING TO RS. 19,95,000/- ARE B ASED UPON DUMB DOCUMENTS FROM WHICH NO LOGICAL CONCLUSION CAN BE D RAWN. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ADDITIONS CANNOT BE SUSTAIN ED WHICH ARE BASED ON DUMB DOCUMENTS. FURTHER, THE DISCLOSURE OF RS. 2 9,08,148/- MADE BY THE ASSESSEE SHOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGLY DIRECT THE A.O. TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 28,47,300/-. THIS GRIEVANCE IS ALSO ALLOWED. 27. THE NEXT GRIEVANCE RELATES TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF R S. 4,76,396/- AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE. 28. DURING THE COURSE OF THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEE DINGS, THE A.O. FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED VARIOUS E XPENSES IN CASH WHICH DO NOT FORM PART OF THE WORKING OF PEAK CREDI T. THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFRONTED WITH THE CASH EXPENDITURE FOUND IN A NNEXURE-C AND WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN WHY ADDITION OF RS. 4,76,396/- SHOULD NOT BE MADE. 29. ASSESSEE FILED A DETAILED REPLY STATING THAT THE EX PENDITURES HAVE BEEN MET OUT OF UNACCOUNTED CASH SALE WHICH MEANS T HAT THE SOURCE OF EXPENDITURE IS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESS EE. THE ASSESSEE SOUGHT TELESCOPING OF THE SAME. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE A.O. WHO WAS OF THE FIRM B ELIEF THAT THE ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 10 COMPUTATION OF PEAK CREDIT DOES NOT DETERMINE THE U NDISCLOSED INCOME GENERATED BUT ONLY DETERMINES THE FUNDS INVOLVED IN THE UNACCOUNTED TRANSACTION. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O. DENIED THE BENEF IT OF TELESCOPING AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 4,76,396/- WHICH WAS CO NFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE ONCE AGAIN REQUESTED FOR TELESCOPING. THE LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE FINDINGS OF THE A.O. 30. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE FIN DINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION AND UN DERSTANDING OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN HAND, ONCE THE UNACCOUNTED TRA NSACTIONS HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED FOR WORKING OF THE PEAK CREDIT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING FURTHER ADDITIONS BASED UPO N UNACCOUNTED ENTRIES. FURTHER, WHEN THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE H AS BEEN ESTIMATED THEN ALL THE RELATED EXPENDITURES ARE DEEMED TO BE ALLOWED AND, THEREFORE, ANY FURTHER ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCES ARE UNWARRANTED AND UNCALLED FOR AND DESERVES TO BE DELETED. WE ACCORDI NGLY DIRECT THE A.O. TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 4,76,396/-. THIS GRIE VANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO ALLOWED. 31. THE LAST GRIEVANCE RELATES TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 8 7,103/- WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE A.O. BEING OF CAPITAL IN NATU RE. 32. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IF THE EXPENDITURE HAS B EEN TREATED AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE THEN THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED F OR DEPRECIATION AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. WE ACCORDINGLY DIREC T THE A.O. TO ALLOW DEPRECIATION ON THE CAPITAL EXPENDITURE OF RS. 87,1 03/- AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW. ITA NO. 855/ AHD/2011 . A.Y. 2007-08 11 33. BEFORE PARTING, CONSIDERING THE FACTS IN TOTALITY, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE DISCLOSURE OF RS. 29,08,148/- BASED ON THE WORKING OF PEAK CREDIT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE SHOULD MEET THE EN DS OF JUSTICE. 34. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 23- 06 - 2016. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHME DABAD