Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, V. Kolhapur Mahila Sahakari Bank Ltd., Kolhapur

ITA 956/PUN/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9454 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-05-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 18-06-2015
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT BOBATE
• Assessee Lawyers: SUS HANT PHADNIS
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 145

Judgement Text

] IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM . / ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 31/C-2, TARABAI PARK, KOLHAPUR. . / APPELLANT V/S KOLHAPUR MAHILA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., 1082-KH, B WARD, TUTUCHI BAG, OPP KHASBAG, KOLHAPUR. PAN : AAAAK0367R. . / RESPONDENT / APPELLANT BY : SHRI AMIT BOBATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUSHANT PHADNIS / ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS EMANATING OUT OF THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) 1&2, PUNE DATED 09.03.2015 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER :- / DATE OF HEARING : 20.04.2017 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 17.05.2017 2 ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 AY.NO.2011-12 2.1 ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE BANK, ELECTRONICALLY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2011-12 ON 17.09.2011 DECLARING TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.23,55,552/-. THEREAFTER, ASSESSEE ON 06.06.2012 FILED REVISED RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.20,28,454/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER DT.11.12.2013 AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.1,26,65,405/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD.CIT(A), WHO VIDE ORDER DT.09.03.2015 (IN APPEAL NO.KOP/434/13-14) GRANTED SUBSTANTIAL RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW; THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON NON PERFORMING ASSETS OF RS.74,93,525/-; WHEN IT WAS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FLOUTED THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY THE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SOUTHERN TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED REPORTED IN 320 ITR 577. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON NON PERFORMING ASSETS; WHEN IT WAS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TREATED THE SAID AMOUNT IN THE CONCEPT OF REAL INCOME; AND IT IS SETTLED LEGAL POSITION THAT THE CONCEPT OF REAL INCOME CANNOT BE EMPLOYED SO AS TO DEFEAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND THE RULES. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON NON PERFORMING ASSETS; WHEN IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS IMPORTED THE CONCEPT OF REAL INCOME, THEREBY WHITTLING DOWN, QUALIFYING AND DEFEATING THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND RULES. 4. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON NON PERFORMING ASSETS; WHEN IT WAS EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TREATED THE SAME ON THE CONCEPT OF REAL INCOME, THEREBY DEFEATING THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S SHIV PRAKASH JANAK RAJ AND CO PVT. LTD REPORTED IN 222 ITR 583. 5. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON NON PERFORMING ASSETS; WHEN IT EVIDENT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EMPLOYED THE CONCEPT OF REAL INCOME SO AS 3 ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 AY.NO.2011-12 TO DEFEAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND RULES, THEREBY FLOUTING THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE VS CIT(1986) 158/ITR 102/24 TAXMAN 337(SC). 3. BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD.D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH THE REVENUE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS BUT THE SOLITARY ISSUE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE ISSUE OF DELETION OF INCOME ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUAL OF INTEREST ON NON-PERFORMING ASSETS. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAD CLASSIFIED ITS LOANS AND ADVANCES AS STANDARD AND NON-PERFORMING ASSETS. ASSESSEE HAD CREDITED THE INTEREST RECEIVED FROM STANDARD LOANS BUT THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE ON NON-PERFORMING ASSETS WAS NOT CREDITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THEREFORE WAS NOT OFFERED TO TAX. THE TOTAL INTEREST ACCRUED ON SUCH NPA ACCOUNTS WAS RS.74,93,525/-. AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRUDENTIAL / PROVISIONING NORMS ISSUED BY RESERVE BANK OF INDIA UNDER THE RBI ACT, WHEREBY THE INCOME AS NPA ACCOUNTS ARE NOT CONSIDERED AS INCOME, CANNOT HAVE OVER-RIDING EFFECT ON THE INCOME TAX PROVISIONS. HE WAS FURTHER OF THE VIEW THAT THE PROVISIONS FOR SEC.43D OF THE ACT WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE BEING A CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND IN THE ABSENCE OF SUCH A PROVISION FOR CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND MOREOVER SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING, INTEREST INCOME ON NON-PERFORMING ASSETS ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND IS LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED AS INCOME. HE ACCORDINGLY MADE ADDITION OF RS.74,93,525/-. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF AO, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A), WHO FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE, DELETED THE ADDITION MADE BY AO BY HOLDING AS UNDER : 4 ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 AY.NO.2011-12 17. GROUND NO.5 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS.74,93,525/- BEING ACCRUED INTEREST ON NPA. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOTED THAT INTEREST RECEIVABLE OR ACCRUED ON THE NPAS IS NOT CREDITED OR OFFERED FOR TAXATION BY THE ASSESSEE IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. THE AMOUNT OF THIS INTEREST WAS RS. 74,93,525/-. AFTER CONSIDERING THE APPELLANTS REPLY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ADDED THIS AMOUNT TO APPELLANTS INCOME. THE AO HAS HELD THAT IN THE MATTERS OF INCOME-TAX PROCEEDINGS, PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT SUPERSEDE ALL OTHER LAWS AND GUIDELINES FRAMED BY THE RBI HAVE TO BE APPLIED ONLY TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE INCOME-TAX ACT. RBI GUIDELINES HAVE BEEN ISSUED UNDER DELEGATED LEGISLATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION AND CONTROL OF MONETARY AND CREDIT SYSTEM AND TO SUPERVISE AND EXERCISE CONTROL ON BANKS AND NBFCS. RBI GUIDELINES WOULD NOT OVERRIDE THE MANDATORY PROVISIONS OF SECTION 145 AND ACCRUAL SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING, THE INTEREST INCOME FROM ASSETS INCLUDING NPAS HAS TO BE ASSESSED TO TAX ON ACCRUAL BASIS. 18. BEFORE THE UNDERSIGNED, SIMILAR CONTENTIONS WERE TAKEN AS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS ALSO STATED THAT RECOVERY DURING THE YEAR IS MORE THAN THE PROVISION THEREFORE, DISALLOWANCE SHOULD NOT BE MADE. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT PROVISIONS FOR NPA ARE MADE AS PER GUIDELINES OF RBI. WHEN THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT ITSELF IS OF DOUBTFUL RECOVERY, THE INTEREST CANNOT BE ACCRUED AND ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ERRED IN DISALLOWING THE PROVISION FOR INTEREST. GUIDELINES REGARDING PROVISIONS FOR DEBTS AND NPA HAVE BEEN MADE AS MEASURE OF PRUDENCE. BY SUCH PROVISIONING THE BANK IS CUSHIONED FROM UNNECESSARY SHOCK IF CERTAIN DEBTS TURNED BAD. THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY RBI ARE MANDATORY ON THE BANKS WHICH ARE UNDER SUPERVISION OF THE RBI. 19. FACTS AS ABOVE. I HAVE GONE THROUGH VARIOUS CASE LAWS CITED BY THE APPELLANT. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CREDITED INTEREST IS A FACT. APPELLANT HAS FURNISHED COPY OF ORDER OF ITAT PUNE A BENCH DATED 29/01/2014 IN ITA NO.01/PN/2013 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THIS ISSUE WAS SUBJECT MATTER IN THE SAID ORDER AND THE ITAT HAS UPHELD ORDER OF CIT(A), KOLHAPUR DELETING SIMILAR ADDITION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AT PARAGRAPH 2.2 IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT : NOTHING CONTRARY WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. FACTS BEING SIMILAR, SO FOLLOWING THE SAME REASON, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE IN THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A) WHO HAS HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43D WERE APPLICABLE TO ASSESSEES SOCIETY BEING NON SCHEDULED BANK BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF OSMANABAD JANTA SAHAKARI BANK LTD., FURTHER, THE CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE INTEREST INCOME DIRECTLY CREDITED TO THE BALANCE SHEET WAS NOT REAL INCOME. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IS UPHELD. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE ITAT AS ABOVE, THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DELETED. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. BEFORE US, LD.D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AO. LD.A.R. ON THE OTHER HAND, REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE AO AND LD. CIT(A) AND FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE AROSE IN ASSESSEES OWN 5 ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 AY.NO.2011-12 CASE IN A.Y. 2010-11 AND THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. HE PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY OF THE DECISION DT.31.12.2015 IN ITA NO.154/PUN/2014. HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S.DEOGIRI NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD., AND OTHERS ORDER DT.22.01.2015. HE THEREFORE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL OF REVENUE NEEDS TO BE DISMISSED. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS WITH RESPECT TO ADDITION MADE BY AO ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUAL OF INCOME ON NPA ACCOUNTS. WE FIND THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE AROSE IN CASE OF ASSESSEE IN A.Y. 2010-11 BEFORE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF DEOGIRI NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD., (SUPRA) DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER :- 5. THE ISSUE IN GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS IN RELATION TO THE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF ACCRUED INTEREST ON NPAS OF RS.94,99,366/-. 6. BRIEFLY, IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE IS A COOPERATIVE BANK ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BANKING. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CREDITED THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE OR ACCRUED ON NON-PERFORMING ASSETS (REFERRED TO AS NPAS) TO ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE CAPTIONED ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD WAS THAT IN VIEW OF RBI GUIDELINES, THE SAID INTEREST INCOME ON NPAS WAS TO BE RECOGNIZED, BUT NOT TO BE OFFERED TO TAX. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING, THE INTEREST ACCRUED ON NPAS IS TO BE ADDED IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE AND ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.94,99,366/- WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE. 7. THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 9. WE FIND THAT SIMILAR ISSUE AS BEFORE US AROSE IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE IN ITA NO .01/PN/2013, RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, VIDE ORDER DATED 29.01.2014. THE TRIBUNAL IN TURN FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE PUNE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN ACIT VS. OSMANABAD JANTA 6 ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 AY.NO.2011-12 SAHAKARI BANK LTD. IN ITA NO.795/PN/2011, ORDER DATED 31.08.2012, HELD AS UNDER:- '2. THE ASSESSEE IS A CO-OPERATIVE BANK ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF ACCEPTING DEPOSITS FROM MEMBERS AND GIVING LOANS TO MEMBERS. IT HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 11.09.2009 FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT 14,57,840/-. IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT CREDITED INTEREST RECEIVABLE OR ACCRUED ON NON-PERFORMING ASSETS (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS NPA) TO ITS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER REJECTING THE VARIOUS CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE HAS HELD THAT THE RBI GUIDELINES ARE NOT INTENDED TO REGULATE THE INCOME TAX LAW AND THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE TO BE ASSESSED ON ACCRUAL BASIS U/S.5 OF I.T. ACT FOR THE REASONS (I) BEN EFITS EXTENDED TO SCHEDULE BANK, PUBLIC FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, PUBLIC COMPANIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 43D WERE NOT EXTENDED TO A CO-OPERATIVE BANK AND (II) THE ASSESSEE WAS FOLLOWING MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING AND NOT CASH SYSTEM. ULTIMATELY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TAXED ON ACCRUED INTEREST OF 25,20,022/- ADVANCE CLAIMED TO BE NPA ACCOUNT. THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY WHEREIN, FOLLOWING THE OSMANABAD JANTA SAHAKARI BANK LTD. IN ITA NO.795/PN/2011, THE CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME HAS BEEN OPPOSED BEFORE US ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. 2.1 AFTER GOING THROUGH THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT IN OSMANABAD JANTA SAHAKARI BANK LTD. (SUPRA) THE TRIBUNAL HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: '7. IN THE CASE BEFORE US, ADMITTEDLY, ASSESSEE HAS DIRECTLY TAKEN THE INTEREST TO THE BALANCE SHEET AND IT IS NOT ROUTED THROUGH THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT. MOREOVER, THE ISSUE OF THE TAXABILITY OF THE INTEREST ON THE STICKY LOSSES/ADVANCES, IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCHES IN THE CASE OF THE DURGA COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK LTD., VIJAYAWADA (SUPRA) AND KARNAVATI COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. (SUPRA). WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE REASONED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. IN THE RESULT, THE REVENUE'S GROUND IS DISMISSED.' THE ABOVE DECISION HAS BEEN FOLLOWED IN (I) ACIT, CIRCLE -3, NANDED V/S BHAGYALAXMI MAHILA SAHAKAR BANK LTD. ITA NO.793/PN/2011, (II) ACIT, CIRCLE -3 V/S SIDHESHWAR SAHAKARI BANK LTD. ITA NO.794/PN/2011, (III) ACIT (CENTRAL) V/S LATUR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. ITA NO.792/PN/2011 AND (IV) ASST. CIT, CIRCLE -1 V/S DEOGIRI NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD. ITA NO.8 17 & 1114/PN/2011. ' 10. THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. M/S. DEOGIRI NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD. IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.53 OF 2014 & ORS. HAS LAID DOWN THE PROPOSITION THAT THE INTEREST ACCRUED ON NPAS IS NOT TAXABLE IN THE HANDS OF ASSESSEE, IN VIEW OF THE GUIDELINES ISSUED BY THE RBI. 11. THE ISSUE IN GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 ARISING BEFORE US IS IDENTICAL TO THE ISSUE BEFORE THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. M/S. DEOGIRI NAGARI SAHAKARI BANK LTD. (SUPRA) AND TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE AND FOLLOWING THE SAME PARITY OF REASONING, WE HOLD THAT NO ADDITION IS WARRANTED ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ACCRUED ON NPAS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS.94,99,366/-. THE GROUND OF APPEAL NO.1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS THUS, ALLOWED. 7. BEFORE US, REVENUE HAS NOT PLACED ANY CONTRARY BINDING DECISION IN ITS SUPPORT NOR PLACED ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD TO DEMONSTRATE THAT 7 ITA NO.956/PUN/2015 AY.NO.2011-12 THE ORDER OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2010-11 HAS BEEN SET ASIDE BY HIGHER JUDICIAL FORUM. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FACTS WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A) AND THUS THE GROUNDS OF REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 17 TH DAY OF MAY, 2017. SD/- SD/- ( VIKAS AWASTHY ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE; DATED : 17 TH DAY OF MAY, 2017. YAMINI / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3 . 4. 5 6. CIT(A)-11, PUNE CIT(CENTRAL), PUNE. , , / DR, ITAT, B PUNE; [ / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // // TRUE COPY // // TRUE COPY // / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, , / ITAT, PUNE.