TAC Resources (I) Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 977/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 96505 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 18-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 21-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR B NISCHAL IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: Business income; Business expenditure; Reasonable cause; Non compliance; Commercial expediency; Revenue expenditure; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 37(1); 148; 37

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . ! , '!# BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NOS. 977 & 978/MDS/2014 ' $ %$ / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 & 2007-08. TAX RESOURCES (I) PVT. LTD, NO.224 & 232 OKKIAM THORAIPAKKAM, CHENNAI 600 096. VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE III(1) CHENNAI. [PAN AABCT 0662M ] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) &' ( ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. R. VIJAYARAGHAVAN, ADVOCATE *+&' ( ) /RESPONDENT BY : DR. B. NISCHAL, IRS, JCIT. ( , / DATE OF HEARING : 18-11-2015 -.% ( , / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11-12-2015 / O R D E R PER G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE TWO APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAIN ST THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS)- III, CHENNAI IN ITA NO.1408 & 1549/2013-14, DATED 2 9.11.2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 U/S. 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT AND FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 U/S. 143(3) AND 250 O F THE INCOME TAX ACT. ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 2 -: 2. THERE IS A DELAY OF 20 DAYS IN FILING THESE TWO AP PEALS BY THE ASSESSEE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LD.COUNSE L HAS FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR DELAY AND THE LD. DR HAS NO SERIOUS OBJECTION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE SATISFIED WITH REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY. THEREFORE THE DELAY IS CONDONED AND APPEALS ARE ADM ITTED. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEE COMPA NY IS IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING A TRAINING CENTER FOR CONST RUCTION AND METAL WORK AND FILING RETURN OF INCOME REGULARLY WITH INC OME TAX DEPARTMENT. THE ACCOUNTS ARE AUDITED UNDER COMPANI ES ACT, 1956 AND U/SEC 44AB OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 AND 2007-2008. THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 WAS FILED ON 03.11.2006 AND PROCESSED U/S .143(1) OF THE ACT ON 09.07.2007. SUBSEQUENTLY THE CASE WAS SELEC TED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS AND ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/SEC 143(3 ) ON 19.12.2008. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON PRESUMPTION OF INCOME HAS ESCAPED THE ASSESSMENT HAS ISSUED NOTICE U/SEC. 148 OF THE ACT AND CALLED FOR INFORMATIONS FROM TIME TO TIME AND ASSE SSEE COMPANY FILED THE DETAILS OF ACTIVITIES, OBJECTS, TRAINING WORKS, CONDUCTED UNDER THE LICENCE FROM GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND FURNISHED LETT ER NO. DGET 19/5/97-TC, DATED 8 TH FEBRUARY, 2000 FROM GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 3 -: DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING, MI NISTRY OF LABOUR, NEW DELHI FOR CONDUCTING TRAINING TO THE STUDENTS. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE EXPLAINED THAT THE COMPANY CONDUCTS TRAINING FOR UNSKILLED CONSTRUCTION WORK FOR THE STUDENTS FOR A PERIOD BETWEEN 45 TO 60 DAYS. FOR IMPARTING TRAINING, THE ASSESSEE PR OCURE MATERIALS FOR DIFFERENT PROJECTS AND UPON SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION O F TRAINING PROGRAMME STUDENTS ARE ISSUED CERTIFICATES. BUT T HE CONDITION PRESCRIBED BY THE GOVERNMENT WAS THAT NO FEES SHALL BE CHARGED FROM THE TRAINEES EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FOR IMPA RTING TRAINING. IN ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, LD. ASSESSING OFFICER RAISE D OBJECTION REGARDING CLAIM OF EXPENDITURE WHILE THE LD. AUTHO RIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COLLECTS FEES ONLY FOR FOOD AND ACCOMMODATION REFLECTED IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCO UNT BECAUSE OF STIPULATED CONDITION OF THE GOVERNMENT THAT THE ASS ESSEE SHOULD NOT COLLECT FEES FOR TRAINING. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICE R CONSIDERED THE INFORMATION AND VERIFIED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND REJECTED THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. O N THE GROUND OF MATCHING CONCEPT OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE, THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FURTHER EMPHASIZED THAT SUCH EXPENDITURE INCURRED I S NOT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE BUSINESS AND THERE IS NO NEXUS BETWEEN BUSINESS AND EXPENDITURE CLAIMED. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS S UBSTANTIATED ITS CLAIM BY FURNISHING ANNUAL REPORT ALONGWITH PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 4 -: BALANCE SHEET, AUDIT REPORT AND OTHER ANNEXURES AN D FOLLOWING GOING CONCEPT ACCOUNTING POLICY FROM THE EARLIER ASSESSME NT YEARS. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER HAS VERIFIED THE LEDGER COPIES, B ILLS AND VOUCHERS. SATISFIED WITH THE GENUINENESS OF EXPENDITURE BUT U NDER ASSUMPTION UNILATERALLY CONCLUDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE MATCHING CONCEPT OF INCOME AND EXPENDITURE ALSO NEX US BETWEEN BUSINESS AND EXPENDITURE AND DISALLOWED THE EXPENDI TURE (I) CONSUMABLES MF TRADE C18,15,647/- (II) CONSUMABLES SRF TRADE C11,69,650/- (III) 50% OF EMPLOYEES REMUNERATION C.6,84,234/- AND BENEFITS. ------------------ C36,69,531/- ------------------ AND COMPLETED ASSESSMENT AND PASSED ORDER U/SEC. 14 3(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT DATED 21.11.2011. SIMILARLY, FOR THE ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2007- 2008, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 15.11.2007 AND SUBSEQUENTLY NOTICE U/SEC. 143(2) WAS ISSUED. THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FURNISHED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS, LEDGER COPIES AND ALSO EXPLANATIONS MADE AS IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 6-2007. BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICER APPLYING THE SAME RATIO OF EARLIE R ASSESSMENT YEAR HAS DISALLOWED THE EXPENDITURE (I) CONSUMABLES MF TRADE C30,18,287/- (II) CONSUMABLES SRF TRADE C29,78,011/- (III) SALARY C6,93,520/- (IV) BONUS C1,33,550/- ------------------ C68,23,368/- ------------------- ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 5 -: AND PASSED THE ORDER U/SEC. 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 11.12.2009. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS SESSEE FILED APPEALS BEFORE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), CHENNA I FOR BOTH ASSESSMENT YEARS AND RAISED/ GROUNDS ON ADDITION. 4. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE ARGUED AND FILED W RITTEN SUBMISSIONS WITH OBSERVATIONS ON EACH DISALLOWANCE AND RELIED O N APEX COURT DECISION SREE MEENAKSHI MILLS LTD VS. CIT 63 ITR 207 (SC) AND ALSO PRODUCED LETTER FROM MINISTRY OF LABOUR, NEW DELHI WHICH HAS STIPULATED THE CONDITIONS FOR NON-CHARGING OF FEES. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY EXPLAINED THE SITUATION FOR COLLECTING RECE IPTS FROM THE STUDENTS REFERRED AT PARA 8.5 OF CIT(A) ORDER:- MOREOVER, IT IS NOT THAT THE APPELLANT IS RUNNING A BOARDING AND LODGING FACILITIES AND THAT FEES ARE COLLECTED ONLY FOR THE SAME. THE STUDENTS WHO STAY WITH THE APPELLANT HAV E COME FOR TRAINING PURPOSES ONLY AND THE PAYMENT OF FEES BY THEM IS ALL INCLUSIVE TOWARDS TRAINING, STAYING AND LODGING . THE FACT THAT THE APPELLANT IS PROVIDING TRAINING IN CONSTRU CTION WORK IS THE ONLY REASON FOR THE STUDENTS TO STAY IN THE APP ELLANTS PREMISES AND NOT FOR MERELY USING IT FOR LODGING FACILITIES THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NOT CONSI DERED THE SUBMISSIONS, AUDIT REPORT, AUDITED ACCOUNTS AND ALS O ACCOUNTING STANDARDS APPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE RELIED ONLY ON T HE LETTER OF THE GOVERNMENT AND OVERLOOKED FACTORS OF BUSINESS EXPE DIENCY AND SUCH EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES TO THE STUDENTS AND UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 6 -: DISMISSING THE APPEALS. AGGRIEVED, BY THE COMMON OR DER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL BY RAISING GROUNDS ON SUCH DIS ALLOWANCE FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. 5. BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, THE LD. COUNSEL ARGUED THAT TH E COMPANY WAS INCORPORATED FOR CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN INDIA AND THE ACTIVITIES ARE AS PER THE OBJECTS OF MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION, WHICH ARE LEGAL AND ALSO COMPLY WITH THE ACCOUNTING PRINC IPLES AND ACCOUNTING POLICES OF THE ICAI. THE ASSESSING OFFI CER ERRED IN DISALLOWING THE EXPENDITURE AFTER HAVING SATISFIED WITH THE GENUINESS OF CLAIM ON VERIFICATION OF VOUCHERS AND LEDGER ACCOU NTS AND ASSESSEE COMPANY COMPLIED WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA FOR TRAINING STUDENTS IN CONSTRUCTION WORKS AND SUCH DI SALLOWANCE BY ASSESSING OFFICER IS ON SUSPICION, SURMISES AND NON COMPLIANCE OF PROVISIONS OF SEC. 37(1) OF THE ACT. FURTHER, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY REL YING ON THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND V EHEMENTLY ARGUED FOR DISMISSAL OF THE APPEALS. ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 7 -: 7. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES , MATERIAL ON RECORD AND LOWER AUTHORITIES ORDERS. THE LD. CO UNSEL HAS FILED PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND AUDITED REPORT ALONGWIT H INCOME TAX PARTICULARS AND DRAWN OUR ATTENTION SECTION 37(1) O F THE INCOME TAX ACT WERE ANY EXPENDITURE (NOT BEING EXPENDITURE OF THE NAT URE DESCRIBED IN SECTIONS 30 TO 36 AND NOT BEING IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURE OR PERSONAL EXPENSES OF THE ASS ESSEE) LAID OUT OR EXPENDED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION SHALL BE ALLOWED IN COMPU TING THE INCOME CHARGEABLE UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAIN S OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION . THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS COMPLYING THE INCOME TAX PR OVISIONS BY ADOPTING THE ACCOUNTING POLICES OF THE ICAI. ON PE RUSAL OF PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED THE INCOME AND CLAIMED EXPENDITURE AS PER THE SCHEDULES OF AUDITED ACCOUNT S. THE ACCOUNTING SYSTEM FOLLOWED BY THE COMPANY IS NOT IN DISPUTE OR AMBIGUITY IN THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED BUT THE LD.ASSESSING OFFICER RE LIED HEAVILY ON MATCHING PRINCIPLE. THE TERM BUSINESS HAS BEEN DEF INED U/SEC. 2(13) OF THE ACT AS UNDER:- BUSINESS INCLUDES ANY TRADE, COMMERCE OR MAN UFACTURE OR ANY ADVENTURE OR CONCERN IN THE NATURE OF TRADE, COMMERCE OR MANUFACTURE . ANY BUSINESS INCOME OR EXPENDITURE HAS TO BE DEALT UNDER CHAPTER IV- COMPUTATION OF BUSINESS INCOME. ON INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 37 AND SECTION 2(13) OF THE ACT, THE EXPENDITURE SHALL BE REVENUE IN NATURE AND EXPENDED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE S OF BUSINESS. ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 8 -: THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN BUSINESS HAS BEEN FOLLOWING THE SYSTEM OF ACCOUNTING FROM ITS INCORPORATION AND IS ACCEPTED B Y REVENUE. THE COMPANY IS FORMED WITH PROFIT EARNING MOTIVE AND TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT AND PAY STATUTORY TAXES TO THE GOVERNMEN T. THE MAIN OBJECT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS TO PROVIDE TRAINI NG FOR UNSKILLED CONSTRUCTION WORK FOR THE STUDENTS WHICH IS A SOCIA L RESPONSIBILITY AND AT THE SAME TIME THE ASSESSEE IS COLLECTING NOMINAL FEES FOR FOOD AND ACCOMMODATION CHARGES. THE COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY T EST CAN BE PROVED IN SITUATION WERE A SUM OF MONEY EXPENDED, WITH A VIEW TO GET DIRECT OR INDIRECT BENEFIT TO THE TRADE AND TO FACILITATE THE CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESS ING OFFICER IS BIASED ON MATCHING CONCEPT PRINCIPLES AND WRONGLY INTERPRE TED THAT EXPENDITURE IS NOT INCURRED OUT OF BUSINESS INCOME WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY AND INDIRECT BENEFIT TO T HE COMPANY AND SOCIETY. THE COMPANY IS BENEFITED WITH RECEIPTS FRO M STUDENTS AND ALSO BY MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. WE RELY ON THE PRINCIPLES FOR TEST OF SCOPE OF BUSINESS EXPENDITURE WHOLLY AN D EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AS HELD IN THE SUPREME COURT CA SE EASTERN INVESTMENTS LTD VS. CIT (1951) 20 ITR 1 (SC) , WHERE THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES WERE LAID DOWN:- (A) THOUGH THE QUESTION MUST BE DECIDED ON THE FACTS OF EACH CASE, THE FINAL CONCLUSION IS ONE OF LAW: ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 9 -: (B) IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SHOW THAT THE EXPENDITURE WAS A PROFITABLE ONE OR THAT IN FACT ANY PROFIT WAS EARNED; (C) IT IS ENOUGH TO SHOW THAT THE MONEY WAS EXPENDED NOT OF NECESSITY AND WITH A VIEW TO A DIRECT AND IMMEDIATE BENEFIT TO THE TRADE, BUT VOLUNTARILY AND ON THE GROUND OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY, AND IN ORDER INDIRECTLY TO FACILITATE T HE CARRYING ON OF THE BUSINESS. (D) BEYOND THAT NO HARD AND FAST RULE CAN BE LAID DOWN TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS MEANT BY THE WORD SOLELY, OCCURRING IN THE PRE-1939 LAW. THE TEST WAS CONSIDERED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN STATE OF MADRAS VS. G.J. COELHO (1964) (53 ITR 186) WERE EXPENDITURE MADE UNDER A TRANSACTION WHICH IS SO CLOSELY RELATED TO THE BUSI NESS THAT IT COULD BE VIEWED AS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE CONDUCT OF THE BU SINESS, MAY BE REGARDED AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE LAID OUT WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS N OT VIOLATED ANY LAW AND EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN INCURRED FOR RUNNING BUSIN ESS. THE TEST OF COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY IS A CRITERIA FOR ALLOWABILIT Y AND EXPENDITURE INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY LAID OUT FOR THE PU RPOSE OF THE BUSINESS. THE REASONABLENESS OF THE EXPENDITURE H AS TO BE JUDGED FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE BUSINESS AND NOT OF R EVENUE AND SUCH POINT OF VIEW SHOULD BE PRUDENT AND REASONABLE WHIC H IS FREE FROM AN APPARENT TAINT OF EXCESSIVENESS, COLLUSIVENESS OR C OLOURABLE DISCRETION AND ALWAYS THE NATURE OF EXPENDITURE HAS TO BE JUD GED IN THE LIGHT OF COMMERCIAL PRACTICE AND TRADING PRINCIPLES. THE AP EX COURT HAS HELD IN CIT VS. MALAYALAM PLANTATIONS LTD (1964) 53 ITR 140(SC) THAT THE ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 10 -: EXPRESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS IS WIDER IN SCOPE THAN THE EXPRESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF EARNING PROFIT S AS OBSERVED AT PAGE 150 AS UNDER:- THE AFORESAID DISCUSSION LEADS TO THE FOLLOWING RESULT: THE EXPRESSION 'FOR THE PURPOSE OF EARNING BUSINESS' IS WIDER IN SCOPE THAN THE EXPRESSION 'FOR THE PURPOSE OF EARNING PROFITS'. ITS RANGE IS WIDE: IT MAY TAKE IN NOT ONLY THE DAY TO DAY RUNNING OF A BUSINESS BUT ALSO THE RATIONALIZATION OF ITS ADMINISTRATION AND MODERNIZATION OF ITS MACHINERY; IT MAY INCLUDE MEASURES FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE BUSINESS AND FOR THE PROTECTION OF ITS ASSETS AND PROPERTY FROM EXPROPRIATION, COERCIVE PROCESS OR ASSERTION OF HOSTILE TITLE; IT MAY ALSO COMPREHEND PAYMENT OF STATUTORY DUES AND TAXES IMPOSED AS A PRE-CONDITION TO COMMENCE OR FOR CARRYING ON OF A BUSINESS; IT MAY COMPREHEND MANY OTHER ACTS INCIDENTAL TO THE CARRYING ON OF A BUSINESS. HOWEVER WIDE THE MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION MAY BE, ITS LIMITS ARE IMPLICIT IN IT. T HE PURPOSE SHALL BE FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS, THAT IS TO SAY, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED SHALL BE F OR THE CARRYING ON OF THE BUSINESS AND THE ASSESSEE SHALL INCUR IT IN HIS CAPACITY AS A PERSON CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS. IT CANNOT INCLUDE SUMS SPENT BY THE ASSESSEE AS AGENT OF A THIRD PARTY, WHETHER THE ORIGIN OF THE AGENCY IS VOLUNTARY OR STATUTORY; IN THAT EVENT, HE PAYS THE AMOUNT ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER AND FOR A PURPOSE UNCONNECTED WITH THE BUSINESS. WE FIND IT IS APPARENT FROM THE FACTS OF THE CASE , AND PRINCIPLES OF LAW, THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPA NY IS GENUINE AND HAS INDIRECT BENEFIT TO THE COMPANY FOR FUTURE BUSI NESS AND SATISFYING COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (APPEALS) HAS IGNORED THE TEST OF BUSINESS EXPEDI ENCY. THEREFORE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) AND ITA NOS.977 & 978/MDS/2014. :- 11 -: DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF C36,69,531/- FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AND C68,23,368/- FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-2008 AND ALLOW THE APPEALS IN FAVOUR OF T HE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA N OS.977 & 978/MDS/2014 ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMB ER, 2015, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . ! ) (G. PAVAN KUMAR) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / CHENNAI / / DATED:11.12.2015 KV 0 ( *',23 43%, / COPY TO: 1 . &' / APPELLANT 3. 5, () / CIT(A) 5. 389 *',' / DR 2. *+&' / RESPONDENT 4. 5, / CIT 6. 9 $ : / GF