Riddhi Siddhi Gluco Biols Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The ACIT, Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 27/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2444 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 09-02-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AP ARNA AGRAWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: P D SHAH
• Keywords: Capital asset; Retrospective amendment
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 234B

Judgement Text

, A IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.(SS)A. NO. 27/AHD/2015 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD. 701, SAKAR-I, OPP. GANDHIGRAM RAILWAY STATION, ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD - 380009 / VS. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), AHMEDABAD. ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAB CR3 417 Q ( APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : P.D. SHAH, A.R. / RESPONDENT BY : APARNA AGRAWAL, CIT DR DATE OF HEARING 09/05/2019 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20/06/2019 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-12, AHMEDA BAD (CIT(A) IN SHORT), DATED 28.11.2014 ARISING IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.03.2014 PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) UND ER S. 143(3) R.W.S IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 - 153B(1)(B) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) CO NCERNING A.Y. 2012-13. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RE ADS AS UNDER:- 1. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS BY NOT QUASHING THE ORDER PA SSED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER, AS THE PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 153A AND ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED AO IS WITHOUT JURIS DICTION AND BAD IN LAW AND FACTS AND THEREFORE THE LEARNED AO BE DI RECTED TO ACCEPT THE INCOME TAX, INTEREST AND ALL OTHERS PARTICULARS AS PER THE RETURN OF INCOME. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO GROUND NO.1: 2. THAT PROPER TAXES, SURCHARGE, CESS IS TO BE COMP UTED AND PROPER CREDIT OF PRE PAID TAXES IS TO BE GIVEN. 3. THAT INTEREST CHARGED UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234 C IS AGAINST THE FACTS AND LAW AND THEREFORE THE LEARNED AO BE DIREC TED TO BE DELETE THE INTEREST CHARGED UNDER SECTION 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LIBERTY TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER AND DELETE ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE FINAL HEARING. 3. GROUND NO. 1 AND GROUND NO. 2 WAS NOT PRESSED AN D THEREFORE DISMISSED. 4. THIS ESSENTIALLY LEAVES US WITH GROUND NO. 3 WHE REBY THE ASSESSEE HAS DENIED ITS LIABILITY TOWARDS CHARGE OF INTEREST UNDER S. 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT ON CAPITAL GAINS ACCRUED T O THE ASSESSEE. 5. WHEN THE MATTER WAS CALLED FOR HEARING THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUTSET SUBMITTED THAT PURSUANT TO S CHEME DEMERGER WITH EFFECT FROM 1 ST OCTOBER 2011, CERTAIN CAPITAL GAINS WERE ACCRUED T O THE ASSESSEE U/S. 50B OF THE ACT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THA T THE CAPITAL GAINS WERE ACCOUNTED IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR (F.Y.) 2011-12 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR (A.Y.) 2012-13 IN QUESTION WITH REF ERENCE TO IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 - DEMERGER SANCTIONED BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COU RT AT THE LATER DATE. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT T HE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT SANCTIONED THE PETITION FOR DEMERGER ON 07 TH FEBRUARY, 2012. A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT WAS REQUESTED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE NEXT DATE THAT IS ON 08 TH FEBRUARY, 2012. A CERTIFIED COPY WAS FINALLY READY ON 1 ST MAY, 2012. THE ASSESSEE FILED FORM NO. 7 ALONG WITH CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT ON 29 TH MAY, 2012 WHICH RESULTED IN IMPLEMENTATION OF DEMERGER EFFECTIVE FROM 1 ST OCTOBER, 2011. IN THE LIGHT OF THE CHRONOLOGY EVENTS NOTED ABOVE, THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT ALTHOUGH THE DEMERGER WAS MADE EFFECTIVE FROM 1 ST OCTOBER, 2011, THE CAPITAL GAIN ON DEMERGER ACCRUE D AND EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY ON ISSUANCE OF SANCTION ORDER BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT AND ON COMPLIANCE OF SUBSEQUENT POST SANCTION FORMALITIES ON 29 TH MAY, 2012. THEREFORE, ALTHOUGH THE CAPITAL GAIN FALLS FOR TAXATION IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12 TH AT IS ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13, THE ASSESSEE WAS IN NO POSITION TO VI SUALIZE ACCRUAL OF SUCH INCOME TILL 29 TH MAY, 2012. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LIABILITY OF INTEREST ON NON-PAYMENT OF TAX FLOWING FROM THE CAP ITAL GAINS ARISING FROM DEMERGER SCHEME [WHICH STOOD SANCTIONED ON 29 TH MAY, 2012 WITH DEMERGER EFFECTIVE FROM 1 ST OCTOBER, 2011] UNDER S. 234C AND S. 234B CANNOT BE FASTENED ON THE ASSESSEE TILL 29 TH MAY, 2012. IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 4 - 6. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT NOTWITHSTANDING MANDAT ORY NATURE OF COMPENSATORY INTEREST PAYABLE UNDER S. 234C AND 234 B, THE LAW CANNOT ENVISAGE A PERSON TO DO THE IMPOSSIBLE. THE LD. AR ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THAT THE CHARGE OF INTEREST UNDER 234C IS TOTALLY ILLEGITIMATE AS THE ACCRUAL OF INCOME TOWARDS CAPITAL GAIN WAS N OT CERTAIN AND CONTINGENT UPON THE SANCTION OF DEMERGER SCHEME BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT WHICH SANCTION WAS FORMALIZED ON 29 TH MAY, 2012 ONLY. SIMILARLY, THE INTEREST LIABILITY U/S. 234B CANNOT BE FASTENED ON THE ASSESSEE TILL 29 TH MAY, 2012 AS THE CAPITAL GAINS STOOD ACCRUED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE ON THAT DATE ALBEIT FROM A RETROSPECTIVE DATE OF 1 ST OCTOBER, 2011 AS APPLIED FOR BEFORE THE HONBLE CO URT. THE LD. AR THUS SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE WAS NOT JUSTIFIE D IN IMPOSING INTEREST ON NON-PAYMENT OF TAX ON CAPITAL GAINS ARI SING FROM DEMERGER TILL 29 TH MAY, 2012 EITHER U/S. 234C OR U/S. 234B OF THE ACT . THE LD. AR THUS DENIED THE LIABILITY OF INTEREST TILL 29 TH MAY, 2012 IN TOTO AND PRAYED FOR A DIRECTION FROM THE TRIBUNAL FOR REVERS AL OF LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234C OF THE ACT. LIKEWISE A SIMILAR DIRECTION WAS PLEADED FOR NON-LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234B TILL MAY 2012. 7. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, REFERRED THE LEGI SLATIVE PROVISION IN THIS REGARD AND SUBMITTED THAT NO EXPRESS STIPUL ATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE IN THE ACT FOR EXEMPTION FROM COMPENSATORY LIA BILITY OF INTEREST UNDER S. 234B AND S. 234C. IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 5 - 8. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIO NS. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT LIABILITY OF INTEREST FOR NON-PAYMENT OF TAX CAN ARISE UNDER S. 234C AND S. 234B ONLY WHERE THE INCOME HAD ACTUALLY ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE H AS, IN THE ORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES, COMMITTED DEFAULT IN PAYMENT OF TAX IN PRESCRIBED PERIOD. 8.1 BEFORE WE PROCEED TO THE CORE CONTROVERSY, WE N OTICE THAT HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN CENTRAL PROVINCES MANGANES E ORE CO. LTD. VS. CIT IN [1986] 160 ITR 961 (SC) HAS HELD THAT LE VY OF INTEREST IS PART OF ASSESSMENT AND HENCE ASSESSEE CAN DISPUTE S UCH LEVY IN APPEAL WHERE HE OUTRIGHTLY DENIES HIS LIABILITY TO THE LEV Y. WE NOW TURN TO INTEREST LIABILITY FOR DEFAULT OF PAYMENT OF ADVANC E TAX. SECTION 234C ENJOINS PAYMENT OF INTEREST FOR DEFERMENT OF TAX AT THE PRESCRIBE RATE. AS PER SEC. 211, ADVANCE TAXES ARE PAYABLE BY COMPA NIES IN FOUR INSTALLMENTS AS A SPECIFIED IN THE AFORESAID PROVIS ION AND IF THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO PAY CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF TAX AS SPECIFIED OR IF THE AMOUNT PAID FALLS SHORT OF SPECIFIED PERCENTAGE OF AMOUNT PAYABLE, THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST AT A SPECI FIED PERCENTAGE. SECTION 234C FURTHER PROVIDES THAT IF THE SHORT FAL L IN PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX IS DUE TO FAILURE TO INTER ALIA ESTIMATE CAPITAL GAINS AND THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE TAX PAYABLE WITH RESPECT TO SUCH INCOME IN THE BALANCE INSTALLMENTS DUE OR WHERE NO SUCH INSTA LLMENTS ARE DUE BY 31 ST MARCH, NO INTEREST WOULD PAYABLE. ACCORDINGLY, IF AN ASSESSEE HAS IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 6 - SOLD A CAPITAL ASSET BETWEEN 16 TH SEPTEMBER AND 15 TH DECEMBER AND PAYS THE TAX DUE ON CAPITAL GAINS IN TWO INSTALLMEN TS THAT IS ON OR BEFORE 15 TH DECEMBER AND ON OR BEFORE 15 TH MARCH NO INTEREST WOULD BE PAYABLE ON ACCOUNT OF SHORT FALL IN PAYMENT OF A DVANCE TAX IN FIRST TWO INSTALLMENTS. THUS, THE LAW RECOGNIZES CONCEPT OF ACTUAL ACCRUAL EXPLICITLY IN SO FAR AS CAPITAL GAINS ARE CONCERNED . THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT IS THEREFORE EXPLICITLY CLEAR THAT ASSESSEE IS EXPECTED TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISION OF LAW TOWARDS PAYMENT OF ADVANC E TAX ONLY WHEN THE INCOME HAS LEGITIMATELY ACCRUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND RIGHT TO RECEIVE THE INCOME HAS ACCRUED. IN THE INSTANT CA SE, THE CAPITAL GAINS THOUGH DEEMED TO HAVE ACCRUED FROM THE EFFECTIVE DA TE OF DEMERGER THAT IS 1 ST OCTOBER 2011 BY VIRTUE OF COURT ORDER, THE RIGHT T O RECEIVE THE INCOME ACCRUED ONLY WHEN THE DEMERGER WAS EVENT UALLY SANCTIONED AND ALL CONNECTED LEGAL FORMALITIES WERE DULY COMPL IED WHICH HAPPENED ONLY IN THE SUBSEQUENT FINANCIAL YEAR. TH EREFORE, NOTWITHSTANDING THE FACT THAT THE INCOME TOWARDS CA PITAL GAINS ON DEMERGER WAS ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 20 11-12 OWING TO FORMAL SANCTION FROM A DATE, EFFECTIVE AND FALLING IN THE CURRENT FINANCIAL YEAR, THE LEGAL SANCTION ACTUALLY TOOK PL ACE IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. THIS BEING SO, THE ASSESSEE BEING DEPENDENT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE COURT PROCEEDINGS, WAS IN NO POSITIO N TO VISUALIZE THE TAX LIABILITY TOWARDS CAPITAL GAINS AND THEREFORE T HE DEFAULT, IF ANY, COULD BE FATHOMED ONLY AFTER THE EVENT DATE I.E. 29 TH MAY, 2012. IN IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 7 - THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, NO INTEREST UNDER S. 234C COULD LEVIED FOR NON- PAYMENT OF ADVANCED TAX IN THE SPECIFIED INSTALLMEN TS. 8.2 LIKEWISE, INTEREST UNDER 234B IS PAYABLE FOR NO N-PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX OR SHORT PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX IN A FI NANCIAL YEAR. THUS, IF AN ASSESSEE EITHER FAILS TO PAY THE WHOLE OF ADV ANCE TAX OR WHERE THE ADVANCE TAX PAID BY HIM IS LESS THAN 90 PER CENT OF THE ASSESSED TAX, HE SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST AT A SPECIFIED PERC ENTAGE FROM 1 ST APRIL OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR TILL THE DATE OF DETERMINATI ON OF TOTAL INCOME OR UP TO THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF TAX UNDER S. 140A OF T HE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HEREIN CLAIMS THAT INTEREST UNDER S. 234B IS NOT CHARGEABLE ON TAX LIABILITY ARISING ON CAPITAL GAINS FLOWING FROM DEMERGER TILL THE FORMAL COMPLETION OF SANCTION FOR DEMERGER I.E. 29 TH MAY, 2012 FOR THE SAME REASON NOTED ABOVE CITING INABILITY TO VISUALI ZE THE CHARGE OF TAX AND CONSEQUENT DEFAULT DUE TO NEAR IMPOSSIBILITY. FOR THE SIMILARITY OF REASONS NOTED ABOVE, WE FIND CONSIDERABLE FORCE IN THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NON-CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST UNDER S. 234B FOR THE FIRST TWO MONTHS, THAT IS, APRIL AND MAY 2012. 8.3 THE DELHI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF HARYANA WAREHOUSING CORPORATION VS. DCIT 75 ITD 155 (DEL) (TM) HELD THAT THE CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR INVOKING SEC. 234B IS THAT THE ASSESS EE MUST BE FASTENED WITH LIABILITY TO PAY ADVANCE TAX U/S. 208 AND MERE LY BECAUSE ON THE BASIS OF A SUBSEQUENT DECISION, ASSESSEE BECOMES LI ABLE TO PAY ADVANCE IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 8 - TAX IN EARLIER YEAR, NO DEFAULT U/S. 208 COULD BE S AID TO HAVE COMMITTED WHICH WOULD ATTRACT INTEREST. IN P RIYANKA OVERSEAS LTD. VS. DCIT 79 ITD 353 , THE DELHI TRIBUNAL HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT LIABLE TO INTEREST UNDER S. 234B AND 234C WHERE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PAY TAX ON CASH COMPENSATORY SUPPORT (CCS) AS PER LAW AS IT TH EN EXISTED AND WHICH WAS AMENDED WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT BY FINA NCE ACT, 1990. IN DR. (MRS.) DEVINDER KAUR SEKHON VS. ACIT 67 ITD 407 (DEL) , THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED IN FINANCIAL YEAR 1992-93 INTERES T ON ENHANCED COMPENSATION FOR ACQUISITION OF LAND WHICH WAS SPRE AD OVER A.YS. 1986-87 TO 1992-93. FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESS EE COULD NOT HAVE FORESEEN RECEIPT OF INTEREST DURING EARLIER YEARS, IT WAS HELD THAT NO INTEREST COULD BE LEVIED FOR EARLIER YEARS. SIMILA R ISSUE ALSO CAME UP BEFORE THE HYDERABAD TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. JINDAL IRRIGATION SYSTEMS LTD. 56 ITD 164 AS TO WHETHER A COMPANY WHICH COMMENCED BUSINESS AFTER 31 ST DECEMBER AND MAKES SUBSTANTIAL INCOME WOULD BE LIABLE TO INTEREST FOR SHORT FALL I N PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX WITH REFERENCE TO EARLIER INSTALLMENTS. THE CO ORDINATE BENCH APPLIED THE DOCTRINE OF LEX NON COGIT AD IMPOSSIBILIA AND HELD THAT THE LAW CANNOT ENVISAGE A PERSON TO DO SOMETHING IM POSSIBLE. WHERE THE COMPANY COMMENCED BUSINESS AFTER 31 ST DECEMBER, IT COULD NOT HAVE ESTIMATED INCOME FOR PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX IN THE FIRST THREE INSTALLMENTS. HENCE, IT WAS HELD THAT NO INTEREST U/S. 234C COULD BE IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 9 - LEVIED FOR NON-PAYMENT OF ADVANCE TAX IN FIRST THRE E INSTALLMENTS IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY DEFAULT COMMITTER PER SE. 8.4 THE CRUX OF ALL THESE JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS IS TH AT AN OBLIGATION GETS DISCHARGED DUE TO IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE . THE LAW OF IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE DOES NOT NECESSARILY R EQUIRE ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY BUT ALSO ENCOMPASSES THE CONCEPT OF S EVERE IMPOSSIBILITY. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ADVANCE TA X OR SELF ASSESSMENT TAX CANNOT BE PAID DUE TO UNCONTROLLABLE CIRCUMSTAN CES. THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE RELEASES THE ASSESSEE FROM ITS OBLIGATION TO PAY ADVANCE TAX/SELF ASSESSMENT TAX. A DEFAULT OCCURS ONLY WHEN AN OBLIGATION IS NOT PERFORMED. WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS RELEASED FROM THE OBLIGATIONS, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT HE IS IN DEFAUL T. THUS, WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS PREVENTED FROM ESTIMATING THE LIABILITY TOWARDS CAPITAL GAINS TAX DEPENDING ON APPROVAL FROM COURT OF LAW, THE QUESTION OF HIS NOT PERFORMING THE OBLIGATION UNDER LAW DOES NOT AR ISE AND THUS HE CANNOT BE HELD A DEFAULTER. THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO PAY INTEREST ON TAX ARISING FROM INCOME IN CASES WHERE IMPOSSIBILITY OF COMPLIANCE IS MANIFEST. THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE IMP UTED WITH CLAIRVOYANCE IN THE INSTANT CASE AND HENCE NO LIABI LITY TOWARDS INTEREST UNDER S. 234C/234B CAN BE FASTENED. 9. IN THE LIGHT THE ABOVE AFORESAID DISCUSSION, WE FIND CONSIDERABLE MERIT IN THE PLEA RAISED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DENIAL OF LIABILITY IT(SS)A NO.27/AHD/2015 [RIDDHI SIDDHI GLUCO BIOLS LTD.VS. ACIT] A.Y. 2012-13 - 10 - TOWARDS INTEREST U/S. 234C IN TOTO AND DENIAL OF LIABILITY U/S. 234B FOR THE INITIAL TWO MONTHS THAT IS APRIL AND MAY 2012. 10. IN THE RESULT, GROUND NO. 3 OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN TERMS OF OBSERVATIONS NOTED IN THE PRECEDING PARAS. 11. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PART LY ALLOWED. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (PRADIP K UMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 20/06/2019 TANMAY TRUE COPY !'#' / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- &. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE (. )*+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. ,- / CIT (A) /. 012 33*+4 *+#4 56) / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 7. 289 : / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / 4 /5 *+#4 56) THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 20/0 6/2019