Shri Nandlal J.Agrawal(HUF), Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,Ahmedabad Circle-1, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 29/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8607 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 8 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 08-11-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: Y P VERMA
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure; Search and seizure; Block assessment
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMADABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA , VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI T.R. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/2009 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7-2001 SHRI NANDLAL J. AGRAWAL (HUF) PROP: AGRAWAL FINANCE CORPORATION, SARTHIK AVENUE, NR. FUN REPUBLIC, SATELLITE, AHMEDABAD V/S . THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMADABAD CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD PAN NO. A ADHA1240H (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) BY APPELLANT SHRI DHIREN SHAH, A.R. /BY RESPONDENT SHRI Y.P. VERMA, SR. D.R. /DATE OF HEARING 08.11.2012 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 24.01.2013 O R D E R PER : T.R.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL AT THE BEHEST OF THE ASSESSEE WHI CH HAS EMANATED FROM THE ORDER OF CIT(A)-VI, AHMEDABAD, ORDER DATED 17.02.2009 FOR BLOCK THE PERIOD 1-4-95 TO 12-7-2001. THE EFFECTIVE GROU NDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL. HE OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED TH E APPEAL FULLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE HIM. I. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE R S. 13,67,775/- IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 2 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.13,67,775/- ON ACCOUNT OF UNACCOUNTE D EXPENDITURE WHILE MAKING AN OBSERVATION THAT IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE BURDEN IS SQUARELY ON THE APPELLANT TO PROVE THE FA CT THAT THE EXPENDITURE CLAIMED HAS BEEN EXPENDED WHOLLY AND EX CLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS, WHICH THE APPELLANT HAS TO TALLY FAILED TO DISCHARGE, THEREBY, THE SAME IS NOT AN ALLOWABLE EX PENDITURE. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GROSSLY ERRED IN LAW AND ON F ACTS IN FAILING TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT THE A.O. HAS NOT PROVIDED CERATIN MATERIALS DEMANDED BY THE APPELLANT IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATYA NARAYN J. KABRA HUF, PROP: S.S. ENTERPRISES WHICH WERE RELIED UPO N BY THE A.O. FOR MAKING THE ARBITRARY ADDITION IN THE CASE OF AP PELLANT. THE AO HAS ALSO FAILED TO GRANT THE OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS E XAMINATION OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA EVEN THOUGH SPECIFICALLY DEMA NDED BY THE APPELLANT. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN FAILING TO CONSIDER THE FACT THAT CONTRA ACCOUNT OF S.S. ENTER PRISES FROM THE BOOKS OF AGARWAL FINANCE CORPORATION, PROP: NANDLAL J. AGARWAL HUF, FROM THE BOOKS OF S.S.ENTERPRISES TALLIES WITH EACH OTHER AND THE SAME IS ALSO ON THE RECORD OF THE DEPARTMENT. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) AS WELL AS THE A.O. FAILED TO CON SIDER THE VARIOUS CASE LAWS RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT. II. CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S. 158BFA(1) OF THE ACT RS.50,225/- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE INTEREST CHARGED U/S.158BFA(1) OF THE ACT. III. CHARGING OF SURCHARGE ON TAX RS. 1155/- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE SURCHARGE CHARGED OF RS. 1155/-. 2. THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE IS THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION U/S. 132 OF THE IT ACT IN CASE OF KABRA G ROUP ON 12.07.2001 WHILE FINALIZING THE ASSESSMENT U/S. 158BD R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE IT ACT IN THE CASE OF IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 3 SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) PROP: S.S. ENTERPR ISES, BLOCK PERIOD ENDING ON 12.07.2001. THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE IN THE INCOM E AS PER SEIZED TRIAL BALANCE AND THE REGULAR RETURN OF INCOME FOR S.S. E NTERPRISES. IT WAS NOTICED BY THE A.O. FROM THE TRIAL BALANCE THAT THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT SHOWN UNDER THE HEAD CHEQUE DD ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES. AS PER THE TRIAL BALANCE AS ON 31/03/01 SEIZED FROM THE OFFICE PREMISES OF KABRA GROUP THE AMOUNT WAS RS.1.24 CRORES, WHEREAS IN THE RETURN OF INCOME SAME WERE SHOWN AT .86 CRORES. FROM THE PERUSAL OF ANNEXURE A-47 SEIZED FROM THE OFFICE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE, PAGE NOS. 86 TO 108 CONTAIN THE SAID INFORMATION. THE ENTRIES ON PAGE NO. 100 TO 108 OF THE CHEQUE DD AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES FOR THE F.Y. 2000-01 WERE COMPA RED WITH THE LEDGER ACCOUNT. IT WAS NOTICED BY THE A.O. THAT THERE WER E MANY ENTRIES WHICH WERE MISSING IN THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE A.Y. 2001-02. IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE SHRI NANDLAL J. AGRAWAL (HUF) VARIOUS ENTR IES WERE MISSING IN TOTAL OF RS.13,67,775/-. THIS WAS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITUR E OF THE ASSESSEE AS ALTHOUGH THE ENTRIES APPEARED IN THE TRIAL BALANCE SEIZED, THE SAME WERE ABSENT IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS, NOTICE U/S. 158BD OF THE I.T. ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 20/07/2004 WHICH WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE ON 05/08/2004. IN RESPONSE OF THIS NOTICE, THE APPELLANT FILED RETURN OF NIL INCOME. NOTICE U/S. 143(2) WAS ISSUED FROM TIME TO TIME ALONGWITH A QUESTIONNAIRE DATED 14.06.2006 U/S . 142(1) OF THE IT ACT. THE LD. A.O. GAVE REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING H EARD AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE ASSESSEES REPLY, HE MADE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT O F UNACCOUNTED EXPENDITURE AT RS. 13,67,775/- ON THE BASIS OF SEIZ ED MATERIAL. IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 4 3. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O., THE ASSESS EE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE CIT(A), WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION BY HO LDING THAT NO SPECIFIC REPLY WAS FILED BY APPELLANT BEFORE THE A.O. AGAINST THE QUERY LETTER ON CHEQUE PAYMENT/RECEIPTS WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS MENTIONED BY THE A.O. IN ASSESSMENT ORDER ON THE BASIS OF ANNEXU RE A-47 SEIZED FROM THE PREMISES. MOST OF ENTRIES RECORDED IN THIS TRIAL B ALANCE ARE FOUND TO BE RECORDED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, A FEW OF THE ENTRIES DID NOT APPEAR IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF). WHEN THESE ENTRIES WERE NOT RECORDED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF). THERE IS NO CHANCE TH AT THESE ENTRIES WILL BE FOUND TO BE RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT. IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THESE TRANSACTIONS COULD BE LOCATED DUE TO THE SEARCH OPERATION CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF). THE TOTAL OF THE AMOUNT WHICH WERE FOUND TO BE NOT RECORDED BY SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT COMES TO RS. 38,23,606/-. THESE AMOUNTS WERE RECEIVED BY SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) FROM VARIOUS PERSONS INCLUDING AGARWAL FINANCE CORPORATION, WHIC H IS A PROPRIETARY CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT PAID B Y THE ASSESSEE TO SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) WAS RS. 13,67,775/- WHI CH INCLUDES AN ENTRY DATED 31.03.2001 OF RS. 10,84,900/-. THE ONUS ON T HE ASSESSEE TO GIVE THE EXPLANATION OF THESE ENTRIES. THE SEIZED MATERIAL IN CASE OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) ENTRIES WHEN RAN OVER N INE PAGES IN THE ACCOUNT AND THEIR NUMBER IS MORE THAN 300. SUCH CO NTEMPORARY AND COMPLETE ENTRIES OF INCOME COULD NOT BE IGNORED BY JUST PREPARING ANOTHER IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 5 ACCOUNT IN WHICH SOME OF THE MAJOR ENTRIES ARE REMO VED. THE NATURE OF ENTRIES SHOWED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD DELIBERATELY NOT SHOWN THESE ENTRIES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. 4. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT IN CASE OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABR A (HUF) PROPRIETARY S. S. ENTERPRISE ORDER U/S. 158BC WAS PASSED ON 28.112003 . HE FURTHER DRAWN OUR ATTENTION ON PAGE NO. 135 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHEREIN THE ADDITION OF DIFFERENCE IN THE TRIAL BALANCE ON ACCOUNT OF THE CHEQUES/DD A T RS. 38,23,606/- WAS MADE IN THE HANDS OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HU F) IN THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT WHICH INCLUDES TRIAL BALANCE ENTRY DATED 31.03.2001 IN THE NAME OF AGRAWAL FINANCE CORPORATION AT RS. 10,08,900/- W HICH HAS BEEN DELETED BY THE CIT(A) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 18.08.2004 BY OBSER VING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD CLAIMED THESE SEIZED PAPERS IN ANNEXURE A-47, P AGE NOS. 85-92 & 100- 102 WERE CONTAINING THE PROVISIONAL TRIAL BALANCE A ND THE CHEQUE ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD 01.04.20 00 TO 31.03.2001 TAKEN IN APRIL WAS SUBJECT TO FINALIZATION. SUBSEQUENTLY AF TER THE NEGOTIATION WITH FOUR MAJOR PARTIES, NAMELY, (I) M/S. AGARWAL FINANCE CORPORATION (II) H. KUMAR GEMS INTERNATIONAL (III) SWARSHILP PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. (IV) WOODCRAFT LTD. THE APPELLANT HAD FINALIZED AND WORKED OUT THE CHEQ UE ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES AT RS. 85,84,856/- AND REFLECTE D THE SAME IN THE BALANCE SHEET AND PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD 01 .04.2002 TO 31.03.2001 WHICH REFLECTED THE CORRECT AND TRUE PICTURE OF CHE QUE/DD ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES. TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CONTENTIO N, THE APPELLANT HAD ALSO IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 6 SUBMITTED THE COPY OF ACCOUNT FROM THE BOOKS OF MEN TIONED PARTIES IN THE APPEAL HEREIN AND POINTED OUT THAT THE SAME ARE TAL LIED. IT WAS HELD BY THE CIT(A) IN CASE OF SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) THAT LD. A.O. HAD NOT INVESTIGATED OR INQUIRED THAT THE PARTIES ABOVE MEN TIONED BY CALLING THE ACCOUNTS OF APPELLANT FROM THEIR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT T O GIVE JUSTIFICATION TO THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. LD. CIT(A) ALSO RELIED UPON VARIOUS CASE LAWS ON INCOME ACCRUED OR ARRIVED TO THE APPEL LANT AND OBSERVED THAT MERE RAISING OF CLAIM OR BILL DOES NOT CREATE ANY L EGAL ENFORCEABLE RIGHT TO RECEIVE THE SAME. HE HELD THAT THIS INCOME WAS NEV ER ACCRUED OR ARRIVED AT. THUS, HE DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS.38,23,606/-. H E FURTHER RELIED UPON IN CASE OF U.P. CERAMICS & POTTERIES LTD. VS. DCIT (1995) 52 T TJ 499, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT WHEN CERTAIN DOCUMENTS ETC. ARE FOUND FROM THE POSSESSION OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE SEARCH OPERATION, BURDEN LI ES ON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE TRANSACTION RECORDED IN S UCH DOCUMENT, STATEMENT OR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE IS DUTY BOUND TO EX PLAIN THE DISCREPANCY, IF ANY, FOUND ON THE BASIS OF THE SEIZED MATERIAL VIS- -VIS THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WHEN ASSESSEE FURNISHES THE EXPLANATION SUPPORTED W ITH EVIDENCE, THE ONUS SIFTED ON THE REVENUE. HE FURTHER RELIED UPON IN C ASE OF N.S. CHOODAMANI VS. CIT (1959) 35 ITR 676 (KER.). HE FURTHER RELIED ON VARIOUS CASES: I. SAYAJI IRON AND ENGG. CO. V. CIT 253 ITR 749 (GU J.) II. DY. CIT V. MIRA INDUSTRIES [2003] 87 ITD 475 (A HD.) III. MEHRATEX INDIA LTD. V. DCIT [2005] 3 SOT 539 ( MUM.) IV. J.K.T. FABRICS (P) LTD. V. DCIT [2005] 4 SOT 84 (MUM.) V. V.G. GAJJAR V. DY. CWT [2005] 93 ITD 624 (AHD.) VI. DY. CIT V. MANGALAM CEMENT LTD. [2005] 92 ITD 4 4 (JP. (TM). VII. 73 ITR 1 (MAD) S. DEVRAJ (1969) VIII. L. G. RAMAMURTHI AND OTHERS 110 ITR 453 (MAD. ) IX. GOODLASS NEROLAC PAINTS LTD. 188 ITR 1 (1991) X. SIS RAM SHARMA & CO. 25 ITD 410 (DELHI) IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 7 XI. GEDORE TOOLS (INDIA) PVT. LTD. 25 ITD 193. XII. EMBEE TEXTILES (P) LTD. 20 TAXMAN 58 (MAD.) XIII. ATMA RAM TRUST 18 ITD 158 (DELHI) XIV. GRAHALAKSHMI & CO. 11 ITD 711 (MAD.) XV. SAHNEY STEELS & PRESS WORKS LTD. 10 ITD 659 (HY D.) XVI. ARUNDATHI INVESTMENTS LTD. 10 ITD 754 (MAD.) XVII. SIMCO METERS LTD. 8 ITD 922 (MAD.) HE ALSO ARGUED THAT REVENUES APPEAL IN CASE OF SHR I SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) HAS BEEN DISMISSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE C BEN CH, AHMADABAD, ON PAGE NO. 69 OF IT(SS)A NO. 306/AHD/2004. THE OPERA TIVE PORTION OF THE ORDER IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 72. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GOING THROUGH THE CASE RECORDS, WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A CATEGO RICAL FINDING AFTER GOING THROUGH THE EVIDENCES LIKE PAPER SEIZED AS AN NEXURE-A/47 PAGES 85-92 AND 100-102 CONTAINING THE PROVISIONAL TRIAL BALANCE, CHEQUE ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES FOR THE PERI OD 01-04-2000 TO 31-03-2001 SUBJECT TO FINALIZATION. THE CIT(A) NOTED THAT AFTER NEGOTIATION WITH FOUR MAJOR PARTIES, I.E. (I) M/S. AGRWAL FINANCE CORPORATION, (II) H. KUMAR GEMS INTERNATIONAL (III) M/S. SWARSHULP PROPERTIES PVT. LTD. AND (IV) WOODCRAFT LTD. THE AS SESSEE FINALIZED THE CHEQUE ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES AT RS.85 ,84,56/- AND DECLARED THE SAME IN THE BALANCE-SHEET AND PROFIT A ND LOSS A/C FOR THE RELEVANT PERIOD. THE CIT(A) ALSO NOTED THAT HE HAS CROSSED VERIFIED THE CHEQUE ISSUING AND DISCOUNTING CHARGES FOR THE RELEVANT PERIOD WAS FOUND IN THE COMPUTER FLOPPIES AT THE TI ME OF SEARCH AND THE SAME WAS SEIZED BY THE SEARCH PARTY. THE PRIN T OUT OF THE SAID ACCOUNT WAS TAKEN OUT BY THE AO AT THE TIME OF THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND COMPARED WITH THE CONTRA A/C. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT WITH THE CLIENTAL BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE CIT(A) NOTED THAT THE AO HAS NOT MADE ANY COMMENTS OF THESE DOCU MENTS AND ACCORDINGLY DELETED THE ADDITION. THE REVENUE COUL D NOT BRING OUT ANYTHING AGAINST THE FINDINGS OF CIT(A). ACCORDING LY, WE UPHOLD THE IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 8 FINDINGS OF CIT(A) DELETING THE ADDITION. THIS ISS UE OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. THUS, HE REQUESTED TO DELETE THE ADDITION. AT THE OUTSET, LD. SR. D.R. VEHEMENTLY ARGUED THAT THESE EVIDENCES WERE NEITHER PRODUCED BEFORE THE A.O. AND NOR BEFORE THE CIT(A), DURING THE COURSE O F ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING. IN REJOINDER, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT HAS DRAWN OUR ATTENTION ON PAGE NOS. 13-14 & 41-88 OF PAPER BOOK. 5. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE APPELLANT HAD NOT SUBMITTED ANY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE A.O. AS WELL AS BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE PAGE REFERRED BY THE APPELL ANT, PARTICULARLY PAGE NOS. 13-14 & 41-88 SHOWED THAT THE APPELLANT HAD CHALLEN GED THE PROPOSED ADDITION ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS LIKE NO COPY OF STATE MENT/ARGUMENT WERE GIVEN AND SEIZED PAPERS WERE FOUND FROM THE PREMISES OF T HE THIRD PERSON. BUT, NO CONCRETE EVIDENCES WERE FILED BEFORE THE A.O. THE CO-ORDINATE C BENCH HAD DISMISSED THE REVENUES APPEAL IN CASE OF SHRI SATY ANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF) ON THE BASIS OF PROPER FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) IN HIS APPEAL ORDER ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT, NAMEL Y, SHRI SATYANARAYAN J. KABRA (HUF). HOWEVER, NO SUCH EVIDENCE HAD BEEN FI LED IN THIS CASE, THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE HAVE CONS IDERED VIEW THAT ON THIS ISSUE, THE MATTER IS REQUIRED TO BE RESTORED BACK TO THE A .O. TO CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT IS ALSO DIRECTED T O FURNISH THE EVIDENCE WITH REFERENCE ENTRIES FOUND IN TRIAL BALANCE BEFORE THE A.O. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS SET ASIDE. 6. GROUND NOS. 2 & 3 ARE PROCEDURAL WHICH HAVE BEEN COVERED IN GROUND NO.1. THE A.O. IS DIRECTED TO PROVIDE THE COPY OF EVIDENCE USED AGAINST THE IT(SS)A NO. 29/AHD/09 BLOCK PERIOD :1-4-95 TO 12-7- 2001 PAGE 9 APPELLANT FOR FRAMING THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT AT THE T IME OF RE-HEARING THE CASE, AS SET ASIDE ABOVE. 7. GROUND NO.4 IS CONSEQUENTIAL TO THE ABOVE FINDIN G. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 24/01/2013 SD/- SD/- (G.C.GUPTA) (T.R. MEENA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA ! ! ! ! '! '! '! '! / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. '(' ) * / CONCERNED CIT 4. *- / CIT (A) 5. !./ ), ) , 12( / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. /45 67 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , 8/ 1 ': ) , 12( ;