The ACIT, Cent, Circle-1(2), Ahmedabad V. Shri Farukh Ahmedbhai Delhiwala, Ahmedabad

ITSSA 33/AHD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 122 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2991 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 year(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 01-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 18-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: VIBHA BHALLA
• Keywords: Capital asset; Search and seizure; Question of law; Tax effect
• Section: 143(3); 153A; 147; 68; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH (BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER) IT(SS)A. NOS: 63 TO 65/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02, 2006-06 & 2007-08) ARJUMAND DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, PALDI, AHMEDABAD-380007 PAN NO. ABMPD0231F V/S ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A. NOS: 78 TO 81/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02 TO 2004-05 & 2007-08) SALIM AHMEDABHAI DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, NARAYAN NAGAR ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD- 380007 PAN NO. AAPPD7729N V/S ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A. NOS: 66 TO 71/AHD/2011 (A.YS.: 2001-02 TO 2002-03 & 2004-05 TO 2007-08) FARZANA FARUKBHAI DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, NARAYAN NAGAR ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD- 380007 PAN NO. ABMPD0230E V/S ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 2 IT(SS)A. NOS: 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & C.O. NO. 52/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02 TO 2007-08) ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD FARZANA FARUKBHAI DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, NARAYAN NAGAR ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD- 380007 PAN NO. ABMPD0230E V/S V/S FARUKBHAI AHMEDBHAI DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, NARAYAN NAGAR ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD- 380007 PAN NO. AAPPD7728P ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A. NOS: 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02 TO 2006-07) FARUKBHAI AHMEDBHAI DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, NARAYAN NAGAR ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD- 380007 PAN NO. AAPPD7728P V/S ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) IT(SS)A. NOS: 72 TO 77/AHD/2011 & C.O. NOS. 53 & 54/AHD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2001-02 TO 2007-08) IMTIYAZ AHMEDBHAI DELHIWALA 1, PRABHU PARK SOCIETY, NARAYAN NAGAR ROAD PALDI, AHMEDABAD- V/S ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), AHMEDABAD IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 3 380007 PAN NO. AAPPD7726D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL TALATI, AR RESPONDENT BY : MS. VIBHA BHALLA, CIT/ D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 01 -02-201 7 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15 -02-2017 PER BENCH 1. IT(SS)A NOS. 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 ARE APPEALS BY THE R EVENUE PREFERRED IN THE CASE OF FARUKH AHMEDBHAI DELHIWALA AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE OF THE LD. CIT(A)-III, AHMEDABAD DATED 02.11.2010 AND C.O. NO. 52/AHD/2011 IS THE CROSS OBJECTION BY THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-III, AHMEDABAD FOR A.Y. 2007-08. C.O. NOS. 5 3 & 54/AHD/2011 ARE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IN IMTIYAZ A. DELH IWALA FOR A.YS. 2001-02 & 2002-03 PREFERRED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT( A)-III, AHMEDABAD. 2. ALL THE AFOREMENTIONED APPEALS OF THE REVENUE HAS T O BE DISMISSED IN THE LIGHT OF THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 21 OF 2015 BY WHICH THE CBDT HAS INSTRUCTED THE REVENUE NOT TO PREFER THE APPEALS WHERE THE TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN RS. 10 LACS. 3. IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFOREMENTIONED CIRCULAR OF THE CBDT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 4 4. INSOFAR AS THE CROSS OBJECTIONS MENTIONED HEREINABO VE ARE CONCERNED, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT HE IS NOT PRESSING THE CROSS OBJECTIONS OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESSEES. THEREFORE, TH E SAME ARE DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 5. IN THE ABOVE CAPTIONED APPEALS PREFERRED BY DIFFER ENT ASSESSEES BELONGING TO THE SAME GROUP, AN ADDITIONAL GROUND HAS BEEN TA KEN BY THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSEES IN ADDITION TO THE GROUNDS TAKEN IN THE M EMORANDUM OF APPEALS. 6. WITH THE ADDITIONAL GROUND, THE ASSESSEES HAVE CHA LLENGED THE VALIDITY OF THE ASSESSMENTS ORDER FRAMED U/S. 153A READ WITH SE CTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON THE ALLEGED GROUND THAT THE ASSESSMENTS HAVE BEE N MADE WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEARCH FOR MAKING THE IMPUGNED ADDITIONS. THEREFORE, THE IMPUGNED ASSESSM ENTS ARE BAD IN LAW. 7. THE LD. D.R. SMT. VIBHA BHALLA STRONGLY OBJECTED TO THE ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL GROUND. THE LD. D.R. VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED TO THE REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE SEEKING ADMISSION OF THE ADDITIONAL GROUND IN HER DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. THE LD. D.R. RELIED UPON JUDIC IAL DECISIONS IN SUPPORT OF HER CONTENTION. IT IS SAY OF THE LD. D.R. THAT IN T HESE CASES, SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION TOOK PLACE ON THE PREMISES OF THE AS SESSEES ON 04.08.2006. THEREAFTER, PROCEEDINGS WERE INITIATED U/S. 153A OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEES FILED RETURNS OF INCOME OF THE RELEVANT Y EARS IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S. 153A OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, AT THIS STAGE, THE ASSESSEES CANNOT OBJECT TO THE LEGALITY AND VALIDITY OF PROCEEDINGS U/S. 15 3A OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 5 SAME WAS NOT CHALLENGED AT THE TIME OF THE INITIATI ON OF THE PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. D.R. CONTINUED BY STATING THAT EVEN BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY , THIS ISSUE WAS NEVER TAKEN BY THE ASSES SEES. THEREFORE, THE BENCH SHOULD NOT ENTERTAIN SUCH ADDITIONAL GROUNDS WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED FOR THE FIRST TIME. 8. WE HAVE GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE WR ITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. D.R. WE FAIL TO PERSUADE OURSELVES TO ENTER TAIN THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE LD. D.R. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CA SE OF NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CO. LTD. VS. CIT REPORTED IN (1998) 229 ITR 3 83 HAS HELD THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS JURISDICTION TO EXAMINE A QUESTION OF LAW WHICH AROSE FROM THE FACTS AS FOUND BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND HAVING A BEARING ON THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT O RDERS QUA THE ORDERS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. WE FIND THAT THE ADDITIONAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEES DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY VERIFICATION OF FACTS. THE UNDISPUTED FACTS ARE ALREADY THERE IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDERS AND ALSO IN THE ORDERS OF THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. IN THE LIG HT OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT (SUPRA), THE ADDITIONAL G ROUND IS ADMITTED. 10. A PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDERS SHOW T HAT THE ADDITIONS HAVE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF -(A) ANNUAL LET OUT VALUE OF ESQ UIRE BUILDING AND (B) CASH CREDITS U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 6 11. AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE, A SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION TOOK PLACE ON THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEES ON 04.08.2006. THE ASSESS MENTS WERE COMPLETED U/S. 153A OF THE ACT R. W. S. 143(3) OF THE ACT. 12. THE AFORE-STATED ADDITIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER CLEARLY SHOW THAT THEY HAVE NO REFERENCE TO ANY SEIZED MATERIAL. NOR THERE IS ANY REFERENCE TO ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND AT THE TIME OF SEA RCH. 13. THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS CONTINENTAL WAREHOUSING CORPORATION (NHAVA SHEVA) LTD, REPORTE D IN (2015) 374 ITR 645 (BOM HC), HAS HELD THAT IF NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL IS FOUND, THEN THE CONCLUDED ASSESSMENT COULD NOT BE REOPENED. . THE RELEVANT FINDING OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT READS AS UNDER:- 'ONCE IT IS HELD THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS ATTAINED FI NALITY, THEN THE AO WHILE PASSING THE INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) OF THE IT. ACT COULD NOT HAVE DISTURBED THE ASSESSMENT/REASSES SMENT ORDER WHICH HAS ATTAINED FINALITY, UNLESS THE MATERIALS GATHERED IN THE COURSE OF THE PROCEEDINGS U/S. 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ESTABLISH THAT THE RELIEFS GRANTED UNDER THE FINALIZED ASSESSMENT/REASSESSMENT WERE CONTRARY TO THE FACTS UNEARTHED DURING THE COURSE OF 153A PROCEEDINGS. IF THERE IS NOTHING ON RECORD TO SUGGEST THAT ANY MATERIAL WAS UNEARTHED DURING THE SEARCH OR DURING THE 153A PROCEEDINGS, THE AO WHILE PASSING ORDER U/S. 153A R.W.S. 143(3) CANN OT DISTURB THE ASSESSMENT ORDER.' 14. THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HAD AN OCCASION TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS OF LAW: IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 7 '1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HON'BLE ITAT IS CORRECT IN NARROWING DOWN THE SCOPE OF ASSESSMENT U /S. 153A IN RESPECT OF COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS BY HOLDING THAT ONLY UNDISCLO SED INCOME AND UNDISCLOSED ASSETS DETECTED DURING SEARCH COULD BE BROUGHT TO T AX? 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HON'BLE ITAT IS CORRECT IN LAW IN HOLDING THAT THE SCOPE OF SEC. 15 3A IS LIMITED TO ASSESSING ONLY SEARCH RELATED INCOME, THEREBY DENYING REVENUE THE OPPORTUNITY OF TAXING OTHER ESCAPED INCOME, THAT COMES TO THE NOTICE OF THE AO. ? 3.WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE HON'BLE ITAT WAS RIGHT IN LIMITING THE SCOPE OF SEC. 153A ONLY T O UNDISCLOSED INCOME WHEN AS PER THE SECTION THE AO HAS TO ASSESS THE TOTAL INCO ME OF THE SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS?'- AND THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY FINALLY HELD A S UNDER:- 'WE, THEREFORE, DISMISS THE REVENUE'S APPEAL AND ANS WER THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AGAINST THE REVENUE AND IN FAVOUR O F ASSESSEE.' 15. IN THE CASE OF KABUL CHAWLA, 380 ITR 573, THE HON'B LE HIGH COURT HAS SUMMARIZED THE LEGAL POSITION AS UNDER:- 37. ON A CONSPECTUS OF SECTION 153A(1) OF THE ACT, READ WITH THE PROVISOS THERETO, AND IN THE LIGHT OF THE LAW EXPLAINED IN T HE AFOREMENTIONED DECISIONS, THE LEGAL POSITION THAT EMERGES IS AS UNDER: I. ONCE A SEARCH TAKES PLACE UNDER SECTION 132 OF T HE ACT, NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153 A(L) WILL HAVE TO BE MANDATORILY ISSUED TO THE PERSON SEARCHED REQUIRING HIM TO FILE RETURNS FOR SIX AYS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING T HE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE AY IN WHICH THE SEARCH TAKES PLACE. II. ASSESSMENTS AND REASSESSMENTS PENDING ON THE DA TE OF THE SEARCH SHALL ABATE. THE TOTAL INCOME FOR SUCH AYS WILL HAVE TO BE COMPU TED BY THE AOS AS A FRESH EXERCISE. III. THE AO WILL EXERCISE NORMAL ASSESSMENT POWERS IN RESPECT OF THE SIX YEARS PREVIOUS TO THE RELEVANT AY IN WHICH THE SEARCH TAK ES PLACE. THE AO HAS THE IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 8 POWER TO ASSESS AND REASSESS THE 'TOTAL INCOME' OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SIX YEARS IN SEPARATE ASSESSMENT ORDERS FOR EACH OF THE SIX Y EARS. IN OTHER WORDS THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE ASSESSMENT ORDER IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE SIX AYS 'IN WHICH BOTH THE DISCLOSED AND THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME WOULD BE BROUG HT TO TAX'. IV. ALTHOUGH SECTION 153 A DOES NOT SAY THAT ADDITI ONS SHOULD BE STRICTLY MADE ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE FOUND IN THE COURSE OF THE SE ARCH, OR OTHER POST-SEARCH MATERIAL OR INFORMATION AVAILABLE WITH THE AO WHICH CAN BE RELATED TO THE EVIDENCE FOUND, IT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE ASSESSMEN T 'CAN BE ARBITRARY OR MADE WITHOUT ANY RELEVANCE OR NEXUS WITH THE SEIZED MATE RIAL. OBVIOUSLY AN ASSESSMENT HAS TO BE MADE UNDER THIS SECTION ONLY O N THE BASIS OF SEIZED MATERIAL.' V. IN ABSENCE OF ANY INCRIMINATING MATERIAL, THE CO MPLETED ASSESSMENT CAN BE REITERATED AND THE ABATED ASSESSMENT OR REASSESSMEN T CAN BE MADE. THE WORD 'ASSESS' IN SECTION 153 A IS RELATABLE TO ABATED PR OCEEDINGS (I.E. THOSE PENDING ON THE DATE OF SEARCH) AND THE WORD REASSESS' TO COMPL ETED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. VI. INSOFAR AS PENDING ASSESSMENTS ARE CONCERNED, T HE JURISDICTION TO MAKE THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT AND THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTIO N 153A MERGES INTO ONE. ONLY ONE ASSESSMENT SHALL BE MADE SEPARATELY FOR EA CH AY ON THE BASIS OF THE FINDINGS OF THE SEARCH AND ANY OTHER MATERIAL EXIST ING OR BROUGHT ON THE RECORD OF THE AO. VII. COMPLETED ASSESSMENTS CAN BE INTERFERED WITH B Y THE AO WHILE MAKING THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A ONLY ON THE BASIS OF SOME INCRIMINATING MATERIAL UNEARTHED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH OR REQUISITIO N OF DOCUMENTS OR UNDISCLOSED INCOME OR PROPERTY DISCOVERED IN THE COURSE OF SEAR CH WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED OR NOT ALREADY DISCLOSED OR MADE KNOWN IN THE COURS E OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. 16. THE AFOREMENTIONED RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE H IGH COURT OF DELHI HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN THE CASE OF LATA JAIN IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 274 & 276 OF 2016 WHEREIN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT HELD AS UNDER:- 5. THE SHORT POINT INVOLVED IS WHETHER THE ITAT WA S CORRECT IN CONCLUDING THAT THERE HAD TO BE INCRIMINATING MATERIAL RECOVERED DU RING THE SEARCH QUA THE ASSESSEE IN EACH OF THE YEARS FOR THE PURPOSES OF FRAMING AN ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153 A OF THE ACT? IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 9 6. IT IS NOT IN DISPUTE THAT IN RESPECT OF THE RESP ONDENT ASSESSEE FOR THE AYS IN QUESTION THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS TOOK PL ACE UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT. THEREAFTER THEY WERE SOUGHT TO BE REOPENED BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 147 OF THE ACT AND RE-ASSESSMENT ORDE RS WERE PASSED UNDER SECTION 147 READ WITH SECTION 143(3) OF THE A CT. DURING BOTH THE AFOREMENTIONED PROCEEDINGS THE QUESTION WHETHER THE GOLD AND SILVER UTENSILS WERE THE CAPITAL ASSETS OR PERSONAL EFFECTS OF THE ASSESSEE WAS EXAMINED. THEY WERE HELD NOT TO BE THE PERSONAL EFFECTS. 7. IT HAS BEEN NOTICED BY THE ITAT IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER THAT FOR THE A.YS IN QUESTION NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL QUA THE ASSESSEE WAS FOUND. 8. IN THAT VIEW OF THE MATTER, AND IN LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THIS COURT IN CIT VS. KABUL CHAWLA(2016) 380 ITR 573 (DELHI), THE COURT I S OF THE VIEW THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE ITAT SUFFERS FROM NO LEGAL IN FIRMITY AND NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES FOR DETERMINATION. 17. A PERUSAL OF THE AFORE-STATED RATIOS LAID DOWN BY T HE HONBLE HIGH COURTS CLEARLY SHOW THAT WHILE FRAMING ASSESSMENT U/S. 153 A, ADDITIONS CAN BE MADE ONLY ON THE BASIS OF SOME INCRIMINATING MATERI AL UNEARTH DURING THE SEARCH. THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENTS ARE DEVOID OF SUCH INCRIMINATING MATERIAL. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSMENTS FRAMED U/S. 15 3A R.W.S 143(3) OF THE ACT IS BAD IN LAW AND AGAINST THE SETTLED RATIO AS MENTIONED ELSEWHERE. IT(SS) A NOS. 22 TO 27/AHD/2011 & 29 TO 35/AHD/2011 & OTHERS . A.YS. 2001-02 TO 2007-08 10 18. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE, ALL THE IMPUGNED ASSESSM ENT ORDERS ARE QUASHED. THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEES BY W HICH THE ORDERS WERE CHALLENGED IS ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. 19. SINCE, WE HAVE DECIDED THE ISSUE ON THE POINT OF LA W IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY QUASHING THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDERS ; WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO DWELL INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 15 - 02- 2017 SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER TRUE COPY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 15/02/2017 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