Smt. Jisal Jaxay Shah, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT.,Cent.Circle-1(1), Ahmedabad

ITSSA 818/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9101 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 27-02-2013
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D S KALYAN
• Assessee Lawyers: P M MEHTA
• Keywords: Gift; Loose papers
• Section: 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD (BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI ANIL C HATURVEDI, A.M.) I.T. (SS) A. NO. 818/AHD/2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2007-08) SMT. JISAL JAXAY SHAH SAAR BUNGALOW B/H. RAJPATH CLUB, C.G. ROAD, AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) VS. THE DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1) AHMEDABAD (RESPONDENT) PAN: APZPS3647H APPELLANT BY : SHRI P.M. MEHTA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D.S. KALYAN, CIT,D.R. ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 27-02-20 13 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12-04-2013 PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI,A.M. THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. CIT (A)-I, AHMEDABAD DATED 05-10-2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE ORDERS ARE AS U NDER. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL DERIVING INCOME FR OM SALARY, HOUSE PROPERTY, CAPITAL GAINS, ETC. A SEARCH WAS CONDUCT ED AT THE RESIDENTIAL ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 2 PREMISES OF ASSESSEE ON 14.02.2007 AND CERTAIN JEWE LLERY, LOOSE PAPERS, BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ETC WERE FOUND AND SEIZED. DURIN G THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLA IN THE SOURCE OF ACQUISITION OF JEWELLERY FOUND DURING SEARCH. THE ASSESSEE INTERALIA SUBMITTED THAT SHE WAS STAYING IN A JOINT FAMILY. OUT OF THE TOTAL GOLD ORNAMENTS AGGREGATING TO 2539.55 GMS (810.10 GMS FO UND FROM RESIDENCE AND 1728.45 GMS FOUND FROM THE LOCKER AT NUTAN SAHA KARI BANK LTD.) INCLUDED ORNAMENTS AGGREGATING TO 501.60 GMS BELONG ING TO HER MOTHER, SISTER-IN-LAW AND RELATIVES, THUS LEAVING GOLD OF 2 038.05 GMS WHICH BELONGED TO THE NINE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO WERE STAYIN G ALONGWITH HER. THE JEWELLERY WAS RECEIVED BY THE FAMILY MEMBERS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME ON VARIOUS RELIGIOUS AND SOCIAL FUNCTIONS. THE ASSESS EE ALSO RELIED ON THE CBDT INSTRUCTION NO.1916 DATED 11.05.1984. THE ASS ESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH CONFIRMATIONS OF THE RELATIVES TO WHOM THE JEWELLERY BELONGED. ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO NOTICED THAT THE JEWELLERY B ELONGING TO ASSESSEE WAS MORE THAN 500 GMS. ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THA T ASSESSEES CLAIM THAT THE JEWELLERY WAS DERIVED OUT OF HER STREEDHAN , GIFT, ETC. WAS NOT SUPPORTED BY ANY PROOF. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THE C IRCULAR OF CBDT REFERRED TO BY THE ASSESSEE IS WITH RESPECT TO THE SEARCH AN D SURVEY PROCEEDINGS AND FOR THE PURPOSE OF SEIZURE BUT HOWEVER THE ASSE SSEE IS ALWAYS LIABLE TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF JEWELLERY FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HE, THEREFO RE, HELD THAT CLAIM OF STREEDHAN CAN BE ONLY ALLOWED TO THE EXTENT OF 500 GMS AND HE ACCORDINGLY TREATED THE JEWELLERY IN EXCESS OF 500 GMS AS UNACC OUNTED INVESTMENT IN JEWELLERY AND MADE ADDITION OF RS.339520/-. AGGRIE VED BY THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER, THE MATTER WAS CARRIED BEFORE TH E CIT(A). THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY HOLDIN G AS UNDER:- ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 3 5.3 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAD NOT PRODUCED T HE EVIDENCE TO PROVE THE SOURCE OF THE INVESTMENT IN THE JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF THE SEARCH. SO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS RIGHTLY MADE THE ADDITION AFTER GIVING THE CREDIT OF 500GMS AS PER CBDT CIRCULAR. THE PLEA OF THE APPELLANT THAT SHE IS LIVING IN THE JOI NT FAMILY AND THE BENEFIT OF CIRCULAR SHOULD BE GIVEN TO EACH MEMBER AND BY AGGREGATION OF THE CIRCULAR BENEFIT THE FOUND JEWEL LERY WILL BE COVERED IS ALSO NOT ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE THE JEWELLERY FOUND HAS BEEN ACCEPTED TO BE BELONGING TO EACH FAMILY MEMBER SEPA RATELY, THE CHART OF WHICH HAS BEEN GIVEN ON PAGE 3 AND 4 OF TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER. SO THE CREDIT FOR CIRCULAR BENEFIT SHOULD A LSO BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY OWNER WISE AND CAN NOT BE AGGREGATED. HOWEVER, IT IS NOTICED THAT VALUE OF TOTAL JEWELLERY OF 741.5GM IN THE HANDS OF APPELLANT IS TAKEN AS RS.7,39,520/- AND HENCE PROPO RTIONATE VALUE OF 500 GMS AS PER CIRCULAR COMES TO RS.4,98,664/- AS A GAINST CREDIT OF RS.4,00,000/- TAKEN BY ASSESSING OFFICER AT THE RAT E RS.8000/- PER 10 GMS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OUGHT TO HAVE TAKEN VAL UE OF 500 GMS ON PROPORTIONATE BASIS AS ABOVE. CONSIDERING THIS, AD DITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,40,855/- IS CONFIRMED AND BALANCE ADDITION IS DELETED. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT (A), THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E, THE LEARNED CIT (A) ERRED IN SUSTAINING ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF R S.2,40,855/- FROM OUT OF TOTAL ADDITION OF RS.3,39,520/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT THE JEWELLERY FOUND DURI NG THE COURSE OF SEARCH IN EXCESS OF 500 GMS REMAINED UNEXPLAINED. 2. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND AND/OR WITHDRAW ANY GROUND OR GROUNDS OF APPEAL EITHER BEFORE OR DU RING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 4 5. BEFORE US, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE PREMI SES, WHERE THE SEARCH CONDUCTED, WAS A RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF JOI NT FAMILY WHERE THE ASSESSEE WAS STAYING ALONGWITH NINE MEMBERS. DURIN G THE COURSE OF SEARCH, THE JEWELLERY WAS FOUND AT RESIDENCE AND FR OM BANK LOCKERS. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH, THE ASSES SEE HAD MADE STATEMENT ABOUT THE JEWELLERY OWNED BY OTHER RELATI VES OF ASSESSEE. HE POINTED OUT THE FREE ENGLISH TRANSLATION QUESTION N O. 4 TO QUESTION NO.7 AT PAGE 8 TO 12 OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED AT THE TIME OF SEARCH. FROM THE REPLY HE POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLEARLY STATED ABOUT THE JEWELLERY BELONGING TO OTHER PERSONS AND FAMILY MEM BERS. THE LD. A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN TERMS OF CBDT CIRCULAR NO .1916, THE ENTIRE JEWELLERY FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH EXPLAIN ED AND ONCE THE CBDT INSTRUCTION IS CONSIDERED ALONGWITH THE EXPLANATION PROVIDED, THE JEWELLERY FOUND STANDS FULLY EXPLAINED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE STAYS TOGETHER WITH 9 PERSONS AND THE GOLD ORNAMENTS BELO NG TO ALL THESE PERSONS AND THE ORNAMENTS WERE RECEIVED BY THEM OVER A PERI OD OF TIME. THE GOLD ORNAMENTS BELONGING TO LADIES ARE THEIR STREEDHAN RECEIVED ON THE OCCASION OF MARRIAGE AS WELL AS VARIOUS OTHER SOCIA L AND RELIGIOUS OCCASIONS. FURTHER CONSIDERING THE SOCIAL STATUS O F THE FAMILY, ALL THE GOLD ORNAMENTS STAND FULLY EXPLAINED. HE FURTHER RELIED ON THE DECISION OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RATANLAL VYAPARIL AL JAIN (399 ITR 351 (GUJ), MANILAL DAVE 117 TAXMANN 23 (AHD). HE THUS URGED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER NEEDS TO BE DELETED. 6. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE MAKING THE ADDITION HAS ALREADY GRANTED THE C REDIT FOR 500 GMS OF ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 5 JEWELLERY AS PER CBDT INSTRUCTION. FOR OTHER FAMIL Y MEMBERS, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT FURNISH THE CONFIRMATION AND THE REFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RIGHT IN MAKING THE ADDITION. HE THUS SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE IS THAT DUR ING THE COURSE OF SEARCH U/S 132 WHICH WAS CARRIED OUT AT THE RESIDENTIAL PR EMISES OF ASSESSEE, ORNAMENTS AND JEWELLERY AGGREGATING TO 2539.55 GMS WAS FOUND FROM THE BANK LOCKER AND RESIDENCE. IN THE STATEMENT RECORD ED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE JEWELLERY WER E ASKED TO ASSESSEE AND THE REPLIES ARE AS UNDER:- Q.4 TODAY FROM THE LOCKER NO.612 OF NUTAN NAGARIK COOPERATIVE BANK LTD., TOTAL GOLD ORNAMENTS OF 1642.00 GRAMS HA VE BEEN FOUND OUT, WHICH ARE INVENTORISED AS PER ANNEXURE-J F. TO WHOM DO THESE ORNAMENTS BELONG TO? ARE THESE ORNAMENTS S HOWN IN YOUR PERSONAL BALANCE-SHEET AS WELL AS WEALTH TAX R ETURNS? A.4 THESE ORNAMENTS BELONG TO MYSELF, MY MOTHER-IN- LAW, MY GRAND MOTHER-IN-LAW, MY FATHER-IN-LAW, MY HUSBAND, MY TWO DAUGHTERS AND MY SON, MY BHABHI (BROTHERS WIFE). THE DETAIL S OF THE SAME ARE AS UNDER:- 1. JISAL J. SHAH 487.500 GRAMS 2. JAXAY J SHAH 100.100 GRAMS 3. SHARADBHAI S SHAH 53.950 GRAMS 4. SHANTIBEN J SHAH 40.300 GRAMS 5. ARYAN J SHAH 16.000 GRAMS 6. BHARTIBEN 463.900 GRAMS 7. VASUBEN SHANTILAL SHAH 407.700 GRAMS 8. PUSHPABEN S SHAH 95.000 GRAMS-MAASI 9. VAISHALIBEN PINALBHAI 65.000 GRAMS ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 6 I AM NOT AWARE AS TO WHETHER THESE ORNAMENTS HAVE BEEN SHOWN IN THE WEALTH TAX RETURNS OR NOT. Q.5 DURING THE SEARCH PROCEEDINGS AT YOUR PREMISES, ORNAMENTS OF 810.00 GRAMS FROM YOUR RESIDENCE, ORNAMENTS OF 1642 .00 GRAMS FROM YOUR LOCKER NO.612 AND ORNAMENTS OF 87.250 GRA MS ARE FOUND FROM LOCKER NO.711 AND IN THIS MANNER, TOTAL ORNAMENTS OF 2839.51 GRAMS HAVE BEEN FOUND. WHAT IS YOUR EXPLAN ATION FOR THE SAME. A.5 IN THIS CONTEXT, I HAVE TO STATE THAT IN OUR HO USE, MYSELF, MY MOTHER-IN-LAW BHARTIBEN AND HER MOTHER-IN-LAW VASUB EN, THERE ARE TOTAL THREE MARRIED LADIES. IN ADDITION TO THE SE, THERE ARE MY TWO UNMARRIED DAUGHTERS SALVI AND RAJVI. FURTHER, THERE ARE THREE MALES IN OUR HOUSE I.E. MY HUSBAND, MY FATHER -IN-LAW AND HIS FATHER. ALL THE ABOVE REFERRED ORNAMENTS BELON G TO THE FAMILY MEMBERS OF OUR FAMILY. IN THIS CONTEXT, I HAVE TO FURTHER STATE THAT THE MAASI OF MY HUSBAND, PUSHPABEN HAS COME FROM AMERICA FOR THE PURPOSE OF MARRIAGE CEREMONY, WHICH MARRIAG E IS FIXED ON 9-2-2007 AND THE MARRIAGE OF IS SHREYASHBHAI. THE ORNAMENTS OF 35.00 GRAMS FOUND FROM LOCKER, WHICH ARE MENTION ED AT SERIAL NO.27 IN ANNEXURE JF, BELONG TO SMT. PUSHPABEN. IN ADDITION TO THE SAME, OUT OF THE ORNAMENTS FOUND OUT FROM MY HO USE, ORNAMENTS WEIGHING 319.700 GRAMS BELONG TO MY MAAS I SMT. PUSHPABEN, WHICH ARE MENTIONED AT SERIAL NOS. 17 TO 20 IN THE INVENTORY PREPARED AT MY HOUSE. IN THIS MANNER, OU T OF THE TOTAL ORNAMENTS WEIGHING 2539 GRAMS, ORNAMENTS OF 414 GRA MS BELONG TO MY MAASI SMT. PUSHPABEN. Q.7 IN ADDITION TO THESE, DO YOU WISH TO SAY ANYTIN G ELSE? A.7 YES, I WISH TO STATE THAT ONE SET OF ORNAMENT W EIGHING 65.00 GRAMS FOUND OUT FROM LOCKER NO.612 IS OF MY BHABHI [BROTHERS WIFE] SMT. VAISHALIBEN PINALBHAI SHAH. Q.3 WHEN WAS YOUR MARRIAGE PERFORMED? ORNAMENTS WE IGHING HOW MUCH MIGHT HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY YOUR FATHER AT THE TI ME OF YOUR MARRIAGE CEREMONY? ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 7 A.3 MY MARRIAGE WAS PERFORMED IN THE YEAR 1993. AT THE TIME OF MY MARRIAGE, MY FATHER HAD GIVEN ME ORNAMENTS OF ABOUT 51 TOLAS AND FROM MY FATHER-IN-LAW SIDE, ORNAMENTS OF ABOUT 31 TOLAS WERE GIVEN. IN ADDITION, ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS LIKE BIRT H OF MY CHILDREN, THEIR JIYANA, ETC. I HAVE RECEIVED ORNAMENTS OF ABOUT 30 TOLAS. Q.6 ARE THE ORNAMENTS OF YOURSELF OR YOUR FAMILY ME MBERS KEPT AT ANY OTHER PLACE? OR ARE THE ORNAMENTS OF OTHER PER SONS KEPT AT YOUR PLACE? A.6 MY ORNAMENTS ARE LYING IN MY LOCKER BUT ARE NOT LYING AT ANY OTHER PERSONS PLACE. BUT THE ORNAMENTS OF MY ONE MAASI NAMED SMT. PUSHPABEN SHARADBHAI SHAH, WHO HAS COME FROM AMERICA, ARE LYING IN MY LOCKER, WHICH SHE WILL IDE NTIFY BEFORE YOU. Q.13 IN YOUR REPLY TO QUESTION NO.6, YOU HAVE STATE D THAT AT YOUR PLACE, THE ORNAMENTS OF YOUR MAASI, WHO HAS COME FROM AM ERICA, ARE ALSO KEPT. HENCE HOW YOU IDENTIFY THE SAME? WHEN D ID YOUR MAASI PUSHPABEN CAME FROM AMERICA AND PRESENTLY, WHERE IS SHE? A.13 THE ORNAMENTS OF MY MAASI ARE KEPT IN A POUC H. SHE HAS COME TO OUR PLACE FROM AMERICA ON 6 TH FEBRUARY. SHE HAD STAYED AT OUR PLACE FOR ABOUT FOUR TO FIVE DAYS AND THEREAFTE R SHE HAS GONE TO . 8. THUS FROM THE ABOVE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED TO BE STAYING IN JOINT FAMILY A ND HAD SUBMITTED THE JEWELLERY BELONGING TO EACH OF THEM. THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED TO HAVE FILED THE CONFIRMATIONS OF THE LADY MEMBERS WHEREIN THEY HAVE CONFIRMED THAT THE JEWELLERY BELONGED TO THEM. THE ASSESSEE HAS A LSO SUBMITTED THE QUANTITY OF JEWELLERY WHICH HAS BEEN RECEIVED BY HE R AT THE TIME OF HER MARRIAGE IN 1993 AND ON VARIOUS OTHER OCCASIONS. I T IS ALSO A FACT THAT THE ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 8 DISCLOSURE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN RETRAC TED BY HER. NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY REVENUE TO CONTROVERT THESE FACTS. IN THE CASE OF RATANLAL VYAPARILAL JAIN (2011 339 I TR 351 (GUJ), THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- THOUGH IT IS TRUE THAT THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.1916, DT. 11 TH MAY, 1994 LAYS DOWN GUIDELINES FOR SEIZURE OF JEWELLERY AND O RNAMENTS IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH, THE SAME TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE Q UANTITY OF JEWELLERY WHICH WOULD GENERALLY BE HELD BY FAMILY M EMBERS OF AN ASSESSEE BELONGING TO AN ORDINARY HINDU HOUSEHOLD. THE APPROACH ADOPTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN FOLLOWING THE SAID CIRCU LAR AND GIVING BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE, EVEN FOR EXPLAINING THE SO URCE IN RESPECT OF THE JEWELLERY BEING HELD BY THE FAMILY IS IN CONSON ANCE WITH THE GENERAL PRACTICE IN HINDU FAMILIES WHEREBY JEWELLER Y IS GIFTED BY THE RELATIVES AND FRIENDS AT THE TIME OF SOCIAL FUNCTIO NS, VIZ. MARRIAGES, BIRTHDAYS, MARRIAGE ANNIVERSARY AND OTHER FESTIVALS . THESE GIFTS ARE CUSTOMARY AND CUSTOMS PREVAILING IN A SOCIETY CANNO T BE IGNORED. THUS ALTHOUGH THE CIRCULAR HAD BEEN ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF NON- SEIZURE OF JEWELLERY DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH, T HE BASIS FOR THE SAME RECOGNIZES CUSTOMS PREVAILING IN HINDU SOCIETY . IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, UNLESS THE REVENUE SHOWS ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY, IT CAN SAFELY BE PRESUMED THAT THE SOURCE TO THE EXTEN T OF THE JEWELLERY STATED IN THE CIRCULAR STANDS EXPLAINED. THUS, THE APPROACH ADOPTED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN CONSIDERING THE EXTENT OF JEWELL ERY SPECIFIED UNDER THE SAID CIRCULAR TO BE A REASONABLE QUANTITY, CANN OT BE FAULTED WITH. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO STATE T HAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS COMMITTED ANY LEGAL ERROR SO AS TO GIVE RISE TO A Q UESTION OF LAW. 9. THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT THOUGH THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.1916 DATED 11 TH MAY 1994 HAS BEEN ISSUED FOR THE PURPOSE OF NON- SEIZURE OF JEWELLERY DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AN D UNLESS THE REVENUE SHOWS ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY, IT CAN SAFELY BE PR ESUMED THAT SOURCE TO THE EXTENT OF JEWELLERY STATED IN THE CIRCULAR STAN DS EXPLAINED. IN THE PRESENT CASE ON THE FACTS SEEN IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE HIGH ITA NO. 818 OF 2010 . A.Y. : 2007 - 08 9 COURT, IT IS SEEN THAT NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD BY REVENUE TO CONTRADICT THE STATEMENT MADE AT THE TIME OF SEARCH . THUS RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISION, WE ARE OF THE VIE W THAT NO ADDITION CAN BE MADE IN THE PRESENT CASE. WE THUS DIRECT THE DELE TION OF ADDITION. 10. THUS THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 12- 4 - 2013. SD/- SD/- (G.C.GUPTA) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY AHMEDABAD. BIJU 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,AHMEDA BAD