M/s. Shyam Builders, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax,(OSD) Circle-9, Ahmedabad

MA 167/AHD/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5262 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAMES KURIEN
• Assessee Lawyers: ASEEM THAKKER
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Peak credit; Additional evidence; Block assessment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM & SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM. M.A. NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO.16/AHD/2010 BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1989 TO 21.01.1997 M/S SHYAM BUILDERS, G-8, S. K. COMPLEX, THAKKARBAPA NAGAR ROAD, BAPUNAGAR, AHMEDABAD. VS. DCIT (OSD) CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABAD. APPELLANT RESPONDENT PAN AALFS 0056R APPELLANT BY SHRI ASEEM THAKKER, AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI JAMES KURIEN, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING: 03/02/2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06/03/2017 O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 29.07.2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/2010 FOR BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1989 TO 21.01.1997 PASSED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE, STATING THEREIN THAT - 1. THIS MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHYAM BUILDERS VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD), CIRCLE-9, AHMEDABAD ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TR IBUNAL, AHMEDABAD BENCH-'C', AHMEDABAD DATED 29.07.2016. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAD PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFO RE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD.CIT(A)-15, AHMEDABAD DATED 1 9.11.2009 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD COMPRISING OF 01.04.1989 TO 21.01.1997. MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 2 3. THE APPELLANT HAD RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHICH ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN PASSING AN ORDER WITHOUT GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT BEFORE ISSUING DIRECTIONS IN RESPECT OF SPECIAL AUDIT U/S. 142(2A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. IS AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE, HENCE THE SAME I S BAD IN LAW AND LIABLE TO BE CANCELLED, 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEA LS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ALLEGED PEAK CASH CREDITS EVEN THOUGH THE APPELLANT HAS FURNISHED THE CONFIRMATIONS AND OTHER EVIDENCES BEFORE HER AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES. THE YEAR WISE DETAILS OF ADDITIONS CONFI RMED ARE AS UNDER: A. YR. AMOUNT IN RS, 1995-96 24,05,000/- 1996-97 31,98,800/- BROKEN PERIOD 18,94,0001- THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OU GHT TO HAVE GIVEN CONSEQUENTIAL SET OFF IN RESPECT OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF PEAK CASH CREDITS DISCLOSED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND THE AMOUNT OF ADDITION FOR THE SAME MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR THE BROKEN PERIOD (I.E. RS. 22,50,000 - RS.18,94,000 = 3,56,000) AGAINST THE OTHER ADDITIONS CONFIRMED BY HER. 3. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING AN ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON ACCOUNT O F ON-MONEY RECEIPTS YEAR WISE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER :- A. YR. AMOUNT IN RS. 1995-96 20,98,734/- 1996-97 51,54,9141- 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ALLEGED NET ON MONEY RECEIPTS OF RS.50,56,433/- BEI NG THE INCOME OFFERED BEFORE THE HON 'BLE INCOME TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION WHEN THE NET RECEIPTS AS PER THE SPECIAL AUDIT REPORT AMOUNTS TO RS.39,90,580/- ONLY. 5. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS EVEN THOUGH THE SAME HAS BEEN D ECLARED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE SETTLEMENT COMMISSION DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER :- A. YR. 1996-97 T OTAL IN RS. I. DONATION 56,001 MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 3 PERIOD FROM 1.4.96 TO 21.1.97 TOTAL IN RS. I. DONATION 77,475 6. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE GROUND RELATING TO NOT GRANTING THE DEDUCTION OF THE CLAIM OF EXPENSES IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS SEIZED DURING THE SEARCH PROCEEDINGS ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME ARE NOT VERIFIABLE, EVEN THOUGH THE A.O. HIMSELF HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE SAME BOOKS, DOCUMENTS AND MATERIAL WHILE CALCULATING THE RECEIPTS AND TREATING THE SAM E AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. 7. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE GROUND RELATING TO IGNORING THE NOTINGS AND CLAIMS IN SEIZED MATERIAL BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON WHICH RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED WHILE COM PUTING THE ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE APPELLANT. 8. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS WITH REGARDS TO THE TRANSACTIONS WHICH AR E REFLECTED IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND FOR WHICH INDEPENDENT AND DISTINCT ASS ESSMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE. 9. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN NOT GRANTING DED UCTION OF LAND AND OTHER EXPENDITURE RELATED TO BUSINESS ACTIVITIES WHEN IT HAS BEEN ADM ITTED BY HIM THAT THERE IS UNACCOUNTED INVESTMENT THEREIN. 10. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HA S ERRED IN PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ALLEGED PROFIT/SURPLUS AS INDICATED IN THE P ROFIT & LOSS A/C. OF THE DUPLICATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AS PER SPECIAL AUDITOR'S REPORT IN SPITE OF SPECIFIC SHORTCOMINGS &'DEFICIENCIES POINTED OUT THEREIN. 11. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A PPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT BOOKING MONEY IN THE DUPLICATE BOOKS OF A CCOUNT ALSO INCLUDES BOOKING MONEY SHOWN IN THE REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. 4. THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAD PREFERRED AN APPLIC ATION BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITSC, MUMBAI FOR THE SETTLEMENT OF THEIR TAX LIABILITIES. THE APPLICATION CAME TO BE ABATED ON ACCOUNT OF NONPAYMENT OF TAX/INTEREST VIDE ORDER PASSED U/S 245HA DATED 22.10.2007. THE APPELLANT FIRM HAD OFFERED ADDITION AL INCOME FOR THE VARIOUS YEARS COMPRISING THE BLOCK PERIOD, THE DETAILS OF WHICH A RE AS UNDER: A.Y.1995-96 (I) NET PROFIT AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF RS.2,00,9 75 (II) PEAK CASH CREDIT RS.14,00,000/- (III) INTEREST ON PEAK CASH CREDIT RS.2,04,500 MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 4 A.Y.I 996-97 (I) NET PROFIT AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF RS.27,06, 214/- (II) DONATION RS.56,001 (III) PEAK CASH CREDIT RS.10,00,000/- PERIOD FROM 01.04.1996 TO 21.01.1997 (I) NET PROFIT AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF RS.50,56, 433/- (II) DONATION RS.77,475/- (III) PEAK OF CASH CREDIT RS.22,50,000/- THE AO MADE THE ADDITION OF FOLLOWING AMOUNTS FROM THE ABOVE: A.Y.1995-96 (I) NET PROFIT AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF RS. 2,00,975 (III) INTEREST ON PEAK CASH CREDIT RS.2,04,500 A.Y.I 996-97 (I) NET PROFIT AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF RS .27,06,214/- (II) DONATION RS.56,001 PERIOD FROM 01.04.1996 TO 21.01.1997 (I) NET PROFIT AS PER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF RS. 50,56,433/- (II) DONATION RS.77,475/- 5. THEREFORE, THE APPELLANT HAD OFFERED PEAK CASH C REDIT OF RS. 14,00,000/- AND INTEREST THEREON OF RS.2,04,500/- FOR A.Y. 1995-96. THE ASSESSEE FIRM HAD ALSO OFFERED PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS. 10,00,000/- FOR THE A.Y. 19 96-97 AND PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS.22,50,000/- FOR THE BROKEN PERIOD FROM 01.04.199 6 TO 21.01.1997. THE COPY OF THE STATEMENTS OF FACTS FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITSC W ITH RESPECT TO THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED WAS ALSO FURNISHED BEFORE THE HON'BL E ITAT CONSISTING OF PB DATED 22.09.2015 COMPRISING OF PAGES 1 TO 32. ATTENTION I S INVITED TO PAGE 12, 14,16 OF THE PAPER BOOK DATED 22.09.2015 WHICH CONTAINS THE PEAK CASH CREDIT STATEMENT ON THE BASIS OF WHICH OFFER FOR ADDITIONAL INCOME BEFORE T HE HON'BLE ITSC HAS BEEN MADE. 6. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THE APPELLANT HAD W ITH REFERENCE TO THE ADDITIONAL INCOME OFFERED BEFORE THE HON. ITSC HAD CONSENTED T O THE ADDITIONS AND AGREED TO WITHDRAW THE RELATED GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 7. THE PEAK CASH CREDITS AS WORKED OUT BY THE AO AN D BEING THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ADDITIONS IS AS PER THE ANNEXURE-A OF THE BLOCK ASS ESSMENT ORDER. THE COMPARATIVE PEAK CASH CREDIT BEING THE SUBJECT MATTER OF APPEAL IS CONTAINED ON PG.L 1 OF THE BLOCK ASSESSMENT ORDER AND WHICH ARE AS UNDER: MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 5 SR. NO. ASST. YEAR PEAK CASH CREDIT WORKING PREPARED BY THE ASSESSEE PEAK OF CASH CREDIT WORKED OUT BY THE DEPARTMENT. 1. 2. 3. 4 1. 1995-96 14,00,000 24,05,000 2. 1996-97 10,00,000 31,98,800 3 01/04/1996 TO 21/01/1997 22,50,000 18,94,000 THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS ALSO ADMITTED TO THE ADDIT ION OF PEAK CASH CREDIT AS PER COLUMN 3 ABOVE. THE ISSUE RELATING TO GROUND NO.2 R AISED BY THE APPELLANT RELATING TO PEAK CASH CREDIT HAS BEEN ADJUDICATED IN PARA 7.3 T O 7.9 AND PAGE 11 TO 15 OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE HON'BLE ITAT. THE FINDINGS IN PARA 7. 9 ARE REPRODUCED FOR EASY REFERENCE. 'WE FIND THAT CIT(A) HAS ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EV IDENCES SINCE THE SAME HAVE ALREADY BEEN FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE AO AFTER FOUR MONTHS PERIOD HAS NOT MADE BAY EFFORTS TO VERIFY GENUINENE SS OF THE CASH CREDITS. HOWEVER, CIT(A) ONLY ON DOUBTS AND SUSPICIONS WITHO UT DISCREDITING THE EVIDENCES HAS QUESTIONED THE RELIABILITY AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITI ON. FURTHERMORE, THE SEIZED BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE TO BE ACCEPTED IN ENTIRETY AND NOT PI ECE MEAL. THE CASH CREDITS AS APPEARING IN DUPLICATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE TO BE ACCEPTED AS GENUINE SINCE THESE BOOKS WERE FOR PERSONAL CONSUMPTION. IN VIEW OF THE SE ADDITIONS MADE FOR ALLEGED PEAK CASH CREDIT ARE NOT JUSTIFIED. SAME ARE DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. ' 8. SINCE THE APPELLANT FIRM HAD ACCEPTED THE ADDITI ON OF PEAK CASH CREDIT TO THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE INCOME HAS BEEN OFFERED BEFORE THE HON'BLE ITSC, IT IS REQUESTED THAT THE ABOVE ORDER BE KINDLY MODIFIED AND THE ADD ITION TO THAT EXTENT BE CONFIRMED, THE DETAILS OF WHICH ARE AS UNDER: PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS.14,00,000/- AND INTEREST TH EREON OF RS.2,04,500/- FOR A.Y.I995-96, PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS. 10,00,000/- FO R A.Y. 1996-97 AND PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS.22,50,000 FOR THE PERIOD FROM 01.04,19 96 TO 21.01.1997 AND THE BALANCE ADDITION OF CASH CREDIT BE DELETED AND THE GROUND B E TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED. 9. SINCE THE ORDER HAS BEEN RENDERED DRAWING INFERE NCES FROM THE ABOVE FACTS AND THE SAME BEING ERRONEOUS AND NOT CORRECT, IT IS RES PECTFULLY SUBMITTED THAT THE HONORABLE TRIBUNAL MAY PLEASE SUITABLY AMEND ITS OR DER TO RECTIFY THE AFORESAID MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 6 THE APPELLANT, THEREFORE, PRAYS THAT THIS MISTAKE B EING APPARENT FROM THE RECORD, MAY PLEASE BE RECTIFIED. 2. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE MISCELLANEOU S APPLICATION LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE REITERATED SUBMISSION S CONTAINED IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE GROUND RELATING TO PEAK CREDIT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PARTLY ALLOWED WHEREAS HON. TRIBUNAL HAS DELETED TH E TOTAL ADDITION OF PEAK CREDITS. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE DID NOT RAISE ANY OBJECTION TO THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US. THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLIC ATION FILED IN PURSUANCE OF TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 29.07.2016, LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAS REFERRED PARA 7.9 WHEREIN ADJUDI CATION HAS BEEN MADE OF THE GROUND RELATING TO ADDITION OF PEAK CRE DITS IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE AND THE IMPUGNED ADDITION HAS BEEN DELETED . WE FURTHER FIND THAT LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAS SUBMITT ED THAT IN THE BLOCK RETURN NO INCOME WAS SURRENDERED ON ACCOUNT OF PEAK CASH CREDITS. BUT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IT WAS REVEALED THAT ASSESSEE HAS MOVED AN APPLICATION BEFORE INCOME-TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AND HAS OFFERED PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS.4 6.50 LACS (RS.14 LACS & 10 LACS + 22.50 LACS FPR ASST. YEAR 1 995-96, 1996-97 AND FOR THE PERIOD 1.4.1996 TO 21.1.1997). HOWEVER, WHILE FRAMING THE ASSESSMENT LD. ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF R S.74.97 LACS MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 7 (RS.24,05,000/- + 31,98,800 + 18,94,000) FOR THE TH REE PERIODS REFERRED ABOVE. THIS ADDITION MADE BY LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CONFIRMED BY LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). AGG RIEVED, ASSESSEE CAME IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND IT WAS ADMITTED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING THAT PEAK CREDITS ADDI TION MAY BE SUSTAINED TO THE EXTENT OF AMOUNT OFFERED BEFORE TH E SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ALONG WITH ADDITION OF RS.2.04,500/- BEI NG INTEREST ON THE PEAK CREDIT FOR ASST. YEAR 1995-96. WE FURTHER OBSE RVE FROM THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNALS ORDER IN PARA 7.9 WHEREIN THE A LLEGED PEAK CASH CREDIT FOR ALL THE THREE PERIODS WAS DELETED. 5. IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ADMISSION OF LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MADE DURING THE CO URSE OF HEARING OF THE MAIN APPEAL, WE FIND THAT AN APPARENT MISTAKE H AS OCCURRED IN THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL DATED 29.7.2016 IN PARA 7.9 A ND WE RECALL THE ORDER FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSES OF MAKING A CHANGE I N PARA 7.9 TOWARDS ADJUDICATING THE GROUND OF ASSESSEE RELATING TO ADD ITION OF PEAK CASH CREDITS AND THIS PARA 7.9 IS REPLACED BY THE FOLLOW ING PARAGRAPH:- WE FIND THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A) HAS ADMITTED THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SINCE THE SAME HAVE ALREADY BEE N FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR HIS COMMENTS. THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER AFTER FOUR MONTHS PERIOD HAS NOT MADE ANY EFFORT TO VERIF Y THE GENUINENESS OF THE CASH CREDITS. LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION ONLY ON DOUBTS AND SUSPICION WITHOUT DISCREDITING THE EVIDENCE AND QUESTIONING THE RELIA BILITY. HOWEVER, IT IS MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 8 ALSO A FACT THAT LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE ON B EHALF OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED FOR CONFIRMING THE ADDITION O F PEAK CASH CREDITS TO THE EXTENT OF AMOUNT DISCLOSED BEFORE TH E INCOME-TAX SETTLEMENT COMMISSION AT RS.14 LACS AND INTEREST OF RS.2,04,500/- FOR ASST. YEAR 1995-96, RS.10 LACS. FOR ASST. YEAR 1996-97 AND RS.22,50,000/- FOR THE BROKEN PERIOD OF 1.4.1996 TO 21.1.1997. IN VIEW OF THESE ADMITTED FACTS WE SUSTAIN THE ADDITION OF PEAK CASH CREDIT OF RS.48,54,500/- AS ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AS AGAIN ST RS.74.97 LACS CONFIRMED BY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A). ACCORDI NGLY, THE GROUND OF ASSESSEE FOR THE ALLEGED PEAK CASH CREDIT IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILLED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06 TH MARCH, 2017 SD/- SD/- (S. S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 06/03/2017 MAHATA/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD MA NO.167/AHD/2016 IN IT(SS)A NO. 16/AHD/ 2010 BLOCK PERIOD 1.4.1989 TO 21.01.1997 9 1. DATE OF DICTATION: 03/032017 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE T HE DICTATING MEMBER: 06/03/2017 OTHER MEMBER: 3. DATE ON WHICH APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P. S./P.S.: 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT: __________ 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S./P.S.: 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK: 6/3/17 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER: 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER: