ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA V. SHRI MANOJ RATHI, KOTA

MA 28/JPR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1711 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 07-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Tax effect; Penny stocks; Capital Gains; Bogus
• Section: 268A; 254(2); 20

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENC HES A JAIPUR JH LAANHI XKSLKBZ] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH FOE FLAG ;KNO] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SING H YADAV, AM M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 1252/JP/2018) FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2015-16 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA CUKE VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI B-213-214, TALWANDI, KOTA LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABIPR7295R VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SMT. RUNI PAL (ADDL. CIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ L S@ ASSESSEE BY : SH. P. C. PARWAL (CA) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 16/10/2020 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09/12/2020 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILE D BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO. 1258/JP/2018 DATED 22/08/2019. 2. IN THIS REGARD, THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT THE OR DER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT AS THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FINDING OF THE AO AFTER CONSIDERING THE INFORMA TION RECEIVED FROM INVESTIGATION UNIT, DELHI AND REPORT OF SEBI. DURIN G THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, IT WAS CLEARLY FOUND THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS TAKEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OF RS. 81,82,076/- IN THE FORM OF LTCG AND PAID M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 2 COMMISSION, HENCE THIS IS THE CASE OF PENNY STOCK A ND FALLS UNDER EXCEPTION TO MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING APPEALS SPE CIFIED AS PER CBDTS CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 DATED 6 TH SEPTEMBER 2019. CONSIDERATION THE ABOVE MENTIONED FACTS AND DESPITE THE TAX EFFECT IN VOLVED IN THE CASE BEING RS. 27,39,436/- WHICH IS BELOW THE LIMIT PRES CRIBED BY THE BOARD VIDE CIRCULAR NO. 17/2019 FOR FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, IT IS PRAYED AS PER SECTION 254(2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 THAT THE ORDER DATED 22/08/2019 IN ITA NO. 156/JP/2019 BE RECALLED IN VIEW OF EXCEPTION TO MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING APPEALS SPE CIFIED AS PER CBDTS CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 DATED 6 TH SEPTEMBER 2019. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD DR THAT THE SAID CIRCULAR DATED 6.09.2019 SH OULD BE READ IN CONTINUATION OF THE EARLIER CBDT CIRCULAR DATED 8.0 8.2019 WHICH WAS ALSO ISSUED BY WAY OF AMENDMENT TO EARLIER CIRCULAR NO. 3 OF 2018 AND ONCE THE SAID CIRCULAR HAS BEEN ISSUED, THE DEPARTMENT I S NOT PRECLUDED FROM FILING ITS APPEAL AND GETTING ITS APPEAL HEARD ON M ERITS AND THUS, THE APPEAL SO DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT MA Y BE RECALLED AND THE MATTER BE HEARD ON MERITS. FURTHER, RELIANCE WAS P LACED ON THE DECISION OF THE AHMEDABAD BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ITO VS SATISH M PATEL (MA NO. 377/AHD/2019 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 9 48/AHD/2019 DATED 10.02.2020) AND ITO VS AMBRISH CHANDRA SHARMA (MA N O. 369/AHD/2019 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 2484/AHD/2018 D ATED 10.02.2020). 3. PER CONTRA, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ON THE BAS IS OF CBDT CIRCULAR DTD. 08.08.2019, THE MONETARY LIMIT FOR MAINTAINING THE APPEAL OF DEPARTMENT WAS INCREASED TO RS. 50.00 LACS WHEREAS THE TAX DEMAND IN THIS CASE WAS RS. 26,55,450/- THUS BASED ON THE SAI D CIRCULAR, THE TRIBUNAL DECIDED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE I .E. THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT WAS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFE CT. IT WAS FURTHER M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 3 SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER WAS HEARD ON 20.08.2019 A ND DISPOSED OFF BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 22.08.2019 AND CBDTS CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 WAS ISSUED ON 06.09.2019 AND THEREFORE, THE APPEAL IN T HIS CASE HAVE BEEN DECIDED WELL BEFORE THE CIRCULAR DATED. 06.09.2019 ISSUED BY CBDT IN WHICH IT WAS MENTIONED THAT THE MONETARY LIMIT WILL NOT BE APPLICABLE IN THE CASES OF PENNY STOCK CASES AND IT IS THEREFORE NOT A CASE OF MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD AT THE TIME OF PASSING OF THE OR DER BY THE TRIBUNAL. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SIMILAR ISSUE HAS BEEN D ECIDED BY THE JAIPUR BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF DCIT CIRCLE- 2 VS SH. SURENDRA PATNI IN M.A NO. 68/JP/2019 DATED 24.02.2020 AND TH E FACTS ARE SIMILAR TO THE ABOVE CASE DECIDED BY THE JAIPUR BENCH AND T HE SAME MAY BE FOLLOWED AND THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE DEP ARTMENT BE DISMISSED. 4. HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PURUSED THE MATE RIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE IDENTICAL MATTER HAD COME UP FOR CONSIDERATION BEFORE THE COORDINATE JAIPUR BENCH IN CASE OF DCIT, CIRCLE-02, JAIPUR VS SH. SURENDRA KUMAR PATNI, JAIPUR IN MA NO. 68/JP/20 19 DATED 24/02/2020 WHEREIN SIMILAR CONTENTIONS WERE RAISED BY BOTH PARTIES, IT WOULD THEREFORE BE RELEVANT TO REFER TO THE FINDING S OF THE COORDINATE BENCH WHICH ARE CONTAINED AT PARA 4 TO 11 WHICH REA D AS UNDER:- 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PURUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LIMITED ISSUE UNDER CONSID ERATION IS WHETHER CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 DATED 6.09.201 9 READ WITH SPECIAL ORDER OF THE CBDT COMMUNICATED VIDE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED 16.09.2019 APPLIES TO THE INSTANT APPEAL AND THE CASE FALLS IN EXCEPTION OF PENNY STOCK, AND THE MATTER WHICH HAS BEEN ALREADY BEEN DISMISSED BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 2.09.2019, FOLLOW ING CBDTS M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 4 EARLIER CIRCULAR DATED 8.8.2019 ON ACCOUNT OF LOW T AX EFFECT, CAN BE RECTIFIED UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. 5. IN THIS REGARD, WE REFER TO CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 DATED 6.09.2019, THE CONTENTS THEREOF READ AS UNDER: SUBJECT: -EXCEPTION TO MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING APPEALS SPECIFIED IN ANY CIRCULAR ISSUED UNDER SECTION 268A OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961-REG REFERENCE IS INVITED TO THE CIRCULARS ISSUED FROM T IME TO TIME BY CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES (THE BOARD) UNDER SEC TION 268A OF THE INCOMETAX ACT,1961 (THE ACT), FOR LAYING DOWN M ONETARY LIMITS AND OTHER CONDITIONS FOR FILING OF DEPARTMENTAL APP EALS BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT). HIGH COURTS A ND. SLPS/APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT. 2. SEVERAL REFERENCES HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE BOA RD THAT IN LARGE NUMBER OF CASES WHERE ORGANISED TAX-EVASION S CAM IS NOTICED THROUGH BOGUS LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAIN (LTCG) /SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS (STCL) ON PENNY STOCKS AND DEPARTMENT IS UNABLE TO PURSUE THE CASES IN HIGHER JUDICIAL FORA ON ACCOUNT OF ENHANCED MONETARY LIMITS. IT HAS BEEN REPORTED THAT IN LARGE NUMBER OF CASES, ITATS AND HIGH COURT HAVE RECOGNIZED THE UNI QUE MODUS OPERANDI INVOLVED IN SUCH SCAM AND HAVE PASSED JUDG MENTS IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE. HOWEVER, IN CASES WHERE SOME APPELLATE FORA HAVE NOT GIVEN DUE CONSIDERATION TO POSITION O F LAW OR FACTS INVESTIGATED BY THE DEPARTMENT, THERE IS NO REMEDY AVAILABLE WITH THE DEPARTMENT FOR FILING FURTHER APPEAL IN VIEW OF THE PRESCRIBED MONETARY LIMITS. M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 5 3. IN THIS CONTEXT, BOARD HAS DECIDED THAT NOTWITHS TANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY CIRCULAR ISSUED U/S 268A SPECIFYING MONETARY LIMITS FOR FILING OF DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS BEFORE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT), HIGH COURTS AND SLPS /APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT. APPEALS MAY BE FILED ON MERIT S AS AN EXCEPTION TO SAID CIRCULAR, WHERE BOARD, BY WAY OF SPECIAL ORDER DIRECT FILING OF APPEAL ON MERIT IN CASES INVOLVED IN ORGANISED TAX EVASION ACTIVITY. 6. PURSUANT TO AFORESAID CIRCULAR, THE SPECIAL ORD ER HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE CBDT, COMMUNICATED VIDE OFFICE MEMORA NDUM DATED 16.09.2019 AND THE CONTENTS THEREOF READ AS U NDER:- SUBJECT: -SPECIAL ORDER OF BOARD EXEMPTING CASES I NVOLVING BOGUS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS(LTCG)/SHORT TERM CAPITAL LO SS (STCL) THROUGH PENNY STOCKS FROM MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN ANY CIRCULAR ISSUED UNDER SECTION 268A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 19 61-REG THE UNDERSIGNED IS DIRECTED TO REFER TO CIRCULAR NO . 23 OF 2019 DATED 6 TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 AND TO SAY THAT BY VIRTUE OF POWE RS OF THE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES U/S 268A OF INCOM E-TAX ACT,1961, THE MONETARY LIMITS FIXED FOR FILING APPE ALS BEFORE ITAT/HC AND SLPS /APPEALS BEFORE SUPREME COURT SHAL L NOT APPLY IN CASE OF ASSESSES CLAIMING BOGUS LTCG/STCL THROUG H PENNY STOCKS AND APPEALS/SLPS IN SUCH CASES SHALL BE FILE D ON MERITS. 7. ON READING OF THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 SO ISSUED BY THE CBDT, WE FIND THAT THE CBDT HAS DECIDED THAT M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 6 NOTWITHSTANDING MONETARY LIMITS FOR NOT FILING/PURS UING APPEALS IN TERMS OF ANY CIRCULAR ALREADY ISSUED UNDER SECTION 268A OF THE ACT SPECIFYING THE MONETARY LIMITS, THE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE CAN STILL BE FILED ON MERITS IN CASES INVOLVING ORGANIZED TAX EVASION ACTIVITY. HOWEVER, IN RESPECT OF WHICH ALL CASES OR CATEGORY OF CASES, SUCH APPEAL CAN BE FILED SHALL BE DECIDED BY WAY OF A SP ECIAL ORDER PASSED BY THE CBDT. THERE IS THUS A SPECIFIC REQUIR EMENT FOR ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL ORDER BY THE CBDT AND THEREFO RE, UNLIKE GENERAL EXCEPTIONS CARVED OUT FROM FILING APPEALS O N MERITS, IN THESE CASES, INVOLVING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS EXEMPTION THROUGH PENNY STOCKS, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR A SPECIAL ORDER TO BE ISSUED BY THE CBDT AND ONLY WHERE SUCH A SPECIAL ORDER HAS BEEN ISSUED, THE APP EAL SHALL BE FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 8. IN CASES INVOLVING LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS EXEMPTION THROUGH PENNY STOCKS, WE FI ND THAT THE CBDT HAS SINCE COME OUT WITH A SPECIAL ORDER COMMUN ICATED VIDE OFFICE MEMORANDUM DATED 16.09.2019 STATING THAT MON ETARY LIMITS FIXED FOR FILING APPEALS IN THESE CASES BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, HIGH COURT AND SUPREME COURT SHALL NOT APPLY IN CASE OF ASSESSEE CLAIMING BOGUS LTCG/STCG THROUGH PENNY STOCK AND AP PEAL SHALL BE FILED ON MERITS. THE SPECIAL ORDER THUS TALKS AB OUT FILING OF APPEAL IN SUCH CASES AND THEREFORE, IT RELATES TO A NY APPEAL IN SUCH CASES WHICH CAN BE FILED PURSUANT TO SUCH AN ORDER ON AND AFTER THE DATE OF SUCH SPECIAL ORDER AND THEREFORE DOESN T CONTEMPLATE A SITUATION WHERE THE APPEAL WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN F ILED PRIOR TO M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 7 ISSUANCE OF SUCH A SPECIAL ORDER BY THE REVENUE WHI CH SHALL BE READ AND UNDERSTOOD AS FILED PURSUANT TO SUCH SPECI AL ORDER. 9. WE ARE CONSCIOUS OF THE FACT THAT CBDT LOW TAX EFFECT CIRCULARS ISSUED FROM TIME TO TIME WHEREIN THE TAX EFFECT HAVE BEEN PROGRESSIVELY INCREASED BY THE REVENUE WITH A VIEW TO MINIMIZE THE LITIGATION HAS BEEN READ BY THE COURTS AND THE TRIBUNAL, AND EVEN THE CBDT HAS ALSO CLARIFIED LATTER, THAT THESE CBDT CIRCULARS SHALL APPLY NOT JUST TO FUTURE APPEALS BUT ALSO TO PENDING APPEALS AND THEREFORE, WHERE THE APPEAL HAS ALREADY BEEN FI LED BY THE REVENUE AND IS PENDING, SUCH APPEAL HAS BEEN HELD T O BE COVERED BY A SUBSEQUENT LOW TAX EFFECT CIRCULAR AND DISMISS ED ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT. HOWEVER, IN THE INSTANT CASE, TH E ISSUE IS REGARDING CARVING OUT AN EXCEPTION FROM SUCH LOW TA X EFFECT LIMITS AND THAT TOO, NOT JUST BY A GENERAL ORDER BUT BY WA Y OF A SPECIAL ORDER WHERE SUCH APPEALS CAN BE FILED, THEREFORE, U NLESS THE SPECIAL ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE CBDT AND AN AP PEAL IS FILED PURSUANT TO SUCH A SPECIAL ORDER, THE EXCEPTION CAN NOT BE READ AND UNDERSTOOD TO APPLY TO EXISTING APPEALS WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN FILED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE SPECIAL ORDER. THERE FORE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 20 19 SHOULD BE READ ALONG WITH SPECIAL ORDER OF THE CBDT DATED 16. 09.2019 IN RESPECT OF APPEALS FILED PURSUANT TO SUCH SPECIAL O RDER AND SHALL THUS APPLY TO ALL APPEALS FILED ON OR AFTER 16.09.2 019 BY THE REVENUE WHERE THE TAX EFFECT MAY BE LOW BUT THE APP EAL CAN STILL BE FILED BY THE REVENUE ON MERITS. M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 8 10. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE WAS FILED ON 16.04.2019 AND THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS NO T FILED PURSUANT TO SUCH A SPECIAL ORDER OF THE CBDT DATED 16.09.2019 AND THUS, THE MATTER DOESNT FALL IN ANY EXCEPTION AS SO PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT IN ITS EARLIER CIRCULAR DATED 8.8.2019 AND THE SPECIAL ORDER DOESNT APPLY IN THE INSTANT CASE AND THE APP EAL HAS THUS RIGHTLY BEEN DISMISSED BY THE BENCH ON ACCOUNT OF L OW TAX EFFECT IN LIGHT OF CBDTS CIRCULAR DATED 8.8.2019. 11. IN ANY CASE, BOTH CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 AND SPECIAL ORDER DATED 16.09.2019 WERE NOT IN EXISTENCE AND TH US NOT PART OF THE RECORD AT THE TIME WHEN THE MATTER WAS HEARD ON 23.08.2019 OR AT THE TIME OF PASSING OF ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 02.09.2019 AND THEREFORE, NON-CONSIDERATION OF SUCH CIRCULAR A ND THE SPECIAL ORDER SO PASSED BY THE CBDT IS NOT A MISTAKE APPARE NT FROM RECORD WHICH CAN BE RECTIFIED WITHIN THE NARROW COM PASS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. 5. FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISION, WHERE ONE OF U S WAS A PARTY, IN THE INSTANT CASE, WE FIND THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 05.11.2018 AND THEREFORE, THE PRESENT APPEAL WAS NO T FILED PURSUANT TO SPECIAL ORDER OF THE CBDT DATED 16.09.2019 AND AS T HE MATTER DIDNT FALL IN ANY EXCEPTION AS SO PRESCRIBED BY THE CBDT IN IT S EARLIER CIRCULAR DATED 8.8.2019 AND THE SPECIAL ORDER DOESNT APPLY IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE APPEAL WAS RIGHTLY DISMISSED BY THE COORDINATE BENC H ON ACCOUNT OF LOW TAX EFFECT IN LIGHT OF CBDTS CIRCULAR DATED 8.8.20 19. WE FIND THAT THIS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF THE MATTER THAT THE CBDT CIRCU LAR DATED 16.09.2019 IS BY WAY OF A SPECIAL ORDER AND THE APPEAL HAS BEE N DIRECTED TO BE FILED M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 9 BY VIRTUE OF SUCH SPECIAL ORDER HAS APPARENTLY NOT BEEN CONSIDERED IN OTHER CASES RELIED UPON BY THE REVENUE IN CASE OF S ATISH M PATEL AND AMBRISH CHANDRA SHARMA (SUPRA). FURTHER, WE FIND T HAT THE DECISION IN SAID CASES HAS ALSO BEEN GUIDED BY THE CONCESSION B Y THE LD A/R ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE TO GO FOR THE TAX SETTLEMENT SCHEME AND WE THEREFORE, FIND THAT THE SAID DECISIONS DOESNT SUP PORT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT BOTH CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 23 OF 2019 AND SPECIAL ORDER DATED 16.09.2019 WERE NOT IN EXISTENC E AND THUS NOT PART OF THE RECORD AT THE TIME WHEN THE MATTER WAS HEARD ON 20.08.2019 OR AT THE TIME OF PASSING OF ORDER BY THE TRIBUNAL ON 22. 08.2019 AND THEREFORE, NON-CONSIDERATION OF SUBSEQUENT CBDT CIR CULAR AND THE SPECIAL ORDER SO PASSED BY THE CBDT IS NOT A MISTAKE APPARE NT FROM RECORD WHICH CAN BE RECTIFIED WITHIN THE NARROW COMPASS OF SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT. IN THE RESULT, MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION SO FILED B Y THE REVENUE IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AND IS HEREBY DISMISSED IN LIGHT O F AFORESAID DISCUSSION. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 09/12/2020. SD/- SD/- LANHI XKSLKBZ FOE FLAG ;KNO ( SANDEEP GOSAIN ) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 09/12/2020. * GANESH KR. VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT M.A. NO. 28/JP/2020 DCIT, CIRCLE-01, KOTA VS. SH. MANOJ RATHI, KOTA 10 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR. 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE {M.A NO. 28/JP/2020} VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR