Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Vijendra Kumar, Bulandshahr vs Department Of Income Tax
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH: 'I' NEW DELHI
BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI B.K. HALDAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A No. 1202/Del/09
Asstt. year 1999-
1999-2000
ITO Vs. Vijendra Kumar,
Ward-
Ward-4, S/o Shri Kallu
Kallu Mal
Bulandshahr C/o M/s. Mohan Dairy,
Siyana Road,
Bulandshahr.
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by: Dr. B.R.R.Kumar, Sr. DR.
Respondent by: Shri Raj Kumar, CA
ORDER
PER DIVA SINGH, JM:
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order dated 4.2.2009 of CIT Meerut pertaining to 1999-2000 asstt. year.
2. The Department is in appeal on the following grounds :-
"Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), has erred in not considering the merits of the case and holding that initiation of Proceedings under section 147 are invalid?
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in holding that the information about the bogus nature of a particular gift furnished by the donor's ITO would not constitute a valid basis for formation of belief that income has escaped assessment.
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision of another CIT(A) or a non-jurisdictional bench of the ITAT was binding on the Ld. CIT(A)."
3. The relevant facts of the case are that the assessee had returned the taxable income of Rs. 89,940/- as per his return filed on 12.1.2000.
2 ITA No. 1202/Del/09Asstt. year 1999-2000 The assessment was reopened u/s 147 vide letter dated 8.12.2006 submitted through his Ld. AR. The assessee contended that the notice issued u/s 148 dated 28.3.2006 was never served upon the assessee. He also stated therein that the return which already stood filed on 12.1.2000 may be considered to be sufficient compliance.
3.1. The AO accordingly framed an assessment taking note of the fact that assessee is showing income from interest capital as partner from M/s. Mohan Dairy of Rs. 88,123; and income from other sources of Rs. 9,644. He considered that the assessee has received gifts of Rs. 15 lakhs. He observed that from M/s. Amit Trade Corporation M/s. Bhargava Enterprises; M/s. Shanti Enterprises;M/s Shanti Enterprises the assessee had received gifts of Rs. 5 lacs, Rs. 5 lacs, Rs. 1 lac, Rs. 4 lacs respectfully,.
3.2 Thus Rs. 15 lakhs were added to the income of the assessee taking note of the fact that the donor in fact was the representative assessee Shri D.K. Agarwal who was subject to survey u/s 133A who had allegedly arranged gifts for which commission was received by him.
3.3. The reopening was challenged on the ground that the AO had not exercised his independent mind and has acted merely on the act that some information was received from a different AO which was accepted without application of mind. It was assailed on the ground of being " a borrowed satisfaction".
4. Aggrieved by this action, the assessee went in appeal before the First Appellate Authority before whom the assessee again challenged the reopening on the ground that it was based on "borrowed satisfaction".
3 ITA No. 1202/Del/09Asstt. year 1999-2000 4.1 It was also agitated that the AO has acted on the basis of receipt of letter dated 22.3.2006 from the Income Tax Officer 4 (1) Agra on 28.3.2006 through fax. It was agitated that this reproduced verbatim the reasons recorded on the very same date. It was further contended that on the very same day proposal was also sent to the Additional Commissioner of Income Tax.
4.2. Apart from agitating that the AO has acted mechanically and completed the entire exercise on the very same date on which he received a fax it was also assailed on the following ground as per para 7 of the impugned order :
7. It was further claimed by the appellant that the letter dated 22.3.2006 did not accompany any evidence, reference of which has been made in the reasons recorded. The Assessing Officer therefore accepted the letter dated 22.3.2006 as gospel truth and without applying his own mind to the contents of the letter dated 22.3.2006 found it most convenient to issue notice to the assessee. Appellant submits that there may be no dispute that letter dated 22.3.2006 could be a source of information, but it cannot be appreciated that merely on the strength of letter without verifying the authenticity or correctness of the contents mentioned therein by the ITO 4(1), Agra and without himself having a look over the material, the reference of which was mentioned in the said letter the learned Assessing Officer only on the basis of "borrowed satisfaction" issued the notice disturbing the finality of the assessment which already stands concluded on account of non-issuance of notice under section 143(2) within the provided period of limitation.
4.3 Reliance was placed upon the following cases for the proposition that the exercise of the AO must contain the ingredients of a definite application of mind so as to form an independent belief:
a) Anant Kumar Soania vs. CIT reported in (1998) 232 ITR 533 (Gau.)
b) Madan Lal Jindal Vs. ITO reported in (1973) 92 ITR 546 (Cal.)
c) Mrs. Vinita Jain vs. ITO reported in (2007) 158 Taxman 167 (Del.) (Mag.) 4 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 4.4. It was further submitted before the CIT(A) that the order of the ITAT in the case of Vinita Jain which was challenged by the Revenue before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court was confirmed as reported in 299 ITR 383 (Delhi.) It was contended that the re-opening therein had been done on the basis of the DDIT (Investigation) belief that the transaction of capital gain was bogus. The Hon'ble High court held therein that the AO did not verify the correctness of the information received and simply accepted the correctness of the information.
4.5. In the context of these facts and position of law it was submitted that the reasons recorded in the present case is nothing but the copy of report as received from ITO 4 (1), Agra who was of the opinion that the transaction is non-genuine. The Assessing Officer issued the notice without there being any satisfaction of his own, on the "borrowed satisfaction" from the ITO 4(1), Agra without there being any relatable material and without verifying the correctness of the information received he issued notice accepting the Report by ITO 4(1), as gospel truth against the assessee, which action it was stated is clearly hit by the aforesaid authorities.
4.6 The action was assailed as being illegal and without authority of law and therefore, the consequent assessment it was agitated was without jurisdiction as such liable to be quashed.
4.7. As per page 5 of the impugned order reliance was further placed upon the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Indra Prastha Chemicals (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2004) 271 ITR 113 (All.) wherein the notice u/s 148 was issued by the Assessing Officer on the basis of Report submitted by Inspector of Income Tax. It was submitted that the Hon'ble High Court quashed the notice holding that in the Report of the Inspector 5 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 there was no relevant material to point out that any income has escaped assessment.
4.8 Reliance was also placed on the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs.Smt. Paramjeet Kaur reported in (2008) 168 Taxman 39 (P &H) wherein the notice u/s 148 was issued by the AO on the basis of Information received from the Survey Circle that the assessee has got prepared a draft which was not accounted for in its books of accounts. It was submitted that on being challenged the Hon'ble H.C. held as under: -
"In the instant case, it was undisputed that the Assessing Officer had initiated reassessment proceedings on the basis of information received from the survey circle that the assessee had got prepared a demand draft which was not accounted for in the books of account of the assessee. But the Assessing Officer has not examined and corroborated the information received from the survey circle before recording his own satisfaction of escaped income and initiating reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer had, thus, acted only on the basis of suspicion and it could not be said that the same was based on belief that the income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. The Assessing Officer has to act on the basis of 'reason to belief' and not on 'reasons to suspect'. The Tribunal had, thus, rightly concluded that the Assessing Officer had failed to incorporate the material and his satisfaction for reopening the assessment and therefore, the issuance of notice under section 148 for reassessment proceedings was not valid.
4.9 The action of the AO was also assailed as per the para 15 of the impugned order on the following reasoning :-
15. It was vehemently submitted by the appellant that the reasons have been recorded in a cyclostyled manner. It cannot be a co-incidence that almost all the Assessing Officer could have 6 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 recorded identical reasons. Reasons as recorded in the present case are on records. Assessee furnished a columnar chart demonstrating that ITO Ward-4 and ITO Ward-1, have recorded reasons which are similarly worded. It is therefore, proved that reasons have been recorded in a mechanical manner without independent application of mind by the Assessing Officer.
4.10 Pages 6-9 of the impugned order contains the tabular form of reasons recorded by the AO on the very same date.
4.11 The contention was also put forth on behalf of the assessee that formation of the required belief by the AO is a condition precedent for the issuance of notice and without formation of such belief the AO can not have jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s 147. The fulfillment of this condition it was contended was not a mere formality but it was a mandatory requirement. It was submitted that any failure to fulfill the condition would vitiate the entire proceedings.
4.12 As per para 16 and 17 following objections were also posed by the assessee :-
"16. On the basis of above, it was submitted by the appellant that reasons recorded are based on "borrowed satisfaction" from ITO 4 (1), Agra, recorded in a cyclostyled manner without application of independent mind and on these reasons it cannot be presumed that the Assessing Officer recording the satisfaction and issuing the notice had any belief of there own. It cannot be attributed to any co-
incidence and it fully proves the assessee's case that the reasons as recorded by the Assessing Officer lacks application of mind, lacks satisfaction of his own and cannot form valid basis for initiation of proceeding under section 148 against the assessee.
17. Assessee further submitted that under Section 147 of the Act the proceedings can be initiated only if the AO has reason to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. The question whether the AO had reasons to believe is not a question of limitation only but is a question of jurisdiction, a vital thing which when questioned needs to be examined by the appellate authorities."
7 ITA No. 1202/Del/09Asstt. year 1999-2000 4.13 The assessee placed heavy reliance on the following judgments as per pages 10 to 12 of the impugned order :-
i) Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd. Vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC)
ii) ITO vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das (1976) 103 ITR 437 (SC)
iii) Ganga Prasad Maheshswari & Others vs. CIT reported at 139 ITR 1043 (All.)
iv) Arjun Singh vs. Director of Income Tax reported in 246 ITR 363 (M.P) 4.14. Relying on the principles laid down in the above judgments it was contended as under vide para 23:
23. "It was thus submitted by the appellant that the reasons recorded may be examined in the light of above guiding principles as evolved by the various courts. Assessee submitted that he wishes to demonstrate the relevancy of the reasons recorded qua the facts on records. Assessee further submitted that assessee does not intends to challenge the sufficiency of the reasons as recorded by the ITO but as held by various Courts the relevancy of the reasons recorded are open can certainly be questioned and are open for judicial scrutiny. Thus, the reasons recorded may kindly be examined in the light of decisions referred above."
4.15. At page 12 to 16 para-wise comments adducing the reasons recorded made by the assessee again in a tabular form are found reproduced.
4.16. Reliance before the CIT(A) was further placed upon the orders of the Agra Bench vide orders dated 23.5.08 and 20.6.2008 in ITA Nos. 171,173, 174 and 175 alongwith CO No. 24, 26, 25 and 50 wherein the issue for consideration involved was identical as there also the re-opening was based on the same information pertaining to gift received from same to same Shri D.K. Agarwal.
4.17. Reliance was also placed upon the order dated 19.5.08 of the Agra Bench in ITA No. 484/Agr/2007 wherein the notice u/s 148 of the Act was found to be based on no valid reasons in the case of same kind of gifts.8 ITA No. 1202/Del/09
Asstt. year 1999-2000 4.18. Reliance was also placed upon yet another order dated 28.7.2007 of Agra Bench in ITA No. 468/Agra/2008 and 469/Agra/2008 for asstt. Year 1999-2000 wherein the reassessment proceedings were quashed. The facts were also stated to be identical. It was submitted that therein also there was the allegation that gifts received form Shri D.K. Aggarwal is a mere accommodation entry based on the very same information..
4.19. Reliance was also placed upon the case of Agarwal Warehousing leasing Ltd. vs. CIT 124 Taxman 440 (M.P) wherein the Hon'ble High Court held that the CIT(A) not only committed judicial impropriety but also erred in law in respect to follow the order of the Tribunal. It was emphasized that their lordships have hold them that even where the AO might have some reservation about the correctness of the decision of the Tribunal he had to follow.
4.20. In the context of the same proposition namely that the principles of the judicial discipline required that the order of the Higher Appellate Authorities should be followed unreservedly by the subordinate authorities, reliance was placed upon the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Kamlakshi Finance Corpn. Ltd. (1992) AIR S.C.711.
4.21. In line with the same proposition reliance was placed on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of K.N. Agarwal Vs. CIT reported in 189 ITR 769 (All). For ready reference relevant extract of the observation is reproduce hereunder :-
"Indeed, the orders of the Tribunal and the High Court are binding upon the Assessing Officer and since he acts in a quasi-judicial capacity, the discipline of such functioning demands that he should follow the decision of the Tribunal or the High Court, as the case may be. He cannot ignore it merely on the ground that the Tribunal's order is the subject matter of revision in the High Court or that the High Court's 9 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 decision is under appeal before the Supreme Court. Permitting him to take such a view would introduce judicial indiscipline, which is not called for even in such cases. It would lead to a chaotic situation. True it is that the dilemma of the Revenue is also real and substantial in such cases, but such a situation cannot be provided for by judicial interpretation by courts, but only by an appropriate agency."
4.22. Vide ground no. 2 before the CIT(A) the assessee agitated that notice u/s 148 was never served on the assessee. The said issue is addressed vide para 31 of the impugned order.
4.23. Arguments on facts and law in regard to ground No. 2 are found discussed in para 32 to 34 at pages 18 to 21 of the impugned order.
4.24. It was submitted that the AO disposed the assessee's objection in regard to the service of notice holding that the notice was served by notice server on Smt. Meenakashi Agarwal on 30.6.2006 and by speed post on 29.3.2006 on 18/33 Moti Bagh, Bulandshahr. It was assailed on the ground that the postal address to which notice was sent was the wrong address as the postal address of the assessee is Vijendra Kumar, C/o M/s. Mohan Dairy, Siyana Road, Bulandshahar. It was stated that the assessee has always been filing its return of income from the said address. Further it was submitted that the residential address of the assessee is 18/37 Moti Bagh, Bulandshar and not 18/33, Moti Bagh, Bulandshahar.
4.25. It was his submission that since the assessee has denied the receipt of service of notice u/s 148. Accordingly it was incumbent upon the AO to show that notice was properly served upon the assessee or his appointed agents. It was submitted that the said exercise was not done. Prior to service of notice the AO was required to record the requisite satisfaction that the notice could otherwise not be served on the assessee in person or 10 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 the assessee is avoiding service of notice. It was his objection that no such satisfaction has been recorded. No evidence has been shown that the assessee avoided service of notice or prior to service of notice reasonable and diligent efforts were made to serve notice upon the assessee. The AO as per record directly served the notice on a person whom he readily found available. This was stated to be in contravention to the requirements of law. For the said purpose. Reliance was placed upon the order of the Agra bench in the case of Pal Singh Gulati vs ITO 1(3) . The said order was relied upon for the proposition that herein the ITAT had quashed the notice u/s 148 served on the wife of the assessee. The fact was stated to be identical. The relevant finding relied upon by the assessee is found and reproduced pages 19 to 21 of the impugned order.
4.26. In regard to the alleged service through speed post it was his submission that the presumption that the same is served upon the assessee since it has not come back can operate, against the assessee only when the notice has been sent to the correct address. Since the address has not been correctly mentioned as it is neither the address which is mentioned in the assessee's income tax return which is available with the department and nor is it the correct residential of the assessee and is in fact a different address. Thus it was argued that the presumption cannot operate in favour of the department. It was submitted that no evidence has been brought by the department to show who has received the notice of the speed post and the assessee is prepared to file an affidavit in this regard if so desired. Accordingly, it was contended that the asstt. order made without a valid service of notice u/s 148 was stated to be void ab initio on the basis of the following judgments :
(i) Venkat Naicken Trust vs. ITO (2000)242 ITR 141 (Mad.)
(ii) Jagannath Prasad & Ors. Vs. CIT & Ors. (1977) 110 ITR 27 (All.)
(iii) CIT vs. Satya Narain Poddar (1973) 89 ITR 136 (All.) 11 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000
(iv) Kunj Behari vs. ITO (1983) 139 ITR 73 (P & H)
(v) Gajendra Kumar Banthia vs. UOI (1996) 222 ITR 632 (Cal.)
(vi) M.O. Thomas vs. CIT(1963) 47 ITR 775 (Ker.)
(vii) Whirlpool India Holdings Lt.d vs. DDIT (2004) 1 SOT 165 (Del.)
(viii) World Wide Exports (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2004) 91 ITD 519 (del.)
(ix) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar Sharma (2008) 214 CTR (del.) 547 4.27. Thereafter vide paras 35 to 67 and the pages 22 to 34 the assessee advanced various arguments on merit. It was contended that the facts available on record were not considered by the AO in the correct perspective in line with the settled legal principles. The judgments relied upon by the AO on merit were discussed at length and the applicability of these in the facts was addressed. Judgments of various High Courts and the apex court were relied upon at length in order to contend that the additions have been made dehorse the facts as such the addition deserves to be deleted in the eventuality the assessee does not succeed on the grounds of jurisdiction.
5. Considering the submissions the CIT (A) proceed to quash the proceedings vide para 69 to 74 found at pages 35 to 38 of the impugned.
The CIT(A) held that the reopening has been based on the reasons forwarded by ITO ward 4 (1) Agra by ITO Ward 4 Bullandshar it has been held by him that there is no application of mind by the AO as there were no details or information which could prime facie establish the non genuineness of the gifts. The AO was held to have initiated proceedings on the basis of vague and sketchy information supplied to him by ITO 4 (1) Agra. In order to come to the conclusion he relied upon the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Paramjeet Kaur cited supra reliance is also placed upon the order in the case of Mrs. Vinita Jain vs ITO (2007) 158 Taxman 167(Del)(Mag.) which was approved 12 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 and upheld by the Delhi High Court as found reported in (2008) 299 ITR 383 (Delhi). Reliance was further placed upon the ITAT, Agra Bench decisions in ITA No. 171/173/174/175/Agra/2008 for A.Y. 1999-2000 and C.O. No. 24/26/25/50/Agra/2008 in which cases the ITAT quashed the reassessment proceedings wherein the issue involved was found to be similar and the reasons recorded were considered to be identical.
5.1. Accordingly in view of the aforementioned factual and legal position he concluded as under :-
"73. In the light of above discussion, it is evident that reasons as recorded in the instant case is nothing but the copy of report as received from ITO 4(1), Agra who was of the opinion that the transaction is non-genuine. The Assessing Officer issued the notice without there being any satisfaction of his own, on the "borrowed satisfaction" from the ITO 4 (1), Agra without there being any reliable material and without verifying the correctness of the information received and issued notice accepting the Report by ITO 4 (1), as gospel truth against the assessee, which action is clearly hit by the aforesaid authorities. I am also persuaded by the decision taken by my counter part CIT(A)-II, Agra. In the following cases the learned CIT(A)-II, Agra had quashed the reassessment proceedings, copies available on records :
(a) Preeti Agarwal vs. ITO 4(3), Agra dated 24.10.2008
(b) Mahesh Chand Agarwal vs. ITO 4 (2), Agra dated 24.10.2008
(c) Meera Rani vs. ITO 4(2), Agra dated 24.10.2008
(d) Meenu Rani Mittal vs. ITO 5 (2), Firozabad dated 22.10.2008
(e) Raj Kumar Mittal vs. ITO 5 (3), Firozabad dated 23.10.2008
(f) Kusum Kumari Mittal vs. ITO 5(2), Firozabd dated 23.10.2008
(g) Kunal Mittal vs. ITO 5(3), Firozabad dated 22.10.2008
(h) Ram Niwas Mittal vs. ITO 5(3), Firozabad dated 23.10.2008 The decision of mine would be in conformity with the view taken by the Hon'ble ITAT, Agra Bench, Agra and with decisions as held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India vs. Kamalakshi Finance Corpn. Ltd. (supra) and by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court 13 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 in K.N.Agarwal vs. CIT (supra) is binding on appellate authorities.
Therefore, in the totality of facts and circumstances of the case as detailed out above and in view of the legal position the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing notice under section 148 on the basis of reasons as recorded by him is declared without authority of law and therefore, the consequent assessment is void-ab-initio without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed.
74. Appellant has also filed submission on merits. However, after having held that the reasons recorded in this case are not valid and on which action under section 148 could not have been taken, there is no need to decide other grounds taken on merits in view of the decisions of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Rawatmal Harakchand vs. CIT (1981) 129 ITR 346 (Cal.) and Hon'ble ITAT (S.B.). Nagpur Special Bench in the case of Rahul Kumar Bajaj vs. ITO (1999) 69 ITD 1 (Nag.) (S.B.)"
6. Aggrieved by this finding the revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal.
7. Ld. DR places reliance upon the assessment order. He further places heavy reliance upon the following judgements :-
1. Praful Chunilal Paten vs. M.J. Makwana/ACIIT reported in 236 ITR 832
2. H.A. Nanji & Co. vs. ITO, Awadh District part (2), Calcutta reported in 120 ITR 593 (Calcutta)
3. ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. reported in 291 ITR 500 (Sc)
4. Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and another vs. ITO reported in 203 ITR 456 (SC) 7.1 On the basis of these it was his contention that for the formation of belief some information is sufficient and no preliminary inquiry is required to be made by the AO. In the facts of the present case the AO has rightly reopened the proceedings by way of recording his reasons in writing and satisfaction is of the AO concerned. The same has been arrived at on the basis of information in his possession that the gifts are not genuine as 14 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 such the action of the AO is very much within the requirements of the Act and the settled legal principles.
8. The authorised representative of the assessee on the other hand relied upon the impugned order.
8.1. The various judgements relied upon by the assessee before the CIT(A) were also heavily relied upon. It was submitted that these are discussed at length in the impugned order and assessee is placing heavy reliance on them. Heavy reliance was placed upon the submissions advanced before the CIT(A) which are also discussed at length in the impugned order. Inviting attention to the same it was reiterated that it is a fact on record that the reopening was done purely on the basis of letter dated 22.3.2006 received from ITO Ward 4(1) on 28.3.2006 by fax. For this assertion attention was invited to paper book 2 so as to contend that the letter mentioned that one Shri D.K. Agarwal created certain trusts and has given gifts, donations etc. to donees having no relationship with the trust.
8.2. Apart from the arguments advanced before the CIT(A) on the basis of which the proceedings were quashed it was submitted that the assessee would further want to support the impugned order on certain other facts which are available on record.
8.3 The Assessment Order was assailed on the ground that there are various other shortcomings in the reasons recorded which would show that the reopening has been done in a mechanical basis. It was contended that it was a case of complete non application of mind on the part of the AO. Referring to the reasons recorded it was submitted that the reopening was done as per the department on account of the alleged bogus transactions of gifts from four trusts amounting to Rs. 20 lacs as would be evident from the page 2 which contains a copy of the reasons recorded.
For ready reference these details are reproduced hereunder :-
15 ITA No. 1202/Del/09Asstt. year 1999-2000 Gift Amount Ch/DD No. Date Name & address of the donor Rs.5,00,000/- 307084 20.01.1999 from M/s. Mahesh Trust, 31/87 Lohar Gali, Agra Rs.5,00,000/- DD 21.01.1999 M/s. Smt. Meera Agarwal Family Trust, Agra Rs.1,00,000/- DD861978 21.1.1999 M/s.Gyanendra Agarwal (P)Family Trust,Agra 138929 Rs.4,00,000/- DD8619825 23.01.1999 M/s. -do- Rs.5,00,000/- 307064 20.01.1999 M/s. Dinesh K Agarwal(P) Fly(Sp.)Trust,Agra Rs.20,00,000/-
8.4. Inviting attention to the assessment order it was submitted that addition has been made on the other hand on account of bogus gifts of Rs. 15 lacs as opposed to the reason recorded which talks of bogus gifts of Rs. 20 lacs.
8.5 Addressing the AO u/s 147 vis a vis the reasons recorded it was further submitted that none of the trusts mentioned by AO are the ones from whom gifts have been received as would be evident from page 3 and 4 of the asstt. Order. The details as per assessment order are as under :-
AS PER PER ASSTT. ORDER, Amount (Rs.) Trust Name 50000/- Amit Trade Corpn. (Trust) 100000/- Shanti Entpp. (Trust) 400000/- -do-
500000/- Bhargava Entpp. (Trust) 1500000/- 1500000/- TOTAL
whereas as per the reasons recorded the facts are as under :-
AS PER REASONS RECORDED
Amount (Rs.) Trust Name
16 ITA No. 1202/Del/09
Asstt. year 1999-2000
500000/- Mahesh Trust
500000/- Meera Agarwal Family Trust
100000/- Gyanedra Agarwal (P) family Trust
400000/- -do-
500000/- Dinesh K Agarwal (P) Fly (SP) Trust
2000000/- Total
8.6. Accordingly it was his submission that a perusal of the AO vis a vis the reasons recorded would show the bare fact that not only the donor trusts were entirely different but even the demand draft cheque Nos. were entirely different . This fact it was argued further supports the impugned order and the finding therein that how blindly and mechanically the AO has proceeded to reopen the concluded assessment. It was his submission that there was no application of mind of the AO. The argument advanced before the CIT(A) that the faxed information of ITO Agra was accompanied with no details on which the AO could have applied his mind was reiterated. It was argued that there was no material before the AO to disbelieve the assessee and treat the information of a different ITO as sacrosanct and correct as a gospel truth.
8.7. Reiterating again the arguments advanced before the CIT (A) which have been accepted in the impugned order it was his submission that the fax admittedly was received by the concerned ITO on 28th March, 2006 on the basis of it reasons were recorded in a mechanical manner on the very same date; and even the approval of the Additional Commissioner was obtained again on the very same date and as though this was not enough the notice was also prepared on 28th March, 2006 as is evident from paper book page I. The facts remained that in order to reopen the assessment admittedly the AO did not call for or examine any documents whatsoever so, as to, cross-check on what basis was the material examined by the AO of Agra. The AO sitting at Bullandshar it was emphasised relied blindly 17 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 on the information of AO Agra without caring to examine a single document. It was his contention that the CIT(A) has held that the AO has proceeded on borrowed satisfaction and nothing has been placed on record by the department to show that there was any material before the concerned officer to hold that income had escaped assessment. It was emphasised that since no documents either accompanied the fax information and admittedly no independent inquiry to form the prime facie belief that income has escaped was done by the concerned AO. In fact it was contended that the AO did not even have those documents on the basis of which ITO Agra sent the fax to the concerned AO. Thus the impugned order was supported on the ground that the concerned AO did not even examine the correctness of the information . For the said assertion reference was again made to the amounts and the name of the trust mentioned in the reasons recorded and how they do not tally either in the total amount or in the names of the donor trust with the trusts mentioned in the assessment order. It was argued that since there was no application of mind by the concerned AO as he has proceeded on borrowed satisfaction no independent inquiry was done and there was no material before him in order to come to the conclusion to form a prime facie belief the proceedings have been rightly quashed. It was also reiterated that the manner in which the entire exercise of such a solemn nature is done in a mechanical basis entirely in a day shows how carelessly the AO has proceeded. It was emphasised that there is no compatibility in the reasons recorded and the cases examined in the reassessment proceedings as neither the names of the donors nor the total amount matches with the reasons recorded vis a vis the assessment order. It was submitted by him that the reasons are non est. 8.8. Inviting attention to section 147 it was contended that section 147 mandates that other income can be charged to tax only alongwith the income for which reasons are recorded and if the income mentioned in the 18 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 reasons is not relevant or is not concealed income then no other income can be taxed. It was contended that once the AO comes to the conclusion that income in respect of which he has issued notice was found explained his jurisdiction comes to a stop and he cannot tax any other income which comes to his knowledge subsequently after the issuance of the notice and thus when the income mentioned in the reasons is not found as escaped income no other income can be assessed u/s 148 For the said proposition reliance was placed upon ITO vs Lakshay Exim Pvt. Ltd. 131 TTJ (Del) 621.
8.9. In the context of the principle settled in ITO vs. Lakshay Exim reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements :-
Authorities :-
Cit Vs. Jet Airways India Ltd.331 ITR (Bom) 236 Cit Vs. Shri Ram Singh 217 CTR (Raj.) 345 Manoj Surgical Industries (2010)42 DTR (Indore)(Trib.)81 Cit Vs. Dr. Devendra Gupta 220 CTR (Raj.) 629 Cit Vs. Atlas Cycles Industries 180 ITR 319 (P &H) Chhagan Lal Urf Vidhya Sagar Gupta (08) 12 DTR (Jod.)(Trib.) 497 Cit Vs. Raj Finlease Ltd. 220 CTR (Mad.) 306 8.10. Without prejudice to the arguments advanced it was further contended that there was no application of mind by the AO to initiate proceedings u/s 147 and there were no satisfaction of concealment recorded by the AO in the reasons recorded.
8.11. Again inviting attention to the requirements as spelt out in section 147 it was his submission that the AO should have reasons to believe and the reason to believe can be formed only when there is some material before the AO which may suggest some escaped income and a fax letter of a different ITO cannot lead to reason to believe of the concerned AO.19 ITA No. 1202/Del/09
Asstt. year 1999-2000 The concerned AO as per settled legal principles has to do some exercise independently on the information to cross check its correctness. Since admittedly the assessee did not receive any gift from the alleged donors as mentioned in the reasons recorded. This itself approved the fact that the AO has not applied his mind at all and has merely proceeded on borrowed satisfaction treating the information of a different AO to be the gospel truth. Reliance in support of the said proposition was placed upon the following judgments .
Cit Vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd. 233 Ctr (Del.)69 Sarthak Securities Co. (P) Ltd. 329 Itr 110 (Del.) Tej Pratap Singh 116 Itd 388 (Del.) Cit Vs. Smt. Paramjit Kaur 311 Itr 38 8.12. The impugned order was also assailed on the ground that in the facts of the present case there was no notice served upon the assessee. Heavy emphasis was laid on the fact that often this argument is advanced at the last stage by the assessee. However in the facts of the present case it was submitted that the assessee has assailed the action of the AO right from the beginning. Inviting attention to the assessment order it was submitted that this objection is posed by the assessee before the AO and this fact is found discussed in the assessment order itself and the AO however has twisted the reply given. Copy of reply dated 23/11/2006 submitted to the AO which is placed at page 3 of the Paper Book addresses this fact. Attention was invited to page 18 of the impugned order wherein vide para 31 onwards the assessee has agitated this issue specifically. Inviting attention of the Bench to this consistent grievance of the assessee on record it was re-iterated that in regard to the notice allegedly sent by post, is addressed as per record to the wrong address and the service of notice on Smt.Meenakshi Aggarwal is on a person not authorised by the assessee as such on a wrong person. Inviting attention to page 3 which is a letter addressed to the AO dated 23.11.2006. It was 20 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 submitted that the assessee at the opening sentence itself states that that no notice u/s 148 has been served upon the assessee as such no return in compliance to the said notice was filed. Inviting attention to said letter it was submitted that it was stated that at the end of the letter that the proceedings are invalid and void ab initio as no notice u/s 148 has been served upon the assessee.
8.13 It was his vehement stand that right from the beginning the assessee has been consistently disputing the service of notice. The service of notice on any relative by the name of Meenakshi Aggarwal it was contended cannot be considered to be a valid service in terms of section 282 of the Income Tax Act. The notice it was submitted had to be served on the assessee and not on some lady mentioned as Minakshi Agarwal. It was contended that she is not an authorized agent of the assessee and the fact remains assessee has never received such notice. The said action was stated to be bad in law as per the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rajesh Kumar Sharma 311 ITR 235 (Del) wherein the court was seized of an identical issue. In the facts of that case notice was received by person other than the assessee and there was no material on record to show that the said person was the authorised person and since the assessee disputed that there was no receipt of notice. The High Court was of the view that the onus was placed on the revenue to prove deemed receipt. In regard to the notice sent through post therein the address was found to be incomplete and in fact a wrong address. As such the impugned order was supported on this ground too as it was the argument of the Ld. AR that these grievances of the assessee are available on record and stand unrebutted. Admittedly the address mentioned in the postal address is not the correct address of the assessee. At the cost of re-iteration it was pointed out that it is neither the address from which returns are filed nor is it the correct residential address. It was further stated that the asstt. order itself has been framed 21 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 mentioning this address and all other notices sent to the address over the years have always been received by the assessee. The presumption of service cannot operate in favour of the AO since the address mentioned is admittedly a wrong address. In the face of the assessee's stand the onus was upon the department to prove service by producing cogent material which may include the AD or service report from the postal authorities which is not available. Reliance was placed upon CIT vs. Laxmi Narain 168 Taxman 128 (P & H). for the contention that if service by Registered post is denied then the onus shifts to the department to prove the service by producing the postal records. Thus the registered post services as per settled legal proposition remains unproved.
8.14. Accordingly it was his contention that the impugned order deserves to be upheld.
8.15. It was also submitted that the assessee has argued the appeal at length before the CIT(A) even on merit and the CIT(A) has recorded the arguments on record. As such heavy reliance was placed upon them in the eventuality the department succeeds in its grounds.
9. Ld. DR on the other hand in regard to the residential address contended that in a small place like Bullandshahar mentioning of the address as 18/37 or 18/33 is not a major flaw and presumably the letter would have been received by the assessee as it has not been sent back unserved for the department. In regard to addressing the letter to M/s. Mohan Dairy, the only occupants would presumably be cows and buffallows as such the department may have considered it prudent to send the notice to the residential address by the post . It was also his submission that the AO has proceeded on his own satisfaction and the asstt. Order deserves to be upheld and the impugned order it was requested may be set aside.
22 ITA No. 1202/Del/09Asstt. year 1999-2000
10. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The judgments relied upon by the parties before the Bench and the orders of the co-ordinate Benches relied upon before the CIT(A) and before us by the Ld. AR as well as the Ld. DR have been taken into consideration.
10.1. On consideration of the facts and arguments thereon alongwith the legal principles canvassed before us by the parties before the Bench the undisputed facts which remain on record are that the information of ITO Agra Ward 4(1) was received by fax by the concerned Assessing Officer on the very day on which he recorded his reasons, obtained the necessary approvals and issued notice. It is also an undisputed fact on record that the reasons recorded are verbatim with the faxed information. It is also a matter of record that none of the donor trusts are the trust from whom the assessee has received gifts. It is also a matter of record that qua the information received and reasons recorded the gifts were allegedly of Rs. 20 lakhs whereas the assessment order would show that they are of Rs. 15 lakh. These are some of the facts on the basis of which it has been canvassed that the reasons recorded are based on borrowed satisfaction, The AO has proceeded in haste and acted mechanically as admittedly the specific facts namely donor trusts, amounts, were all wrong. It is seen that on facts the department has not rebutted the assessee's stand. The department has relied upon case law to canvass that once the reasons are recorded on the information received, the action of re-opening is justified. No doubt sufficiency of reason cannot be agitated however the first hurdle that the formation of belief is of the concerned AO and not of some other AO has to be met. The blind acceptance in haste the view of another AO has not been rebutted by any cogent fact or argument and to our mind case law cannot address the issue. A perusal of the finding of the CIT(A) reproduced in the earlier part of this order would show that Appellate Authority has held that the reasons recorded is nothing but a copy of information as received 23 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 from ITO 4(1) Agra who was of the opinion that the transaction is non- genuine. The CIT(A) has come to the conclusion that the AO has proceeded on "borrowed satisfaction". The AO has been held to have proceeded in issuing notice accepting the report of ITO 4 (1) as gospel truth without verifying the correctness of the information received. The CIT(A) has further taken into consideration the order dated 23rd May, 2008 in ITA No. 171to 175 / Agra / 2006 alongwith CO. No. 24 / 25 / and 50 the Agra /2008 so as to conclude that the issue is covered. A perusal of the above mentioned order dated 23rd May, 2008 placed at pages 2 to 10 of the Paper Book shows that the co-ordinate Bench considered the cases of three different assessees namely Vipin Kumar Aggarwal, Sunil Kumar Aggarwal and Anil Kumar Aggarwal wherein the issue for consideration was the satisfaction of the AO based on information from AO Agra of bogus gifts for trusts created by Shri D.K. Agarwal on the basis of survey u/s 133A conducted on 22.4.2001 at the premises of Shri P.K. Aggarwal. The co-ordinate Bench dismissed the departmental appeal wherein the addition had been deleted on merit and considering the assessee's cross objection wherein the CIT(A) had upheld the proceedings u/s 147 the co- ordinate Bench relying upon CIT vs. Anita Jain and Vinita Jain's case reported in 299 ITR 383 held that the issue is covered by the principle set down in the said judgment in as much the AO accepted without verifying the correctness of the information received by him in a mechanical manner. The co-ordiante Bench has also relied upon Indra Prastha Chemicals (P) Ltd. vs. CIT 271 ITR 113 (All). In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances as they stand we are of the considered view that the departmental appeal does not have any merit. Being satisfied with the reasoning and conclusion arrived at by the CIT(A) and considering the same in the light of the settled legal principle the same is upheld. In the facts of the present case the assessee has further fortified the finding arrived at in the impugned order by the unrebutted arguments advanced namely that the AO has mechanically proceeded without verifying the 24 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 correctness of the information given as not only the name of the donors as per the reasons recorded based on the information given is incorrect but even the amounts qua the facts in the assessee's order when compared with the reasons recorded is completely wrong.
10.2 Before parting we would like to discuss the case law relied upon by the Ld. Sr. DR which has been taken into consideration by us.
10.3 On a careful consideration of the principles laid down by the courts in the facts before them it is seen that in the facts of the present case they do not strengthen the case of department in any manner. Notwithstanding the fact that each case proceeds on facts entirely peculiar to its own. It is seen that the principles laid down therein cannot have a blanket application . We consider it appropriate to discuss them separately. It is seen that the Ld. DR has heavily relied upon Praful Chunilal Patel vs. M.J. Makwana/ACIIT, H.A. Nanji & Co. Vs. ITO, ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brothers (P) Ltd., Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another vs. ITO (citied supra) for the proposition that for the formation of belief some information is necessary and no preliminary inquiry is required to be made and as long as reasons are recorded; the satisfaction of the AO on the basis of information available with him will tantamount to fulfilling the requirements of law.
10.4 H.A. Nanji & Co. Vs. ITO, Calcutta ( cited supra ):-
) It is seen that the facts available on record were that after the deductions claimed by the assessee on account of interest paid on hundi loans were accepted as genuine in the original assessments subsequently the ITO received a circular from the special investigation department. The said circular gave the list of bogus creditors which included the alleged creditors of the assessee. The initiation of reassessment proceedings was held to be a valid action. Their Lordships held that it could not be said that the discovery of creditors of the assessee as bogus creditors was an 25 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 inferential fact based on the same materials which the assessee disclosed as primary facts. On a reading of the recorded reasons it became obvious that a comparison of the names of the bogus creditors with the list of those shown by the assessee was made by the ITO which was the investigation contemplated by the circular and when such names disclosed by the assessee were found in the list the ITO straightway recorded his prime facie positive belief that income had escaped assessment. In the facts of the present case as has been successfully demonstrated by the assessee that the names of the donors trusts in the information found has been verbatim recorded in the reasons and the assessee has never received gifts from those donor trusts. Moreover as per the reasons recorded the assessee was supposed to have received gifts by way of specific cheques and DDs amounting to Rs. 20 lacs and on a perusal of the assessment order page 3 it is seen that the gifts were received of Rs. 15 lacs. In this background the argument of the assessee relying upon the order of the coordinate Bench at Agra that AO has proceeded on "borrowed satisfaction" as no effort was made whatsoever to atleast to cross check the names of the donor and the amount of gifts received by the assessee. The fact that these were bogus gifts or genuine gifts would be an inference which could be drawn only after the basic fact that the donor trusts were same and the amount considered to have been received by the assessee as per reasons recorded and assessment order were same the same. The blind belief which the AO placed on the correctness of the information received is apparent. Had he made some efforts to cross check the correctness of the information then he would have seen that not only donor trusts were different but the amounts were different.
10.5. It is seen that none of the decisions relied upon by the department lay down the proposition that information received from another AO even 26 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 if incorrect should be blindly accepted and assessee should be subjected to reopening of the proceedings. The AO exercising the powers vested in him by the statute is necessarily presumed to act in an unbiased manner on the receipt of information in order to form a belief that income has escaped assessment. The haste in which right from the receipt of the information to the issuance of notice leads us agree with the conclusion of the CIT(A) that the AO has acted on borrowed satisfaction. The fact that the entire exercise has been completed within the day shows that the power vested in the AO has been mechanically exercised. In the facts of the present case we find ourselves in agreement with the finding of the CIT(A) in as much as that the concerned AO has proceeded on borrowed satisfaction in a mechanical manner and not even caring to make a bare minimum effort to cross check the veracity of the information received. As such the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the facts of the present case does not help the department in any manner.
10.6 Reliance has also been placed upon by the Ld. Sr. DR on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Phool Chand Bajrang Lal and Another vs. ITO (cited supra). A perusal of the facts as have been taken into consideration by the Hon'ble Apex Court would show that in the facts of that case the assessee claimed that cash loan had been taken from a specific Calcutta company which had been accepted as genuine by the AO. Subsequently information from the AO of the company at Calcutta came into the possession of the concerned AO according to which the Managing Director of the Calcutta Company had confessed that the company had not advanced any loan to any person during the period covering the date of cash loan. Since the subsequent information was definite, specific and reliable notice for reassessment was held to be valid.
The argument that it was a mere change of opinion was not accepted. When contrasted with the facts of the present case the record would show that the information of the different AO was suffering from inaccuracies 27 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 and wrong facts which have been blindly accepted by the concerned AO as observed not only the basic names of the donors are entirely different even the amounts received as gifts is different. The fact that the entire exercise from receiving the information on issuance of notice is completed in a day supports the stand of the CIT(A) that the AO has proceeded on borrowed satisfaction in haste and mechanically and the present case cannot be guided by the principle laid down by the Apex Court wherein in the original assessment the claim had been allowed which was sought to be set aside on the basis of specific definite and reliable information.In the facts of Phool Chand it is seen that the concerned AO had formed his independent belief that income had escaped assessment. The concerned AO having entertained the doubts about genuineness of loans transactions addressed a letter to the ITO Calcutta on May 19, 1970 inquiring if the Calcutta company was within its jurisdiction and to gather certain information from the case records of a specific company. The ITO Calcutta replied on July 7, 1970 stating that the concerned MD has confirmed that the socalled company is a dummy concern and the position had been accepted by the said company in the assessment of the company over 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65. It was informed that transactions with this concern were not genuine and the concerned ITO stated that he could furnish further information of any transaction if it was so required. On the receipt of this communication notice was issued to the assessee on 26th August 1971. It is seen that there was sufficient material before the AO for the formation of his belief and he had not proceeded in undue haste accepting as gospel truth the information from another AO. The concerned AO has acted and proceeded diligently and not formed an opinion in undue haste. Whereas in the facts of the present case the information received by fax has been found to be inaccurate and wrong as it contained wrong names of the donors mentioning wrong amounts of the gifts were stated to given. Had the concerned AO applied his mind 28 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 his mind the glaring mistakes would have been noticed. Having proceeded mechanically on borrowed satisfaction the actions cannot be upheld. As such the principle laid down therein on facts is not of much help to the Revenue as there the time taken attention to detail and the efforts to cross-check the veracity cannot be compared to the hasty exercise in the present proceedings.
10.7. Similarly in judgment of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Praful Chunilal Patel vs. M.J. Makwana/ACIIT, (cited supra) it is seen that therein the conversion of capital asset into stock-in-trade and transfer, thereof by partner to firm in the earlier years led the AO to form the belief that income chargeable to tax in the form of capital gains in respect of the transfer which took place in the earlier year had escaped assessment and the initiation of proceedings u/s 147 were held tobe validly initiated. In the facts of the case the principle is of no help to the Revenue as herein the entire action has been based on faxed receipt of information of a different AO whose veracity has been blindly and mechanically accepted as correct and true contrary to what the record shows. The entire exercise having been completed in a single day leads us for the conclusion that the impugned order relying upon the order of the coordinate Bench in the facts as they stand has tobe upheld. In this background nothing has been placed by the department to canvass a contrary view except relying on the principles laid down in different judgments which proceed on facts peculiar to their own . In the facts of the Gujarat High Court in the case of Praful Chunilal Patel vs. M.J. Makwana/ACIIT, it is seen that the AO while making the assessment for the assessment year 1993-94 recorded his reasons in writing holding that income in 1991-92 assessment year had escaped assessment. By virtue of the fact that income chargeable to tax in the form of capital gains in respect of transfer was not taken into consideration. In view of the fact that the property was converted from capital assets to stock in trade and subsequently the property was sold to 29 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 the firm and the capital gain arising from the transfer to the partnership firm had not been subjected to tax. As such in that background their Lordships of the High Court had an occasion to form the view that the concerned ITO had reasons to believe that income had escaped assessment. As such the view formed in the facts of that case was of the concerned AO. Whereas in the present proceedings it has been effectively demonstrated by the CIT(A) in the impugned order that the AO proceeded on borrowed satisfaction.
10.8. Reliance has also been placed on ACIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. wherein it was canvassed that it was a change of opinion. In view of the fact that intimation U/s 143(1)(a) was considered to be not an assessment and was deemed to be a notice of demand u/s 156. Their Lordships held that there being no assessment question of change of opinion does not arise. As such the principle laid down therein does not advance the case of the Revenue. In the present case the impugned order has quashed the re-assessment not on the ground of change of opinion but on the ground that the concerned AO has proceeded on borrowed satisfaction, non-application of mind and power of reopening exercise exercising mechanically amongst others.
10.9 The fact that notice was not served on the correct person and the fact that notice by post was not sent to the correct address also remaining unrebutted on record. Fatuous argument advanced by the Sr. DR that at the address as per return the only likely occupants would be cows and buffaloes as such is of help to the department as it merely addresses the fact that no attempt was made to serve notice to the address available on the return. Similarly the argument that notice would have been received despite a wrong address in a small place like Bulandshahar also does not inspire any confidence and it definitely cannot be said to be a rebuttal of the consistent unrebutted stand of the assessee that the notice was never served upon the assessee. In regard to notice on some Minakshi Agarwal 30 ITA No. 1202/Del/09 Asstt. year 1999-2000 again in the face of consistent stand of the assessee right from the stage of AO that he has not received the notice and she was not the authorized person of the assessee a rebuttal by the department on record is not available. The case law relied upon the assessee on the issue namely CIT v. Rajesh Kumar Sharma 311 ITR 235 (Delhi) and CIT v. Laxmi Narain 168 Taxman 128 (P&H) further fortify the action of the CIT(A) though on a different ground.
11. Accordingly for the reasons given hereinabove the departmental appeal is dismissed.
12. In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed.
13. The said order pronounced in the open court on 19th August, 2011.
Sd/- sd/-
[B.K. HALDAR] [DIVA SINGH]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Dated: 19.8.2011
Veena
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order,
Deputy Registrar,
ITAT