Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh
M/S Nikhil Exim Pvt. Ltd., Ludhiana vs Dcit, Ludhiana on 26 July, 2017
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA Nos.1346 to 1351/Chd/2016
(Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2010-11)
Sh.Tilak Raj Bedi, Vs. The D.C.I.T.,
Prop. M/s Puneet Exports Inc., Central Circle-1,
854/2, Punjab Mata Nagar, Ludhiana.
Ludhiana.
PAN: ADBPB3623N
ITA Nos.1352 to 1357/Chd/2016
(Assessment Years : 2005-06 to 2010-11)
Sh.Puneet Bedi, Vs. The D.C.I.T.,
Prop. M/s Nikhil Exports Inc., Central Circle-1,
473/1, St.No.0 Janak puri, Ludhiana.
Ludhiana.
PAN: AGAPB9766C
ITA Nos.1358 to 1360/Chd/2016
(Assessment Years : 2008-09 to 2010-11)
Smt.Neha Bedi, Vs. The D.C.I.T.,
Prop. M/s Neha Exports Inc., Central Circle-1,
471/1, St.No.0 Janakpuri, Ludhiana.
Ludhiana.
PAN: AOFPB1778M
ITA No.1362/Chd/2016
(Assessment Year : 2010-11)
M/s Rajan Trading Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The D.C.I.T.,
C/o Puneet Fashion Group, Central Circle-1,
559/4, Kali Sarak, Ludhiana.
Ludhiana.
PAN: AAECR1188B
ITA No.1363/Chd/2016
(Assessment Year : 2009-10)
M/s S.K. Textiles, Vs. The D.C.I.T.,
C/o Puneet Fashion Group, Central Circle-1,
471/1, Janakpuri, Ludhiana.
Ludhiana.
PAN: ABQFS0455C
And
2
ITA Nos.1365 & 1366 /Chd/2016
Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12)
M/s Nikhil Exim Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The D.C.I.T.,
C/o Puneet Fashion Group, Central Circle-1,
Bedi Complex, Tajpur Road, Ludhiana.
Shiv Mandir Street, Ludhiana.
PAN: ADBCN3623N
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Pankaj Bhalla
Respondent by : Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Date of hearing : 12.07.2017
Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2017
O R D E R
PER BENCH. :
Th i s bunch of 19 appeals ha s been filed by different a s s e s se e s against se p a r a t e o r de r s of L d . CI T (Appeals), B a t hi n d a , all d at e d 01.09.2016 re l a t i n g to a s s e s s m e nt y e ar s 2005-06 to 2010-11 and 2 0 1 1 - 1 2, u p h o l d i n g th e l ev y o f p e n a l t y u /s 2 7 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) of t he I n co m e Ta x A c t , 1 9 6 1 .
2. I t w a s c o m mo n g r o u n d be t w e e n b o t h t h e p a r ti e s that all the ab o v e cases i nvo l v e d c o m m on facts a nd t h e r e f o r e al l t h e c a s e s w e r e h ea r d t o g e t h er a n d a r e b e i n g disposed off by this common order. For t he sake of c o n v e n i e nc e w e sh a l l b e d e a l i n g wi t h t h e f a c t s i n th e c a s e o f I TA N o . 1 34 6 / C hd / 2 0 1 6 .
I T A N o . 1 34 6 / C hd / 2 0 1 6 ( T i l a k R a j B e d i P r o p . M/ s P u n e et Ex p o r t s I n c . ):
3. Th e i s s u e i n v ol ve d i n th e p r es e nt a p p e a l p e r ta i ns t o l e v y o f p e n a l t y u / s 2 7 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) of t h e I n c om e Ta x A c t , 1 9 6 1 ( i n s h or t ' th e Ac t ' ) . Th e b r i e f b a c k g ro u n d o f t h e c a s e, 3 l e a d i n g t o t he l e v y o f p e n a l t y . i s t h a t s e a r c h an d s e i z u r e o p e r a t i o n u nd e r s e c t i o n 1 3 2 o f t he A c t w a s c o n d uc t e d i n t h e c a s e o f t h e a s se s s e e a l o n g wi t h o t h e r g r o u p en t i t i e s a n d f a m i l y m e m b e rs c o l l e c t i v e l y c a l l ed P u n e et F as h i on G r o u p on 1 2 . 1 0 . 2 0 10 . The a s s e s se e d er i ve d i n c o me a s p ro p r i e t o r o f M / s P u n ee t Ex po r t s I nc . a nd i nc o m e f ro m h ou se p r o p er t y . P u r s u a n t t o se a rc h a n d i n r e s po ns e t o n o t i c e un de r s e c t i o n 1 5 3 A o f t h e A c t , r e t u r n d e c l a r i ng i n c o m e o f R s .8 , 3 4 , 4 3 0 /- was f i l ed by th e a s s e s se e . S u b s e q u e nt l y , as s e s s m e nt p r o c e e d i ng s we re i n i ti a t e d i n wh i c h t he a ss e s se e d i d n o t c o o p e r a t e, w i t h v a r i o u s n o t i ce s b e i n g i s s u e d t o i t r e m a i n i ng u n c o m p l i ed w i t h. Th e r e a f t e r , o w i n g t o t h e c om p l e x i t y o f a c c o u n t s an d d ou b t s a b o u t t h e co r r e c t n e ss o f t h e a c c o u n t s , a s p e c i al audit under s ec t i o n 142(2A) of t he Act w as o r d e r e d , w h i ch w a s a l so h a mp er e d b y t h e n o n c o o p e r a t i v e a t t i t u d e o f t h e as s e s s e e . Th e A s s e s s i n g O f f i c e r , t h e r e f o r e, p r o c e e d e d t o f r am e t h e a s s e s s m en t u n d e r s e c t i o n 1 4 4 o f t h e Act o n t h e b a si s o f i n f or m a t i on a v a i l a b l e a n d h i s b e st j u d g m e n t , m a ki ng a d d i ti o n s t o t a l l i n g R s. 4 , 49 , 4 3, 0 0 9 / - o n a c c o u n t of t h e f ol l o w i n g :
1. R e j e c t i n g t h e bo o k s o f a c c o un t o f t he a s se s s ee a n d e s t i ma t i n g th e G P , t h e r e b y m a k i n g a dd i t i o n o f R s . 4 , 16 , 8 7 4 /- ,
2. On account of i n c r e me n t in s u nd r y c r e d i t o r s/ u n s e cur e d l o a n s , h ol d i n g t h e s a m e t o b e u n e x p l a i n e d , a m o u n t i n g t o R s.3 , 6 0 , 8 6 , 36 4 / - .
3. D i s a l l o wa n c e o f i n t e r e s t u n d er s ec t i o n 3 6 ( 1 ) ( i i i ) o f t h e A c t am o u n t i n g t o R s .6 5 , 0 4 ,15 8 / -
4. D e p r e c i a ti o n a mo u n t i n g to R s . 8,4 5 , 6 1 3 / - .4
5. On a c c o u nt of unexplained investment in th e purchase of l an d on the b a si s of the s e i z ed d o c u m e n t s, R s .1 0 , 9 0 , 0 0 0/ - .
Th u s a g g r e g a t e a d d i t i o n o f R s . 4, 4 9 , 4 3 , 0 09 / - w as m a d e t o th e i n com e o f t h e a s s e sse e .
4. Th e s a i d e x - p a r t e o r d e r w a s c a r r i e d i n a p p e al b e f o r e t h e Ld . CI T ( A p p ea l s ) w i th t h e a p p e a l be i n g f i l e d b e y o n d t h e l i m i t p r e s c r i b ed u n de r s e c t i o n 2 4 9 ( 2) ( b ) o f t h e Act. Th e a s s e s s e e p l e a d e d f o r c o n d o n i n g t he d e l a y c i t i n g v a r i o u s re a s o n s r a n g i n g fr o m the f a i l u re o f th e a s s e s s e e 's c o u n s e l t o f i l e th e a p p e a l t o t he d i r e f i n a n c i a l co n d i t i o n o f t h e a s s e s s ee . Th e L d . CI T( A ) , h o w e v e r , r e fu s e d to c o n d o n e the delay a nd treated the a p pe a l as not m a i n t a i n a b l e. A g a i n s t t h e a f o res a i d o r d e r t h e a ss e s s e e f i l e d a r ec t i f i c a ti o n application u n de r section 1 5 4/1 5 5 of the A c t. In the m e a n w h i l e e v e n b e f o r e th e d e ci s i o n o f t he q u a ntu m a p p e al b e f o r e t h e L d .CI T ( A p p e a l s ) g o t d e c i d e d , p e n al t y pr o c e e d i n gs w e r e i n i t i a t e d by t h e A ss e s s i ng O f f i c e r. I n r es p o n s e t o n o t i c e i ss u e d , th e a s s e s s ee i n i ti a l l y p l ea d e d i gn o r a n c e of the c i r c um s t a n ce s under wh i ch the notice fo r p e n a l ty p r o c e e d i ng s w as issued, p u rsu a n t to which copies of a s s e s s m e nt o r de r and n o t i ce s were s u p p l i ed to the a s s e s s e e 's r e p r es e n t a t i v e. Th e r e a f t e r t h e a s se ss e e p l e a d e d t h a t t h e p e n a l t y p r o c e e d i n g s b e k e p t i n ab e y a nc e t i l l the d e c i s i o n of t h e F i r s t A p p el l a t e A u t h o r i t y i n t h e q u a n t um case. H o we v e r , t h e A s s e ss i n g O f f i c e r re j e c t ed t h e p l e a of t h e a s s e s s e e a n d p r o c e e d e d t o i mp o s e p e n a l t y a mo u n t i n g to R s . 1 , 4 8 , 53 , 6 2 6 /-.
5
5. Against th e said order th e a ss e s s e e w en t in appeal be f o r e th e L d . CI T ( A ppe a l s ) w he r e initially th e assessee p l ea d ed before the Ld . CI T (Appeals) that the a p p e l l a t e p r oc e ed i n g s b e k e p t i n a b e y a n c e t i l l t he d i s p o s a l of the r e c ti f i c at i o n application made b e f o re th e L d . CI T (Appeals). N o su b m i s s i o ns o n th e m e r i t s o f t h e c a s e w e re made. Th e L d. CI T ( A p p e a l s) summarily d i s mi s s e d t he a s s e s s e e 's a p p ea l holding t h at the e l e m en t of non- cooperation was writ large on the entire pro c e e d i n g s pursuant to s ea r c h . Ld CI T( A ) found no m e ri t in the a s s e s s e e s re q u e st f o r k e e p i n g th e o r d e r i n a b e y anc e t i l l t h e d i s p o s a l o f t h e r e c t i f i ca t i o n p r oc e e d i n g s , s ta t i ng t h a t t h e c o n s e q u e nc e s o f t h e r e c ti f i c a ti on p r o c e e di n g s ma y o r m a y n o t l e a d t o r e c on s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e i s s u e s , a g a i ns t b o t h o f w h i c h a p p ro p r i at e r e m e d i e s w e r e a v a i l a b l e t o t h e a s s e s s e e. Th e r e l e v a n t f i nd i n g s o f t h e L d .C I T ( A p pe a l s ) a t p a r a 7 t o 9 o f h i s or d e r a re a s u n d e r :
"7. As set out above, the element of non-cooperation is writ large on the entire proceedings pursuant to the search. It is a matter of record that the post-search assessment for all the group cases including the case of the appellant was framed under the provisions of section 144 of the Act. Thereafter, even the appeal against the ex parte order was filed after a considerable gap, which appeal was found to be non-maintainable by the jurisdictional appellate Commissioner by a speaking order in which all the submissions of the appellant are seen to have been dealt with. The appellate Commissioner has clearly indicated in the order his dissatisfaction about both, the genuineness as well as the sufficiency of the grounds purported to have been causative of the delayed appeal. Yet, instead of filing an appeal against that order before the second appellate authority for redressal of the grievance, the appellant, for reasons best known to it, chose to file a rectification petition against that order on the specious reason that judicial precedents have not been followed. Though it is 6 not intended to prejudge the efficacy or the probable outcome of the pending rectification petition before the jurisdictional appellate Commissioner, as this appellate authority is not seized with this matter, it cannot but be felt that the appellant is obstructing and stonewalling the finality of the post-search proceedings by nitpicking and abusing the process of law.
8. It cannot be gainsaid that the quantum assessment has a direct bearing on the penalty proceedings and therefore the outcome of appeal in the quantum shall necessarily decide the course of appeal in respect of the impugned penalty order. Should the assessee now become cooperative and be conscious of its obligations and duties towards paying the due taxes of the Government, the entire matter shall have to necessarily go through the entire rigmarole once again as the appellant did not avail of the opportunity before the AO who, perforce, passed an ex parte order. There has also been a special audit in the appellant's case. In this view of the matter and considering the entirety of the circumstances, the plea of the appellant to keep the matter pending and in abeyance till the disposal of the rectification petition is not considered appropriate. Assuming that the appellant succeeds in the pending rectification application, there shall be a consideration of the matter, necessarily involving a remand before the AO, only after which the appellate order can be passed. Further assuming that the appellate proceedings would result in knocking off the additions/disallowances, the AO shall have to recast the penalty pursuant to the appellate order. Should the grievance regarding penalty remain, the appellant can then,again come up in appeal. Say if the appellant does not succeed with the rectification application, he still has an avenue at the jurisdictional Tribunal, whose order also shall have a bearing on the penalty, which can be re-worked or re-decided. It is for this reason that the appellant's request of keeping the appellate proceedings qua the impugned penalty order in abeyance is not considered appropriate and hence not acceeded to.
9. Now since the appellant has not stated anything in support of the appeal, it is held that he has nothing to say in this regard. Hence the appeal is dismissed. It is ordered accordingly."
6. A g g r i e v e d b y th e s a m e t he a s s ess e e h a s c o m e up i n a p p e a l b e f o re u s r a i s i ng f o l l o wi n g g r o u nd s o f ap p e a l : 7
"1. That the Ld. CIT(A), Bathinda has wrongly passed the order u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against law & facts of the case.
2. That the Ld CIT(A) had gravely erred in law and facts of the case in confirming penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee.
3. That the Ld CIT(A) erred in laws and facts by most arbitrary rejecting the application of the appellant to keep the appeal against impugned penalty in abeyance till the quantum proceedings attained finality before the jurisdictional Commissioner (Appeals).
4. That the Ld CIT(A) erred in laws and facts by proceeding to dispose off the appeal of appellate in a summary manner , by rejecting application to keep appellate proceedings in abeyance and without affording any opportunity to the appellate to file submissions on merits of the case. Thus the order passed in gross violation to the principles of natural justice i.e. audi alteram partam.
5. That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the A.O. did not carry out a valid service of the impugned notice(s) u/s 271 (1) ( c) r.w. Sec 274 of the 'Act', had therein gravely erred in law and facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction and imposing penalty u/s 271(1) (c) in the hands of the assessee.
6. That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO had gravely erred in law and facts of the case by most arbitrarily imposing penalty u/s 271(1) (c) on the basis of a non-speaking order, without assigning any reason , much the less a cogent reason justifying the imposition of the penalty in the hands of the assessee.
7. That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO had gravely erred in law & facts of the case by most arbitrarily imposing penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) in the hands of the assessee , solely for the reason that additions had been made in the course of the assessment proceedings.
8. That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate the AO had gravely erred in law and facts of the case by most arbitrarily imposing penalty u/s 271(l)(c)without recording any independent reason justifying imposition of the same.
9. That the Ld CIT(A) and the AO even otherwise had gravely erred in law and facts of the case in confirming/imposing the impugned penalty u/s 271(1) (c) of the 'Act' for a default which is separate and distinct from the alleged ' default on the basis of which the penalty proceedings had been initiated in the body of the assessment order.8
10. That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO had grossly erred in law and facts of the case wherein he though alleged that the assessee had wilfully disclosed "Inaccurate particulars of income', but thereafter imposed penalty in his hands for' Concealment of Income'.
11. That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO even otherwise had gravely erred in law and facts of the case by failing to appreciate that in light of the nature of additions made in the hands of the assessee, no penalty u/s 271(1) (c) was liable to be imposed.
12. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO had gravely erred in law and facts f the case by imposing penalty u/s 271(1)(c) on the basis of an order made as on 27.05.2014, without obtaining the approval of the appropriating authority, as required under law."
7. During the co ur s e of hearing before us Ld . c o u n s e l fo r t h e a s s e s s e e p r a y ed t h a t t he c a s e be r e s t o re d t o t h e CI T( A ) s i nc e h e h a d f a i l e d t o a d d r e s s t h e l eg a l g r o u n d r a i s e d b e f o re h i m b y t h e a s s e s se e o f a s s u m i n g ju r i s d i c t i o n t o l e v y p en a l t y w i t h o u t ob t a i n i ng t h e n e c es s a r y a p p r o v a l of the p r e sc r i b e d authority as p ro v i d e d un d e r th e l a w . Ld C o u n s e l f or t h e a s s e s s e e d re w o u r a t t e n t i o n t o G r o u n d N o . 1 1 o f t h e G r ou n d s o f a p p e a l ra i s e d b e f o re t h e L d . CI T( A ) i n F o r m N o . 3 5 wh i c h r e a d a s u nde r ;
" 1 1 . T h at th e A O h ad g r av e l y e r r e d in l a w an d f ac ts o f th e c as e b y i mp o s i n g p e n al ty u / s 2 7 1 ( 1 ) ( c ) o n th e b as is o f an o r d e r mad e as o n 2 7 . 0 5 . 2 0 14 , wi th o u t o b tai n i n g th e ap p r o v al of th e ap p r o p r i a te au th o r i ty, as r e q u ir e d u n d e r l a w. "
8. Th e L d . c o u n s e l f o r t h e a s s e s s ee s t a t e d t h a t t he L d . CI T ( A p p e a l s ) h a d n ot d e al t w i t h t hi s g r ou nd r a i s e d b y t h e a s s e s s ee . Th e L d . c o u n s el fo r t h e a s s e ss e e p o i n t e d o u t t h a t a s p er t h e pr o v i s i o n s o f s e ct i o n 2 7 4 s u b -s e c t io n ( 2 ) , n o o r d e r i m p o s i ng p e n a l t y c o u l d be m a d e b y t h e A s s i s ta n t Commissioner where t he p e na l t y e x ce e d s Rs . 2 0 , 0 0 0 /- 9 e x c e p t w i t h th e p r i o r a p p r ov a l of t h e J o i n t C o mm i s s i o n e r. L d C o u n se l fo r th e a s s e se e po i n te d o u t t h a t i n th e p r e se n t c a s e , p en a l t y a mo u n t i n g t o R s .1 ,4 8 , 5 3 , 6 2 6/ - h a d b e e n l e vi e d b y t h e De p u t y Co m m i s s i o ne r o f I n c o m e Ta x . Th e L d . c o u n se l for the as s e s s ee t h e r e a ft e r d re w our a tt e n t i on to the d e c i s i o n o f t h e Co o r d i n a t e B e nc h o f t h e I . T. A . T. i n t h e c a s e of Late Shri Gyan Chand Jain Vs. I TO in I TA N o . 5 3 / J p /2 0 1 1 d a t e d 7 . 3. 2 0 1 4 w h e r e i n t h e ne c e s s i t y of obtaining a p p r ov a l from the re q u i s i t e a u t h o ri t y u n d er s e c t i o n 2 7 4 w a s u p h e l d a n d i n t he a b s e n c e o f t h e s a m e t h e p e n a l t y o r d e r w as h e l d n o t t o b e a l e g a l o r d er i n th e e y e s o f law. Th e L d . co u n s e l f o r t h e as s e s s e e , th e r e f ore , p r a y e d t h a t t h e m a t t er b e r e m an d e d to t h e L d. CI T ( Ap p e a l s ) f o r r e c o n s i d er a t i o n.
9. Th e Ld. D.R. fairly a d m i tt e d that the L d . CI T ( A p p e a l s ) h ad n ot d e a l t w i t h t h e a f o r e s a i d gr o u n ds r a i s e d b y t h e a s s e ss e e i t.
10. W e h a v e h e a r d b o t h t h e p a r t i e s a n d p e r u s e d t he o r d e r s o f t h e au t h o r i t i es b e l o w. W e f i n d m e ri t i n t h e c o n t e n t i on s of the L d . C o un s e l for the assessee. U n d o u b t e dl y in the present ca s e penalty u /s 271(1)(c) amounting t o R s . 1 , 4 8 , 53 , 6 2 6 /- h a s b e e n l e v i ed b y t h e D CI T. S e c t i o n 2 7 4 o f t h e A c t , m a n d a t e s a p p ro v a l o f t h e J o i n t C o mm i s s i on e r o f I n co m e Ta x , w h e r e p e n a l t y l e v i e d by the D C I T e x c ee d s 2 0 , 0 0 0 / -. Th e a s s e s s e e , w e f i n d , h a d raised t he g r ou n d before t he CI T( A ) c h a l l en g i n g the a s s u m p t i on o f ju r i s d i c t i o n by th e D CI T t o l e v y p e n a l t y . Th e 10 L d C I T( A ) , w e f i n d , d i s m i s s ed t he a s s e s s e e s a p pea l w i t h o u t d e a l i n g w i t h t he l e g a l g r o u n d r ai se d b e f o r e i t . I n te r e s t i n g l y w e f i n d t h a t th e L d . CI T( A ) h a s m a d e a p as s i n g r e f e r e n c e t o t h i s i s su e i n h i s o r d e r a t p a r a 5 , w h i l e n ar r a t i ng th e f a c t s o f t h e c a s e , s t a t i n g t h a t a p p a r e n t l y t h e s t a t u t o r y a pp r o v a l w a s t a k e n a f te r t h e pa s s i n g o f t h e or de r i m p o si n g p e na l t y w h i c h e v i d e n t l y w a s i nc o r r e c t l y d a t e d. Th e r e l e v a n t p ort i o n o f th e o r d e r i s a s u n de r:
" P e n al ty o f R s . 1 , 4 8 , 5 3 , 62 6 / - wa s , th u s , l e v ie d v i d e o r d e r d ate d 2 7 / 0 5 / 2 0 1 4 , ev e n th o u g h i t i s s ta te d th at ap p r o v al f or th e s a id o r d e r was ac c o r d e d b y th e A d d i ti o n al C o mmi s s i o n e r on 3 0 / 0 5 / 2 0 1 4. E v id e n tl y, th e AO h as d ate d his p e n al ty o r d e r in c o r r e c tl y. "
11. Th e aforesaid observation of the L d . CI T( A ) , without c o r r o bor a t i n g th e f ac ts of t he c a se from th e r e c o r d s , d oe s n ot t a n t a m o u nt t o a d j u d i c a t i n g t he i s s u e o f a s s u m p t i on of j u r i s d i c ti o n . Fu r t h e r we find that the L d . CI T( A ) d i s mi s s e d the a s s es s e e s a pp e a l summarily w i t h o u t de a l i n g w i t h t h e sp e c i f i c g r o u n d s , n u m b er i n g i n a l l t o 1 2 , r a i s e d b y t h e a s s e ss e e . W e t h e r e fo r e c on s i d e r i t f i t t h a t t h e a p p ea l b e r e s t or e d ba ck t o t he Ld . CI T ( A p p e a l s ) f o r p a s si n g a s pe a k i n g or d e r d ea l i n g wi t h al l t he g r o u n ds r a i s e d b y th e a ss e s s e e . W e f u r t he r d i r e c t th a t t he a s s e s s e e b e g i v e n d u e o pp o r t u n i t y o f h ear i n g . In view of the above, the appeal of the a s s e s s ee is allowed for statistical purposes.
I T A N o s . 13 4 7 t o 1 3 5 1 / C h d/ 2 0 16 (Sh.Tilak Raj Bedi) ( S h . P u n e et B e d i) I T A N o s . 13 5 2 t o 1 3 5 7 / C h d/ 2 0 16 ( S h . P u n e et B e d i) 11 I T A N o s . 13 5 8 t o 1 3 6 0 / C h d/ 2 0 16 (Smt.Neha Bedi) I T A N o . 1 36 2 / C hd / 2 0 1 6 (M/s Rajan Trading Pvt. Ltd.) I T A N o . 1 36 3 / C hd / 2 0 1 6 (M/s S.K. Textiles) I T A N o s . 13 6 5 & 1 3 6 6 / C h d / 20 1 6 (M/s Nikhil Exim Pvt. Ltd.)
12. It is relevant to observe here that the facts and circumstances of these appeals are similar to the facts and circumstances in ITA No.1346/Chd/2016 and the findings given in ITA No.1346/Chd/2016 shall apply to these appeals also with equal force. The appeals of the assesses are allowed for statistical purposes.
13. I n t h e re s u l t , a l l t h e a p p e a l s o f th e a s s e s s e e s a re a l l o w e d f o r s ta t i s t i c a l p ur p o s e s.
O r d e r p r on o u n c ed i n t h e o p e n cou r t .
Sd/- Sd/-
(DIVA SINGH) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated : 26 t h July, 2017
*Rati*
Copy to:
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent
3. The CIT(A)
4. The CIT
5. The DR
Assistant Registrar,
ITAT, Chandigarh