The ITO, Ward 8(1), Ahmedabad v. Sarthi Consultancy Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad

ITA 1099/AHD/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 109920514 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AADCS0486L
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 1099/AHD/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 21 day(s)
Appellant The ITO, Ward 8(1), Ahmedabad
Respondent Sarthi Consultancy Pvt. Ltd, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 31-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 27-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 27-01-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 09-04-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH C AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N.PHAUJA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1099/AHD/2009 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2006-07 DATE OF HEARING:27.1.11 DRAFTED:28.1.11 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-8(1) 4 TH FLOOR AJANTA COMMISSION. CENTRE A WING ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD V/S. SARTHI CONSULTANCY PVT. LTD. NR. AMBICA GAS SERVICES ISANPUR 4 ROAD ISANPUR AHMEDABAD PAN NO.AADCS0486L (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI DR. RAJARAM SAH SR-DR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI VIJAY RANJAN AR O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY REVENUE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-XIV AHMEDABAD IN APPEAL NO. CI T(A)-XIV/ WD.8 (1) /155/08-09 DATED 17-02-2009. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRA MED BY THE ITO WARD- 8(1) AHMEDABAD U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 19 61 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 27-11-2008 FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006- 07. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE IS AGA INST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITUR E. FOR THIS REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND NO.1 & 2 :- ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 2 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE IN RESPECT OF INTEREST EXPENDITUR E WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. 2. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.8 37 511/- IN RESPECT OF INTERES T EXPENDITURE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS LEADING TO THE ABOVE ISSUE ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AN D IT HAS DEBITED INTEREST EXPENSES OF RS.8 58 304/- INCLUDING THE BANKING CHA RGES OF RS.20 793/- AND INTEREST OF RS.8 37 511/-. ACCORDING TO ASSESSING O FFICER THE ASSESSEE HAS BORROWED ADDITIONAL LOAN OF RS.57 51 250/- AND REPA ID LOAN OF RS.59 46 458/-. ACCORDING TO AO ASSESSEE HAS UTILIZED THE LOAN ACCE PTED DURING THE YEAR FOR REPAYMENT OF EARLIER LOAN TO REDUCE INTEREST BURDEN . BUT THE AO FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS ADVANCED LOAN OF RS.58 88 695/- TO VAR IOUS PERSONS ON WHICH NO INTEREST HAS BEEN CHARGED WHEREAS ASSESSEE HAS PAID INTEREST ON BORROWED FUNDS OF RS.57 51 250/- AMOUNTING TO RS.8 37 511/-. ACCORDINGLY AO DISALLOWED INTEREST GIVEN ON NEW INTEREST FREE A DVANCE AT RS.8 37 511/-. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE BY G IVING FOLLOWING FINDINGS IN PARA-3.3 OF HIS APPELLATE ORDER:- 3.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE C ASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT ALONG WITH THE LEGAL P RONOUNCEMENTS RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS FREE FUNDS BY WAY OF SHARE CAPITAL RESERVES AND SURPLUS CURRENT LIABILITIES AND INTEREST FREE UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.1 54 72 499/- WHICH IS IN EXCE SS OF INTEREST FREE ADVANCES AND THE SAID LOANS WERE ADVANCED IN EARLIE R YEARS AND IT WAS FOUND IN THE YEAR EARLIER YEAR THAT LOANS HAVE BEEN GIVEN OUT OF COMPANYS OWN FUNDS. THE A.O IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDE R FOR A.Y. 2005- 06 HAD DISCUSSED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT EX PLAINING THE SOURCE OF FRESH ADVANCES IN THAT YEA AS HAVING BEEN MADE O UT OF RECEIPTS FROM MEMBERS OF DUPLEX HOUSES BOOKED AND ALSO IN TWO INS TANCES AS BEING OUT OF SALE OF CAR. THUS NEXUS BETWEEN FRESH INTER EST FREE ADVANCES WITH INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE HAS BEEN EXPLAIN ED BY THE APPELLANT IN A.Y. 2005-06. THE A.R. HAS GIVEN DETAILS OF LOANS A ND ADVANCES AS ON 31.03-2005 AND THE SAME AS ON 31-03-2005 WHICH HAVE COME DOWN TO RS.31 06 331/- AS ON 31-03-2006 AND THERE IS NO SUC H FRESH ADVANCE AS DISCUSSED BY THE A.O OF RS.8 75 331/-. FURTHER IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT HAS ITS OWN SUFFICIENT FUNDS AND IT NEED NOT REQUIRE ANY BORROWED FUNDS TO ADVANCE LOANS TO VARIOUS PARTIES. THE RATIO LAID DOWN ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 3 IN THE DECISIONS IN THE CASE OF TORREND FINANCIERS VS. CIT 73 TTJ 624 (AHMEDABAD ITAT) CIT VS. RADICO KHAITAN IS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. FURTHER IT NEEDS TO BE SEEN FROM THE OVERALL POSITION OF THE BALANCE SHEET AS TO WHETHER THE APP ELLANT HAS ENOUGH INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE EXTENT OF INTE REST FREE ADVANCES MADE AND IF THERE ARE SUCH FUNDS THEN TO THAT EXTE NT NO DISALLOWANCE OUT OF CLAIMED INTEREST CAN BE MADE. IN FACT SIMILA R DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST MADE IN THE EARLIER YEAR HAS BEEN DELETED VIDE MY ORDER DATED 18-8-2008. BY FOLLOWING THE SAID ORDER I HOLD THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS AND DIRECT THE A.O TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.8 37 511/-. AGGRIEVED REVENUE CAME IN APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 4. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. BEFORE US LD. COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENT AVAILABLE IN FORM OF SHARE CAPITAL SHARE APPLICATION MONEY RESERVE AND SURPLUS FOR GIVING THE LOANS AND ADVANCES OF RS.58 88 695/- AND THEREFORE INTEREST ON BORROWED F UNDS CANNOT BE DISALLOWED AND BREAK UP OF INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AS ON 31-03- 2006 GIVEN BELOW:- INTEREST FREE FUNDS AS ON 31/03/2005 SHARE CAPITAL 4 87 500 RESERVES AND SURPLUS 74 51 456 CURRENT LIABILITIES 71 44 239 INTEREST FREE UNSECURED LOAN 3 89 304 TOTAL 1 54 72 499 THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE STATED THAT ASSESSEE H AS INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE ARE FAR IN EXCESS OF LOANS GRANTED BY ASS ESSEE PROPORTIONATE INTEREST ON ADVANCES MADE CANNOT BE DISALLOWED AND THAT SOURCES OF LOANS GIVEN IN EARLIER YEARS HAVE BEEN EXAMINED DURING TH E ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS OF EARLIER YEARS AND IT WAS ESTABLISHED THAT LOANS ARE GIVEN OUT OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY OWN FUND AND NOT OUT OF BORROWED FUNDS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE HONBLE APEX COURTS DEC ISION IN THE CASE OF MUNJAL ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 4 SALES CORPORATION V. CIT AND ANOTHER (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) WHEREIN THE APEX COURT HAS OBSERVED THAT WHEN THE OPENING BALAN CE OF INTEREST FREE FUNDS IS SUFFICIENT TO COVER THE IMPUGNED LOAN THERE CAN NOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST U/S.36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. THE OBSERVATION OF ASSESSING OFFICER IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN NEW INTEREST FREE ADVANCES O F RS.8 75 331/- AND ASSESSEE STATED THAT IT HAS RECEIVED BACK ADVANCES AMOUNTING TO RS.32.95 LAKH AS AGAINST ADVANCES OF RS.8 75 331/- REFERRED BY AO WHICH MEANS THAT ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAS RECEIVED BACK ADVANCE OF RS.24 19 669/- AND DURING THE YEAR NO NEW ADVANCES WERE MADE BY ASSESSEE. THE AO OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS NOT MADE ANY EFFORTS OF RECOVERING ANY INTEREST FREE ADVANCES THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS RECEIVED BACK RS .24 19 669/- OUT OF OPENING BALANCE OF RS.55.26 LAKH WHICH MEANS THAT N EARLY 45% OF OPENING BALANCE OF LOANS AND ADVANCES HAS BEEN RECEIVED BAC K BY ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS IT HAS GIVEN THE DETAILS OF ADVANCE ALONG WITH ADDRESS AND PAN. IT WAS FURTHER STATED THAT IN THE PROCESS OF PURCHASES OF LAND IT MAY HA PPEN THAT ASSESSEE HAS TO GIVE CERTAIN AMOUNT AS ADVANCES TO RESERVE ITS RIGH T / INTEREST IN PURCHASE OF SAID PROPERTY AND DEALING IS FINALIZED ONLY WHEN CO NCERNED PERSON GETS SATISFACTORY LEGAL TITLE OF THE LAND AND TILL THE F INAL NEGOTIATION IS NOT OVER. AS LAND ADVANCES ASSESSEE OUTSTANDING SINCE TWO YEARS SAME CANNOT BE THE BASE FOR DISALLOWING INTEREST EXPENDITURE ON LOAN T AKEN BY IT DURING THE COURSE OF BUSINESS. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED A CHART TO SHOW THAT BORROWED FUNDS WERE NOT UTILIZED FOR MAKING INTEREST FREE LO ANS AND ADVANCES AND INTEREST PAID ON BORROWED FUNDS CANNOT BE DISALLOWE D U/S.36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. AS REGARDS LOAN FROM MEMON CO OPEATIVE BANK OF RS.57 84 320/- IT WAS STATED THAT THE SAID LOAN WAS SECURED AGAINST MORTG AGE PF PROPERTIES OF CLIENTS AND INTEREST PAID ON SUCH LOAN FOR RS.17 77 129/- H AS BEEN TRANSFERRED TO VISHWESHWAR SOCIETY AND NO SUCH INTEREST EXPENDITUR E IS DEBITED TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. AS AFORESAID AMOUNT HAS BEEN UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS INTEREST EXPENDITURE PAID ON SUCH LOAN CA N NEVER BE DISALLOWED. SIMILARLY UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.38 15 135/- HAVE BE EN TAKEN DURING THE YEAR ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 5 WHEREAS DURING THE YEAR NO FURTHER ADVANCES HAVE BE EN GIVEN. WE FIND FROM THE CHART OF LOANS AND ADVANCES ATTACHED IN THE ASS ESSEES PAPER BOOK THAT NO NEW ADVANCES WAS MADE WHICH PROVES THAT UNSECUR ED LOANS WERE NOT UTILIZED TOWARDS GRANTING LOANS AND ADVANCES. FURTH ERMORE IT IS A FACT THAT AFORESAID AMOUNT HAS BEEN UTILIZED IN PURCHASE OF L AND AMOUNTING TO RS.65.38 LAKH DURING THE YEAR AND SHOWN AS INVENTORY IN ANNU AL ACCOUNTS. THE CASH FLOW OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY DEPICTS THAT SOURCE FOR PU RCHASE OF AFORESAID LAND AMOUNTING TO RS.65.38 LAKH IS OUT OF BORROWED FUNDS OF RS.43.85 LAKH AND AMOUNT RECEIVED BACK FROM ADVANCES OF RS.24.20 LAKH . IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS ALSO ACCEPT ED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND INTEREST PAID ON FUNDS UTILIZED FOR PUR CHASE OF INVENTORY IS ALLOWABLE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE AND MOREOVER LOANS A ND ADVANCES HAVE BEEN GIVEN IN EARLIER YEARS AND IT CAN BE SEEN FROM AFOR ESAID CHART THAT NO BORROWED FUNDS WERE UTILIZED FOR MAKING SUCH ADVANCES HENCE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST MADE BY ASSESSING OFFICER IS RIGHTLY DELETED BY CIT (A) AND WE CONFIRM THE SAME. 5. THE NEXT ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE IS AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DELETING THE DEPRECIATION ON CAR. FOR THIS REVE NUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS NO.3 & 4 :- 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE IN RESPECT OF DEPRECIATION ON CAR WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND O FACTS IN D ELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1 38 007/- IN RESPECT OF DEPRECI ATION ON CAR. 6. WE FIND THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED TH E DEPRECIATION ONLY ON THE BASIS THAT CARS ARE IN THE NAME OF DIRECTOR AND NOT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED APP EAL BEFORE CIT(A). THE ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 6 CIT(A) DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE BY GIVING FOLLOWING FINDINGS IN PARA-2.3 OF HIS APPELLATE ORDER:- 2.3 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND TH E SUBMISSIONS ALONG WITH THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS AS RELIED UPON. I FIND THAT THE CARS HAVE BEEN PURCHASED OUT OF FUNDS OF THE COMPANY AND THE CARS HAVE BEEN USED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS FOR THE APPELLANT COMPANY. I AM INCLINED TO AGREE WITH THE VIEWS OF THE APPELLANT AND HOLD THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION F OR DISALLOWANCE OF DEPRECIATION. BY FOLLOWING THE CASE LAWS SUPRA I HOLD THAT THE A.O WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE DISALLOWANCE AMOUNTING TO RS.1 38 007/- BEING DEPRECIATION ON MOTOR CAR AND THE SAME IS DIR ECTED TO BE DELETED. AGGRIEVED REVENUE CAME IN APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 7. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HA S TWO CARS IN THE NAME OF DIRECTOR TO AVAIL THE BENEFIT OF CONCESSIONAL RTO T AX AND LOAN WAS EASILY AVAILABLE IN THE NAME OF DIRECTOR. THE ASSESSEES C ONTENTION BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND EVEN NOW BEFORE US IS THAT LOAN WAS ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY AND WERE ALSO REPAID BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY FROM ITS OWN SOURCE AND CARS WERE USED FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSES. THIS FACT HAS NOT BEEN DENIED BY REVENUE AND EVEN BEFORE US ONLY THE REVENUES CONTENTION THAT THE CARS ARE IN THE N AME OF DIRECTOR AND NOT IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY. WE FIND THAT ONCE THE CARS ARE PURCHASED OUT OF ASSESSEES FUND AND CARS HAVE BEEN USED WHOLLY A ND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ASSESSEES BUSINESS DEPRECIATION CANNOT BE DISALLOWED. FURTHERMORE THE OTHER EXPENSES OF THE CARS HAVE BE EN ALLOWED IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE-COMPANY LIKE PETROL AND MAINTENANCE CHARGE S. ONCE THESE EXPENSES ARE ALLOWED AS BUSINESS EXPENSES DEPRECIAT ION CANNOT BE DISALLOWED. ACCORDINGLY THIS ISSUE OF REVENUES AP PEAL IS DISMISSED. ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 7 8. THE NEXT ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE IS AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF PERKS PAID TO THE D IRECTOR. FOR THIS REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND NO.5& 6 :- 5. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE IN RESPECT OF PAYMENT OF PERKS TO THE DIRECTOR WAS NOT JUSTIFIED. 6. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.42 333/- IN RESPECT OF PAYMENT O F PERKS TO THE DIRECTOR. 9. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THROUGH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT ASSESSING O FFICER DISALLOWED PERKS ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID REMUNERATION TO THE DIRECTOR AND IT HAS NOT CARRIED OUT ANY BUSINESS DURING THE YEAR EXCEP T PURCHASING OF PLOT. ACCORDINGLY AO DISALLOWED PERKS PAID TO THE DIRECTO R AT RS.42 333/-. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE BY GIVING FOLLOWING FINDINGS IN PARA-3.3 OF HIS APPELLATE ORDER:- 3.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE C ASE AND THE SUBMISSIONS AS ADVANCED BY THE A.R OF THE APPELLANT . FROM THE DETAILS SUBMITTED BY THE A.R IT IS SEEN THAT THE AMOUNT REC EIVED BY THE APPELLANT IS IN FACT IN THE NATURE OF SUPERVISION F EES AND SERVICE CHARGES AND THE PAYMENT WAS MADE BY THE CONCERNED PARTY AS PER THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE APPELLANT FOR DEVELOP MENT OF LAND AND CONSTRUCT IN OF CERTAIN PROJECTS. IN THIS TYPE OF B USINESS IN MY VIEW IT IS THE BUSINESSMAN WHO HAS TO DECIDE AS TO WHAT IS REA SONABLE AND WHAT IS NOT REASONABLE IN INCURRING CERTAIN EXPENDITURE AND IT IS QUITE NATURAL THAT HE MAY NOT GET THE RESULT AS ALWAYS EXPECTED. SINCE ONE OF THE DIRECTORS HAD ALREADY DISCLOSED IN HIS RETURN THE P REMIUM PAID ON LIC THE OBSERVATION OF A.O IS NOT JUSTIFIED THAT THE LI C PREMIUM WAS NOT SHOWN AS PERKS IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. CONSIDERING ALL THESE ASPECTS I HOLD THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE OF RS.42 333/- BEIN G THE PERKS PAID TO THE DIRECTORS IS NOT IN ORDER AND THE A.O IS DIRECT ED TO DELETE THE SAME. WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS PAID THIS AMOUNT OUT OF T HE AMOUNT OF RECEIVED IN NATURE OF SUPERVISION FUND AND SERVICE CHARGES AND THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE ITA 1099/AHD/2009 A.Y. 06-07 ITO WD-8(1) ABD V. SARTHI CONSULTANCY P. LTD. PAGE 8 AS PER AGREEMENT. IT IS THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE TH AT THE DIRECTORS HAVE DISCLOSED THE PERKS IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL RETURNS AND REVENUE HAS NOT DISPUTED THIS FINDING. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS WE CONFIRM TH E ORDER OF CIT(A) AND THIS ISSUE OF REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 10. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 31/01/2010 SD/- SD/- (A.N.PHAUJA) (MAHAVIR SINGH) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD DATED : 31/01/2011 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-XIV AHMEDABAD 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD