M?s. Charotar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Anand v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1,, Anand

ITA 186/AHD/2016 | 2011-2012
Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2017 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 18620514 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AABFC3231A
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 186/AHD/2016
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant M?s. Charotar Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd., Anand
Respondent The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1,, Anand
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted C
Tribunal Order Date 28-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 12-06-2017
Next Hearing Date 12-06-2017
First Hearing Date 12-06-2017
Assessment Year 2011-2012
Appeal Filed On 25-01-2016
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S. GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NOS. 2678/AHD/2015 786/AHD/2014 & 186/AHD/2016 / A.Y. 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 RESPECTIVELY M/S. CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD CHIMAN SATHI BHAVAN SUBHASH ROAD ANAND-388 001 PAN : AABFC 3231 A VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 ANAND / (APPELLANT) / (RESPONDENT) BY ASSESSEE(S) : MS. ARTI N. SHAH CA BY REVENUE : SHRI PRASOON KABRA SR DR / DATE OF HEARING : 14/11/2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 28/11/2017 / O R D E R PER S.S. GODARA JUDICIAL MEMBER :- THESE THREE ASSESSEES APPEALS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 2010-11 AND 2011-12 ARISE AGAINST THE CIT(A)-4 VADODARAS ORDERS DATED 18.06.2015 21.01.2014 AND 13.10.2015; RESPECTIVELY IN CASE NOS.CAB/4- 276/2014-15 CAB/VI-262/2012-13 & CAB/4-274/2014-15 IN PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961; I N SHORT THE ACT. 2. HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. CASE FILE PERUSED. 3. IT EMERGES FROM ASSESSEES PLEADINGS THAT IT RAI SES THREE SUBSTANTIVE GRIEVANCE(S) IN PRINCIPLE. THE FIRST ONE IS COMMON WHEREIN IT SEEKS TO CHALLENGE BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION TREATI NG ITS ALLEGED BUSINESS INCOME OF RS.2 36 05 880/- RS.2 54 90 395/- AND RS .6 78 18 287/- FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2008-09 2010-11 AND 2011-12; RESP ECTIVELY AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES THAN BUSINESS INCOME. WE ADVERT TO THE RELEVANT FACTS QUA THE INSTANT ISSUE. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT TH E RESERVE BANK OF INDIA ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 2 - (BANKING SECTOR REGULATORY BODY) HAD SUSPENDED ASSE SSEES LICENSE ON 30.07.2003. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE DERIVED T HE IMPUGNED INCOME BY RECOVERING ITS OLD DUES FROM ITS MEMBERS/CUSTOMERS IN THE FORM OF PRINCIPAL AS WELL AS INTEREST. WE NOTICE FROM IDENTI CAL ASSESSMENT FINDINGS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS FACING WINDING UP PROCEEDINGS THROUGH OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR. HE THEREFORE WAS OF THE OPINION THAT IT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN TAKEN AS EN GAGED IN BANKING BUSINESS SO AS TO BE ENTITLED FOR GETTING TREATED T HE ABOVE INCOME AS BUSINESS. HE THEREFORE TREATED THE SAME AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES AFTER CONCLUDING THAT THE ABOVE RECEIPTS OF INTERES T ON DEPOSITS AND ITS OWN ADVANCES DURING LIQUIDATION PERIOD WOULD NOT AMOUNT TO BUSINESS RECEIPTS. 4. THE CIT(A) CONFIRMS THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTI ON AS UNDER:- 4.3 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT. DURING THE AP PELLATE PROCEEDINGS VIDE ORDER SHEET NOTING DATED 05.09.2013 THE APPELLANT S AR WAS REQUESTED TO FILE COPY OF ORDER APPOINTING THE LIQUIDATOR. THE S AME WAS FILED ON 05/12/2013. THE APPELLANT'S MAIN SUBMISSION IS THAT EVEN AFTER THE CANCELLATION OF ITS BANKING LICENSE IT REMAINS A C REDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND HENCE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80P(2)(A)( I) OF THE ACT. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE LIQUIDATOR HAS BEEN APPOINTED UN DER SECTION 107-108 OF THE GUJARAT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT 1961 AND ACCO RDINGLY THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SOCIETY CAN TAKE PLACE U/S 11 0(10) OF THE ACT. IN THIS REGARD FROM THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2007 OF THE REGI STRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY GUJARAT STATE IT IS SEEN THAT NO SUCH REC ONSTRUCTION AS PER SECTION 19 OF THE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT IS MENTIONED IN THIS ORDER. FOR READY REFERENCE THE ORDER OF THE REGISTRAR IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 'PREFACE:- THE CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD ANAND DIST. ANAND IS A CO-OPERATIVE BANK PROTECTED WITH UNSURANCE AND REG ISTERED UNDER THE CLAUSE - 1961 OF GUJARAT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES . IT'S REGISTRATION NO. 4368 DATED 30-11-1974. THE SAID BANK HAS DOING THE MANAGEMENT AS PER CO-OPERATIVE RULES SUB-CLAUSES BANKING REGULATING ACT-1949 PROVISION AND AS PER GUIDANCE A ND ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 3 - INSTRUCTIONS TIME TO TIME GIVEN BY CO-OPERATIVE DEP ARTMENT AS WELL RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AS PER FIXED AND CHANGED. DUE TO CONSTRUCTIVE INSPECTION OF THE BANK AND SLOW RECOVERY OF OUTSTANDING DUES OF THE BANK IT IS PUT IN CRITICAL CONDITION AND THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY TO REINSTALL IT AND AS PER THE OR DER DATED 2/1/2002 THE ADMINISTRATOR WAS DEPUTED IN THE BANK. THERE ARE MA NY ATTEMPTS MADE FOR RECOVERIES OF THE SAID BANK EVENTHOUGH THE RE IS NO RECOVERIES MADE SATISFACTORY AND SO THAT IN THE REFERENCE OF E CONOMICAL CONITION OF THE BANK AS PER PROPER CONCLUSION IT IS RECOMMEN DED TO THIS OFFICE TO PUT THE BANK IN DISPOSAL CONDITION AND IN THIS REFERENCE THE SAID OFFICE MADE PROPER CONCLUSION AND DECLARE TO PUT TH E BANK IN DISPOSAL CONDITION BY THE LETTER DATED 23/7/03 OF THE INDIAN RESERVE BANK CENTRAL OFFICE MUMBAI AND THE ORDER TO PUT THE BAN K IN DISPOSAL CONDITION FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST AS WELL FOR THE I NTEREST OF DEPOSITORS AND SHARE HOLDERS BY GRANTED THE PERMISSION. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS UNDER: ' ; : ORDER:- I.A.S. KHANDHAR JOINT REGISTRAR (AUDIT) CO-OPERATI VE SOCIETIES GUJARAT STATE GANDHINAGAR AS PER OBTAINED AN AUTHO RITY TO ME AND I ORDER TO UPT THE CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD. ANAND DIST. ANAND AS PER CLAUSE - 1961 PROVISIONS. AND HEREBY D EPUTE TO SHRI C.B. KOTECHA AS A DISPOSAL OFFICER DISTRICT REGIST RAR CO-OP. SOCIETIES ANAND AND PRESENT ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CHAROTAR NAG RIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD. ANAND DIST. ANAND. (2) THE DEPUTED DISPOSAL OFFICER MUST TO COMPLETE T HE ACTIVITY OF CLOSING BANK WITHIN A THREE YEARS ACCORDING TO THE CO-OPERATIVE RULES CODE-114 (1) OF REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES A NAND AS PER INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN BY TIME TO TIME. (3) THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR MUST TO TAKE CHARGE IMM EDIATELY OF DISTPOSAL CONDITION. AND THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR SH ALL PRODUCE THREE MONTHS REPORT OF HIS ACTIVITIES TO THE REGISTRAR C O-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES GUJARAT STATE GANDHINAGAR UPTO 15TH BEF ORE COMPLETION OF THREE MONTHS. 4.3.1. FROM THE ABOVE ORDER IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE BANK WAS IN CRITICAL CONDITION AND THERE WAS NO POSSIBILITY TO REINSTALL IT AND ACCORDINGLY IT WAS PUT IN DISPOSAL CONDITION FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST A S WELL AS FOR THE INTEREST OF THE DEPOSITORS. AS PER THIS ORDER ONLY AN OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR WAS APPOINTED. ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 4 - 4.3.2. THUS THIS ORDER FOR APPOINTING OF LIQUIDATO R U/S 115(1)(2) OF THE GUJARAT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY ACT 1961 IS FOR THE P URPOSE OF LIQUIDATION OF THE CO-OPERATIVE BANK. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 19 OF THE GCSA 1961 ARE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 19 RECONSTRUCTION OF SOCIETIES. -WHERE A COMPROMISE OR ARRANGEMENT IS PROPOSED (A) BETWEEN A SOCIETY AND ITS CREDITORS OR (B) BETWEEN A SOCIETY AND ITS MEMBERS THE REGISTRAR MAY ON THE APPLICATION OF THE SOCIET Y OR OF ANY MEMBER OR OF ANY CREDITOR OF THE SOCIETY OR IN THE CASE O F A SOCIETY WHICH IS BEING WOUND UP OF THE LIQUIDATOR ORDER RECONSTRUCT ION IN THE PRESCRIBED MANNER OF THE SOCIETY. 4.3.3. THUS FROM THIS PROVISION IT IS EVIDENT THA T FOR THE PURPOSE OF RECONSTRUCTION A SEPARATE ORDER HAS TO BE PASSED B Y THE REGISTRAR. THE APPELLANT HAS NO WHERE SUBMITTED THAT SUCH AN ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED. HENCE DURING THE FY 2009-10 THE APPELLANT SOCIETY WAS UNDER LIQUIDATION ONLY AND HENCE THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE AO IN THE CASES OF INDRAPRASTH STEEL INDUSTRY LTD. (SUPRA) MORBI MERC ANTILE BANK LTD. (SUPRA) AND VIJAYLAKSHMI SUGAR MILLS LTD. (SUPRA) A RE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THIS CASE. SINCE NO BUSINESS HAS BEEN CARRIED O UT DURING THIS YEAR HENCE THE APPELLANT'S CLAIM THAT IT CONTINUED TO BE CO-OP ERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. BESIDES THE AO'S CONCLUSION THAT O NCE THE BANKING LICENSE HAVE BEEN CANCELLED AND THE LIQUIDATOR HAS BEEN APP OINTED FOR WINDING UP THE APPELLANT SOCIETY IT DOES NOT REMAIN A CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ALSO CORRECT. 4.4. HENCE ON THE BASIS OF THESE DISCUSSIONS THE ACTION OF THE AO OF TAXING THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE APPELLANT AS INCO ME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S 80P AT THIS INCOME O F THE APPELLANT IS UPHELD. THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT THE ABOVE FINDINGS PERTAI NING TO FORMER ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED IN LATER TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS AS WELL. 5. LEARNED COUNSEL REPRESENTING ASSESSEE VEHEMENTLY CONTENDS THAT BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES OUGHT TO HAVE TREATED AS SESSEES ABOVE INCOME DERIVED FROM ITS MEMBERS QUA PAST DUES UNDER THE HE AD BUSINESS INCOME ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 5 - THAN THE ONE FROM OTHER SOURCES. HER FURTHER CASE IS THAT IT IS ONLY THE MANAGEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE BANK WHICH HAS GONE IN T HE HANDS OF THE OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR. SHE PLACES ON RECORD THE STATE GOVERNMENTS DECLARATION UNDER CLAUSE 161 GRANTING EXTENSION UND ER SECTION 114 (1) OF THE GUJARAT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT. LEARNED CO UNSEL THEREAFTER PLACES STRONG RELIANCE ON THIS TRIBUNALS DECISION IN THE CASE OF ANAND URBAN CO- OP. BANK LTD VS. ITO IN ITA NO.2731/AHD/2013 DECIDE D ON 29.05.2017 TREATING SIMILAR INCOME UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS. N EXT CASE LAW QUOTED IS HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURTS DECISION IN THE CASE O F MORVI MERCANTILE BANK LTD VS. CIT REPORTED IN [1976] 104 ITR 568 (GUJ.). 6. THE REVENUE AT THIS STAGE STRONGLY SUPPORTS BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACTION TREATING ASSESSEES ABOVE INCOM E NOT UNDER THE HEAD BUSINESS BUT AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. MR. KAB RA REFERS TO THE CIT(A)S FINDINGS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS IN FACT DEP OSITED ITS ABOVE RECEIPTS FROM MEMBERS IN THE BANK AND THEREAFTER DERIVED THE IMPUGNED INCOME AS AGAINST THE FACTS OF THE ABOVE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT DECISION. HE FURTHER CLARIFIES THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN AB LE TO PROVIDE A DETAILED BIFURCATION OF ABOVE INCOME DERIVED FROM MEMBERS VI S--VIS INTEREST ARISING OUT OF ITS DEPOSITS MADE IN THE BANK IN QUE STION. LEARNED COUNSEL REPRESENTING ASSESSEE FAILS TO REBUT THIS FACTUAL P OSITION. THE FACT HOWEVER REMAINS THAT THE ABOVE BIFURCATION OF ASSESSEES IN COME IS VERY MUCH NECESSARY FOR ADJUDICATING THE INSTANT ISSUE. THE ABOVE CO-ORDINATE BENCH DECISION HAS ALREADY HELD A SIMILAR CO-OPERATIVE BA NK TO BE ENTITLED FOR ITS INCOME RECEIVED FROM MEMBERS DURING THE SUSPENSION OF LICENSE AS BUSINESS INCOME. WE THEREFORE ARE OF THE OPINION TH AT LARGER INTEREST OF JUSTICE WOULD BE SERVED IN CASE THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ONCE AGAIN RE- ADJUDICATES THE ENTIRE ISSUE AFRESH AS PER LAW. IT SHALL BE ASSESSEES DUTY AND RESPONSIBILITY TO FURNISH ALL PARTICULARS OF ITS IM PUGNED BIFURCATION OF ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 6 - INCOME UNDER THE ABOVE TWO HEADS. THIS FIRST SUBSTA NTIVE GROUND IS TAKEN AS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN ALL THREE A SSESSMENT YEARS. 7. THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ITA NO.2678/AHD/2015 FOR A Y 2008-09 RAISING THIS SOLE ISSUE IS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 8. THE ASSESSEES NEXT SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN LATTER TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS SEEKING ADJUSTMENT OF ABOVE BUSINESS INCOME A GAINST CARRIED FORWARD BUSINESS LOSSES IS TREATED AS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE AS POINTED OUT AT BOTH THE PARTIES BEHEST. THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER SHALL ADJUDICATE THE SAME AFTER FINALIZING THE ABOVE FIRST ISSUE. THIS P LEA IN LATER TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS IS ALSO ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL P URPOSES. 9. THE ASSESSEES NEXT SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN ASSESS MENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 2011-12 PLEADS THAT BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING ITS DEPRECIATION CLAIM OF RS.16 86 457/- A ND RS.14 90 568/- AS DEDUCTION IN ASSESSMENT AS AFFIRMED IN THE LOWER AP PELLATE PROCEEDINGS. BOTH THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES ARE AD IDEM THAT THIS ISSUE IS ALSO CONSEQUENTIAL TO OUR ADJUDICATION HEREINABOVE QUA F IRST ISSUE. WE THEREFORE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO FINALIZE THE CONSEQUENTIAL COMPUTATION AFTER DETAILED ADJUDICATION ON THE FIRS T ISSUE OF BUSINESS INCOME IN PRECEDING PARAGRAPH. THIS SUBSTANTIVE GR OUND IS ALSO TAKEN AS ACCEPTED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 10. THE ASSESSEES THIRD SUBSTANTIVE GROUND IN ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2010-11 AVERS THAT THAT BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERR ED IN LAW AS WELL AS ON FACTS IN TREATING CLOSING BALANCE DIFFERENCE OF ORI ENTAL BANK ACCOUNT AS UNEXPLAINED THEREBY MAKING ADDITION OF RS.16 86 457 /-. LEARNED COUNSEL FIRST OF ALL STATES THAT THE CORRECT FIGURE HEREIN IS RS.12 26 300/- THAN THE ABOVE ONE. SHE THEREAFTER TAKES US TO THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT FINDINGS ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 7 - WHEREIN THE ASSESSING OFFICER QUOTED ITS FAILURE IN RECONCILING THE CORRESPONDING BANK ACCOUNT DESPITE NUMEROUS OPPORTU NITIES AFFORDED. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE THEREAFTER FILED ITS RECON CILIATION AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE IN THE LOWER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS. PAGE 1 9 OF THE CIT(A)S ORDER IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 REVEALS THAT THE ASSESSE E SOUGHT TO RECONCILE THE DIFFERENCE IN BANK ACCOUNT VIS--VIS BALANCE FROM A SSESSMENT YEARS 2006-07 ONWARDS TILL 2012-13. IT THEREAFTER PLEADED THAT T HE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM DEPOSIT INSURANCE AND CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION (DICGC IN SHORT) STOOD DEPOSITED IN THE ABOVE ORIENTAL BANK ACCOUNT FOLLOWED BY THE NECESSARY CHEQUES BEING ISSUED TO THE DEPOSITORS IN GUJARAT AS WELL AS OUTSIDE THE STATE. ITS CASE THEREAFTER WAS THAT THE ABOVE SAID CORPORATIONS LETTER DATED 09.08.2004 HAD MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE CORRESPONDING AMOUNT LYING UNDISBURSED WOULD BE REFUNDED BACK. THE CIT( A) HOWEVER REJECTS ALL THE SAID ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE AFTER CONCLUDING T HAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD GRANTED SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES AND THEREFORE THERE IS NO CASE MADE OUT FOR ENTERTAINING THE ABOVE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE. 11. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO TH E RIVAL PLEADINGS REITERATING RESPECTIVE STANDS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WE LL AS THE REVENUE. IT HAS COME ON RECORD THAT THE ASSESSEES BANKING LICENSE STANDS SUSPENDED. IT IS RIGHT NOW BEING MANAGED BY AN OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR. WE THEREFORE OBSERVE THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LACK OF COHESION IN ITS WORKI NG SO FAR AS FILING OF THE RELEVANT DETAILS PERTAINING TO THE INSTANT ISSUE IS CONCERNED. THE FACT HOWEVER REMAINS THAT THE INSTANT ISSUE IS MORE A RE CONCILIATION FAILURE ON ASSESSEES PART TO TALLY THE RELEVANT BANK ACCOUNT WITH ITS BALANCE-SHEET VIS- -VIS THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED/REFUNDED AS PER THE ABOV E DICGC DIRECTIVES. WE REITERATE THAT WE HAVE ALREADY REMITTED ALL REMAI NING ISSUES INCLUDING THE MAIN ONE (SUPRA) BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. SUFFICE TO SAY IT WOULD BE IN THE LARGER INTEREST OF JUSTICE IF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER FINALIZES ITA NOS. 786/AHD/ 14 2678/AHD/15 & 186/AHD/16 CHAROTAR NAGRIK SAHKARI BANK LTD VS. ITO A.Y :- 2008-09 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 8 - THE INSTANT RECONCILIATION AS PER LAW. WE CAST THE ENTIRE DUTY ON THE ASSESSEE TO PLACE ON RECORD ALL THE RELEVANT DETAIL S IN CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS. THESE THREE ASSESSEES APPEALS ITA NO S.2678/AHD/2015 786/AHD/2014 & 186/AHD/2016 ARE ACCEPTED FOR STATIS TICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 28 TH NOVEMBER 2017 AT AHMEDABAD SD/- SD/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (S.S. GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 28/11/2017 *BT / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / CONCERNED CIT 4. ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. / DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER TRUE COPY / (DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) / ITAT AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION-19.11.2017. 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER- ..21.11.2017. OTHER MEMBER 28.11.2017. 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S. 28.11.2017 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 28.11.2017.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES TO THE SR.P.S. 28.11.2017 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK-.29 .11.2017 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK. 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER