Shri Rajendra R.Patel, Surat v. The ACIT.,Circle-3,, Surat

ITA 2957/AHD/2008 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 295720514 RSA 2008
Assessee PAN AAVPP8050E
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 2957/AHD/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 11 month(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant Shri Rajendra R.Patel, Surat
Respondent The ACIT.,Circle-3,, Surat
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 30-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 30-07-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 19-05-2010
Next Hearing Date 19-05-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 18-08-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL : D BENCH : AHMEDABA D CAMP AT SURAT (BEFORE HONBLE SHRI T.K. SHARMA J.M. & HON'BLE SH RI D.C. AGRAWAL A.M.) I.T.A. NO. 2957/AHD./2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-2006 RAJENDRA R. PATEL SURAT -VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (PAN : AAVPP 8050 E) CIRCLE-3 SURAT (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.N. VEPARI RESPONDENT BY : SMT. JYOTI LAXMI SR. D.R. O R D E R PER SHRI T.K. SHARMA JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 27.06.2008 OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-II SURAT FOR T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. 2. THE VARIOUS GROUNDS RAISED IN THIS APPEAL ARE AS UNDER :- (I) UNEXPLAINED GIFTS RS.6 54 672/- (1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIR MING THE ADDITION OF RS.6 54 672/- U/S. 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 196 1 BEING UNEXPLAINED GIFTS. (2) THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) HAS MISCONSTRUED THE FACT OF TRANSFER OF ACCOUNTS WHICH WOULD NOT REQUIRE BANK STATEMENT AND THAT HE PRESUM ED THEM TO BE TRADE CREDITORS AND WRONGLY BROUGHT IN CERTAIN ASPE CTS WHICH WERE NOT RELEVANT AT ALL IN CONFIRMING THE ABOVE ADDITION. (3) UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDITS RS.10 49 842/- (1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIR MING ADDITION OF FOLLOWING UNSECURED LOANS AS BEING UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT (I) REKHA R. PATEL RS.44 591/- (II) UIHAS R. PATEL RS.45 251/- (III) R.F. PATEL (HUF) RS.6 70 000/- (IV) SUSHILA R. PATEL RS.2 90 000/- _____________ TOTAL RS.10 49 842/- 2 ITA NO. 2957-AHD-2008 (2) THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT THE ACCOUNT AT (III) AND (IV) WERE OPENING BALANCES OF EARLIER YEARS AND NOT RECEIVED DURING T HE YEAR AND BALANCE AT (I) AND (II) ARE BALANCE OF TRANSACTION WHICH HA D TAKEN PLACE IN EARLIER YEAR. (III) HOUSEHOLD EXPENSES :- (1) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERR ED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF A SUM OF RS.65 812/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY ESTIMATING HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWAL OF RS.2 00 000/- AND GIVING CREDIT OF RS.134 887/- ACTUALLY WITHDRAWN. (2) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) FAI LED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE HAVING STAYED IN INDIA FOR 69 D AYS ONLY AND THE EXPENSES ON TRAVEL HAVING BEEN MET FROM KENYA THERE WAS NO CASE FOR CONFIRMING THE AD HOC ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSE SSING OFFICER. (IV) UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT RS.6 00 000/- (1) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERR ED IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS.6 00 000/- BEING CASH DEPOSIT ED BY THE APPELLANT FROM THE CASH ON HAND ON 01.04.2004 OF RS .7 43 843/-. (2) THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) MAD E THE ADDITION ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD HAVE DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT IN BANK IN ONE OF THE EARLIER TRIPS. (V) TREATING SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.6 44 886 /- AS BUSINESS INCOME :- (1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) ERRED IN CONFIR MING THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE TRANSACTION S IN SHARES MADE AMOUNTED TO BUSINESS WHEN ALL ALONG THE ASSESSEE BE ING AN INVESTOR HAS BEEN SHOWING SURPLUS BEING CAPITAL GAIN AND ACC EPTED AS SUCH. (VI) MISCELLANEOUS :- (1) THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT INTEREST U/S. 234A IS RE QUIRED TO BE DELETED. (2) THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT INTEREST U/S. 234B IS RE QUIRED TO BE DELETED. (3) THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD ALTER OR VARY AN Y OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 3. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS ARE THAT AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US ON BEHALF OF ASSESSEE SHRI R.N. VEPARI LD. COUNSEL APPEARED AND FILED A PAPER BOOK CONTAINING 97 PAGES. ON EARLIER DATE OF HEARING I.E. ON 4.2.2010 LD. D.R. ASKED SOMETIMES TO CALL THE ASSESSMENT RECORD. SUBSEQUENTLY AFTER VERIFYING THE ASSESSMENT RECORD THE LD. D.R. POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SOME 3 ITA NO. 2957-AHD-2008 ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFOR E THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THIS WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES O N 16.02.2010. THE SAID APPLICATION READS AS UNDER :- MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOURS : (1) IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE APP ELLANT HAD FILED EVIDENCE RELATING TO THE ISSUES IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IT WAS NOTI CED DURING THE COURSE OF APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HON. TRIBUNAL THAT SOME OF T HE EVIDENCE PRODUCED BEFORE THE HON. TRIBUNAL AND CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ROT FILED. THIS IS SINCERELY REGRETTED. HOWEVER THE RE LATED EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT TO DECIDE THE ISSUES IN APPEAL AND FOR A MORE APPROPRIATE ORD ER BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL AS DISCUSSED BELOW. (2)(I) THE FIRST GROUND IN APPEAL RELATES TO NON-A CCEPTANCE OF GIFTS TING TO RS.654672/- RECEIVED FROM SIX RELATIVES OF THE APPE LLANT BY BOOK ENTRIES. THE AMOUNTS WERE CARRIED FORWARD IN THE BOOKS OF APPELLANT SINC E LONG AND THE CONCERNED RELATIVE DONORS HAVING SHIFTED ABROAD SINCE LONG HAD EXPRESS ED THEIR DESIRE TO GIVE THE AMOUNTS TO THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT AND RELATIV ES WERE PARTNERS / DEPOSITORS IN THE PARTNERSHIP FIRMS OF INDIAN ELECTRODES AND WELDING RODS MFG. CO. WHICH WERE DISSOLVED LONG BACK AND THE BUSINESS OPERATIONS OF SUCH FIRMS WERE CLOSED. ON DISSOLUTION THE APPELLANT BEING THE ONLY PERSON WH O USED TO COME FOR SOMETIME TO INDIA EVERY YEAR TOOK OVER THE BALANCES WHICH CONT INUED. (II) THY GIFTS WERE RECEIVED FROM SIX RELATIVE S AND CONFIRMATION OF FIVE WERE GIVEN IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND II CASE OF ONE OF THEM I.E. RAMANBHAI F. PATEL IT HAD REMAINED TO BE GIVEN. FURTHER THE COP IES OF ACCOUNTS JS APPEARING IN THE BOOKS OF THE APPELLANT OF THE DONORS HAVING THEIR C REDIT BALANCES SINCE LONG WERE WAS ALSO NOT FURNISHED THOUGH THEY APPEARED AS SUCH AND SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEETS OF THE APPELLANT FILED OVER YEARS WHICH ARE PART OF PAPER BOOK. IT IS THE PRODUCTION OF THIS CONFIRMATION AND THE COPIES OF ACCOUNTS WHI CH WAS NECESSARY FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESOLVING THE CONTROVERSY AND THEY ARE NOW FILED AND MAY BE ADMITTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE (P.L-13). (3) (I) AS REGARDS THE NEXT GROUND OF UNSECURED LOAN THEY WERE FROM FOUR PARTIES AS UNDER:- REKHA K. PATEL 44 591 ULHAS R PATEL 47 251 R.F. PATEL (HUF) 6 70 000 SUSHILA R. PATEL 2 90 000 _________ 10 49 842/- _________ (II) SO FAR AS AMOUNT PAYABLE TO RA VJIBHAI F. PATEL WAS CONCERNED THOUGH THE AMOUNT WAS SHOWN IN THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE APPELLANT THE COPIES OF ACCOUNTS AND THE RETURN OF INCOME OF RAVJIBHAI F. P ATEL WITH THE BALANCE SHEET 4 ITA NO. 2957-AHD-2008 SHOWING AMOUNTS RECEIVABLE FROM THE APPELLANT HAD R EMAINED TO BE FILED. THESE ARE FILED NOW AND MAY KINDLY BE ADMITTED AS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE (P.14-38). (III) AS REGARDS SUSHILABEN R. PATEL PARTICULARS W ERE FILED ONLY FOR 2005-06 ASSESSMENT YEAR BUT NOT FOR EARLIER YEARS. THEY ARE NOW FILED AS ABOVE. (IV) AS REGARDS AMOUNTS PAYABLE TO REKHA R. PATEL A ND ULHAS PATEL OF RS.44 591/- AND RS.45 251/- RESPECTIVELY THE COPIES OF ACCOUNTS HA D REMAINED TO BE ATTACHED. THE ABOVE CREDIT BALANCES HAD ARISEN BECAUSE THE ABOVE TWO SISTERS OF THE APPELLANT OWNED SHARES WHICH THEY WANTED TO DISPOSE OFF BUT SINCE B EING NON-CITIZENS / NON-RESIDENTS THEY DID NOT HAVE PAN AND COULD NOT DEMATE THEIR SH ARES. HENCE THE APPELLANT PURCHASED THOSE SHARES FROM THEM. THE AMOUNTS SHOWN AS PAYABLE REPRESENTS AMOUNTS IN RESPECT OF SHARES PURCHASED BY THE APPEL LANT. (4) AS REGARDS GROUND RELATING TO DETERMINATION OF SHOR T TERM CAPITAL GAIN / BUSINESS INCOME THE APPELLANT HAD GIVEN A LIST OF SHARES SO LD WITH THE DATES OF SALE BUT HAD NOT GIVEN THE DATES OF PURCHASES. THE LIST OF SUCH SALE OF SHARES ALONGWITH DATES OF PURCHASE AND DATES OF SALE IS VITAL BECAUSE THE APP ELLANT COMING TO INDIA TWO TO THREE TIMES IN A YEAR HAD PURCHASED SHARES AND SOLD THEM WITH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PURCHASE DATE AND SALE DATE RANGING FROM 1 MONTHS TO 11 MONTHS. THIS WOULD T INDICATIVE OF THE NATURE OF TRANSACTION BECAUSE THE PARAMETERS DETERMINING THE ABOVE CONTROVERSY RELATING TO FREQUENCY VOLUME ETC. ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONSIDERED. THIS IS FILED NOW (P 42). THE APPELLANT ALSO HAD LARGE PORT FOLIO OF INVESTMENTS WITH THE BOOK VALUE OF RS.10 TO 15 LACS IN EARLIER YEARS AS REFLE CTED IN THE BALANCE SHEETS FILED BY HIM WITH THE INCOME-TAX RETURNS. (5) CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WILL GO TO THE ROOT OF THE ISSUES IN APPEAL AND IT WILL BE POSSIBLE FOR THE HON. TRIBUNAL TO PA SS A MORE APPROPRIATE ORDER IN A MORE SATISFIED MANNER. IN THIS CONNECTION I RELY O N THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENTS :- 1. PARI MANGALDAS GIRDHARDAS 6-CTR-64 (GUJARAT) 2. SHRI KANCHHODBHAI BHULABHAI PATEL (AHMEDABAD TRI BUNAL) 3. A.M.MATHUR 7-DTR-466 (INDORE) 4. MAHAVIR PRASAD GUPTA 100-TTJ-1078 (DELHI) 5. UPO LLC 12-SOT-499(DELHI) 6. SHIYA DAWOODI BOHRA 130-TAXMARI-293 (M.P..) (6) AS REGARDS GROUND OF CASH WITHDRAWAL COPIES OF CASH BOOK AND CAPITAL ACCOUNT ARE FILED (P.39-41). (7) IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ADDITIO NAL EVIDENCE MAY KINDLY BE ADMITTED. ON RECEIPT OF AFORESAID APPLICATION THE CASE WAS A DJOURNED TO 25.05.2010. 4. ON 25.05.2010 IN SURAT CAMP OF ITAT ON BEHAL F OF ASSESSEE SHRI R.N. VEPARI APPEARED AND POINTED OUT THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDEN CES BE ADMITTED BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE SHRI 5 ITA NO. 2957-AHD-2008 RAJENDRA R. PATEL IS RESIDING IN KENYA. WHEN THE AS SESSING OFFICER FRAMED THE ASSESSMENT ON 30.11.2007 THE ASSESSEE WAS OUTSIDE INDIA. IN SUPP ORT OF THIS THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE PHOTO-COPY OF THE PASSPORT AND SUBMITTED THAT THE P ERIOD DURING WHICH SHRI RAJENDRA R. PATEL WAS IN INDIA IS AS UNDER :- 09.06.2007 TO 16.06.2007 17.09.2007 TO 04.10.2007 18.12.2007 TO 07.01.2008 THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED T HAT THE CONCERNED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT WHO REPRESENTED THE ASSESSEES CASE BEFORE THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER COULD NOT FURNISH THE COMPLETE DETAILS/ DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE WAS OUTSID E INDIA. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES BE ADMITTED AND HE BE PERMITTE D TO ALLOW ARGUE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERIT. ALTERNATIVELY THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESS EE SUGGESTED THAT THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) IN RESPECT OF A LL THE ADDITIONS/ DISALLOWANCES WHICH ARE DISPUTED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL BE SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE DIRECTION THAT HE SHOULD RE-ADJUDI CATE THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS/ DISALLOWANCES. 5. ON THE OTHER HAND SMT. JYOTI LAXMI LD. SR. D.R . APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE VEHEMENTLY OBJECTED TO THE AFORESAID PRAYER OF THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. D.R. POINTED OUT THAT THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) BE CONFIRMED. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THIS THE LD. D.R. POINTED OUT THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR SETTING ASIDE THE ADDITION OF RS.44 591/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING O FFICER BECAUSE EVEN NOW ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED THE SHARE CERTIFICATES WHICH INDIC ATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD SHARES OF REKHA R. PATEL AMOUNTING TO RS.44 591/-. SIMILARLY IN RE SPECT OF LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWAL THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION FOR RESTORING THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER. WITH REGARD TO LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A AND 234B THE LD. D.R. POINTED OUT THAT LEVY OF INTEREST IS MANDATORY AND THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO GET ONLY CONSEQUENT IAL RELIEF. 6. IN REJOINDER THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SU BMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IN CASE THE ADDITION IN RESPECT OF UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT OF R S.44 591/- IN RESPECT OF REKHA R. PATEL IS SUSTAINED. IN RESPECT OF LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWAL O F RS.65 812/- ALSO THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT HE HAS NO OBJECTION IN CASE THE ADDITION IS ALSO CONFIRMED. HOWEVER IN 6 ITA NO. 2957-AHD-2008 RESPECT OF REMAINING ADDITIONS/ DISALLOWANCES HE P OINTED OUT THAT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WHO WILL RE-ADJUDICATE THESE ADDITIONS AFTER CONSIDERING ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AS THE ASSESSEE WA S PREVENTED IN FILING THE SAME BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN PROPOSITION THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE BY RELYING ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS.- ASSAM TRAVELS SHIPPING SERVICE [1993] 199 ITR 1 / 67 TAXMAN 269 AND HUKUMCHAND MILLS LTD. VS .- CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 CONTENDED THAT THE TRIBUNAL CAN SET ASIDE OR REMAND FILE TO ASSESS ING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 254 FOR FURTHER ENQUIRY TO MAKE PROPER ASSESSMENT BY ALLOWING THE P ARTIES TO RAISE A CONTENTION FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE IT. 7. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES WE HAVE CAREFULLY G ONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS.- AMAR MINING CO. [ 2009] 121 ITD 273 (AHD.)(T.M.) CITING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF C IT VS.- ASSAM TRAVELS SHIPPING SERVICE [1993] 199 ITR 1 / 67 TAXMAN 269 AND HUKUMCHAND MIL LS LTD. VS.- CIT [1967] 63 ITR 232 IT WAS HELD THAT TRIBUNAL CAN SET ASIDE OR REMAND FILE TO ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FURTHER ENQUIRY TO MAKE PROPER ASSESSMENT BY ALLOWING THE PARTIES TO R AISE A CONTENTION FOR THE FIRST TIME BEFORE IT. THIS POWER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR REMANDING THE ISSUE WAS CONFIRMED IN THE SAID DECISION. 7.1. IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM RAKHA R. PAT EL AMOUNTING TO R.44 591/- THE LD. COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY ADMITTED THAT THE AS SESSEE IS NOT HAVING THE CERTIFICATE INDICATING HOLDING OF SHARES IN PHYSICAL FORM WHICH WERE SOLE LY BELONGED TO REKHA R. PATEL. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS) CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.44 591/- IS UPHELD. T HE ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF LOW HOUSEHOLD WITHDRAWAL AMOUNTING TO RS.65 812/- IS AL SO UPHELD. 7.2. WITH REGARD TO REMAINING ADDITIONS PRIMA FACI E IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE BEING A NON- RESIDENT THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE NOW BEIN G FILED COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JU STICE THE FOLLOWING ADDITIONS/ DISALLOWANCES ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER :- (1) UNEXPLAINED GIFT - RS.6 54 672/- 7 ITA NO. 2957-AHD-2008 (2) UNEXPLAINED CASH CREDIT OF ALL THE CREDITORS EX CEPT REKHA R. PATEL (RS.44 591/-) I.E. RS.9 00 660 (RS.10 05 251/- (-) RS.44 591/- (3)UNEXPLAINED CASH DEPOSIT RS.6 00 000/- (4) TREATING SHORT-TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS BUSINESS INCOME RS.6 44 886/- THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL EXAMINE THE VARIOUS ADDI TIONAL EVIDENCES MAY CALL FURTHER EVIDENCE CONDUCT ENQUIRY WHICH HE DEEM FIT AND RE-ADJUDICAT E ALL THE AFORESAID RESTORED ADDITIONS AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 7.3. LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234A AND 234B I S MANDATORY. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL ALLOW CONSEQUENTLY RELIEF IN LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER THAT SECTION. 8. IN THE RESULT FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES THE APP EAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS PARTLY ALLOWED. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 30.07.201 0 SD/- SD/- (D.C. AGRAWAL) (T.K. SHARMA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 30 / 07 / 2010 COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE DEPARTMENT. 3) CIT(A) CONCERNED (4) CIT CONCERNED (5) D.R. ITAT AHMEDABAD. TRUE COPY BY ORDER DEPUTY REGI STRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD LAHA/SR.P.S.