Mahesh & Co.(Const.) Pvt. Ltd.,, Ahmedabad v. The Income tax Officer, Ward-4(4),, Ahmedabad

ITA 313/AHD/2006 | 2002-2003
Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 31320514 RSA 2006
Assessee PAN AACCM8082H
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 313/AHD/2006
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant Mahesh & Co.(Const.) Pvt. Ltd.,, Ahmedabad
Respondent The Income tax Officer, Ward-4(4),, Ahmedabad
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 01-07-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 01-07-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 01-07-2010
Next Hearing Date 01-07-2010
Assessment Year 2002-2003
Appeal Filed On 08-02-2006
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH B AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.N.PHAUJA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.313/AHD/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2002-03 DATE OF HEARING:1.7.10 DRAFTED:2.7.10 MAHESH & CO. (CONST.) PVT. LTD. 10 ABHIVRUDHI ASHRAM ROAD AHMEDABAD PAN NO.AACCM8082H V/S. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(4) AHMEDABAD (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI DHIREN SHAH AR RESPONDENT BY:- SHRI K. MADHUSUSDUN SR-DR O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-VIII AHMEDABAD IN APPEAL NO.CI T(A)-VIII/ ITO/4 (4) / 006/05- 06 DATED 05-12-2005. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY T HE ITO WARD-4(4) AHMEDABAD U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (H EREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 28-02-2005 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2002-03. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF LABOUR EXPENSES. FO R THIS ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND NO.I :- I. DISALLOWANCE OF LABOUR EXPENSESS RS.11 10 183/ - 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.11 10 183/- ON THE OBSERVATION T HAT. THE APPELLANT HAS NEITHER PRODUCED ANY PERSON FOR VERIFICATION NOR T HEY WERE FOUND ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN. THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE IN CASH JU ST BELOW RS.20 000/- TO ABSTAIN FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3). IN T HE ABSENCE OF WRITTEN ITA NO.313/AHD/2008 A.Y.2002-03 MAHESHS & CO. (CONST.) PVT. LTD. V. ITO WD-4(4) ABD PAGE 2 CONTRACT AGREEMENT IT IS ALSO NOT ASCERTAINABLE AS TO UPTO WHAT EXTENT THE LABOUR EXPENSES WERE TO BE BORNE BY THE APPELLANT A ND WHY THE PAYMENT TO LABOUR IN CASH WAS DONE BY M/S. MAHESH & CO. IN VIE W OF THESE FACTS AND THE REASONS GIVEN BY AO I AGREE WITH AO THAT THE APPEL LANT HAS FAILED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF PAYMENT OF LABOUR AMOUNTING TO R S.11 10 183/- AND THEREFORE THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IS HEREB Y CONFIRMED. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS LEADING TO THE ABOVE ISSUE ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY WAS INCORPORATED ON 22-04-188 WITH THE MAIN OBJECT TO P URCHASE ACQUIRE AND TAKE OVER THE RUNNING BUSINESS OF PARTNERSHIP FIRM OF M/S. MA HESHS & CO. STATION ROAD BHUJ KUTCH AND ALSO TO ENGAGE IN THE BUSINESS OF CONTRAC TS OF CIVIL ENGINEERING AND MECHANICAL ENGINEERING ETC. HOWEVER DURING THE YEA R UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY RECEIVED TOTAL CONTRACT RECEIPTS O F RS.1 11 02 202/- FOR CONSTRUCTING RESIDENTIAL HOUSES UNDER REHABILITATIO N SCHEME OF EARTH QUAKE VICTIMS UNDERTAKEN BY THE GOVT. OF MAHASHTRA AND THE ASSES SEE HAS INCURRED EXPENDITURE RS.1.15 CRORES THEREBY DECLARING NET LOSS IN THE PR OFIT & LOSS A/C. AT RS.4 73 811/-. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSME NT PROCEEDINGS NOTICE THAT ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED LABOUR EXPENSES TO EARN ABOVE THE CONTRACT RECEIPTS AT RS.38.28 LAKHS. THE AO IN ORDER TO VERIFY THE GENU INENESS OF THE LABOUR EXPENSES REQUIRED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAILS OF THE PERSON TO WHOM THE JOB-WORK WAS ALLOTTED ALONG WITH NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE LABOURE RS. THE ASSESSEE IN RESPONSE TO SAME SUBMITTED THE LIST OF LABOUR PAYMENTS ALONG WI TH NAME & ADDRESSES OF THE LABOURERS AND LABOUR CONTRACTORS. THE AO ISSUED NOT ICE U/S.133(6) OF THE ACT TO VERIFY THE GENUINENESS OF LABOUR EXPENSES AND PARTIES FROM SL. NO.1-5 HAVE GIVEN THEIR REPLY ALONG WITH EXPLANATION. THE AO ACCEPTED THE LABOUR PAYMENTS MADE TO THOSE PARTIES. THE LETTER SENT TO REMAINING PARTIES AT S L.NO. 7 TO 72 TO WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID CASH AMOUNTING TO RS.10 000/- TO 19 800/- RETURNED UN-SERVED WITH THE REMARKS POSTAL AUTHORITY NOT FOUND. THE AO REQUI RED THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE THOSE PERSONS. THE ASSESSEE REPLIED THAT SEVERE EAR TH QUAKE HAPPENED DURING THE JANUARY 2001 AT GUJARAT AND AFFECTED THE DAY-TO-DA Y LIFE OF THE PEOPLE AND KUTCH REGION WAS THE MOST AFFECTED AREAS AND THE STATE GO VERNMENTS CENTRAL GOVERNMENT PRIVATE AND PUBLIC CORPORATE NGOS TRUSTS AND INTE RNATIONAL COMMUNITY ETC. RUSHED HEAVILY FOR THE SUPPORT AND HELP TO THE AFFECTED AR EAS. MANY OF THE CORPORATE AND STATE GOVT. ETC. HAD ADOPTED THE AREAS AND VILLAGE FOR REHABILITATION. IN THE SAME PROCESS GOVT. OF MAHARASHTRA HAD MADE MANY HOUSES F OR THE VICTIMS. M/S. MAHESH & CO. WAS AWARDED THE WORK FOR REHABILITATION OF HOUS ES FOR THE VICTIMS AFFECTED IN ITA NO.313/AHD/2008 A.Y.2002-03 MAHESHS & CO. (CONST.) PVT. LTD. V. ITO WD-4(4) ABD PAGE 3 EARTHQUAKE AT VONDH AND AADHOI AREAS OF KUTCH AND I T HAD TO COMPLETE 100 NOS. OF HOUSE IN THE VILLAGE AADHOI AND VONDH IN KUTCH DIST RICT AND LATER ON 269 NOS. OF TYPE IV UNITS AND 32 NOS. OF TYPE III UNITS AT VONDH VIL LAGE. TALUKA BACHAUA KUTCH WERE ALLOTTED FOR CONSTRUCTION. THE SAME WORK WAS TAKEN BY ASSESSEE AS SUBS-CONTRACTOR. AT THE SAME TIME OF EXECUTION OF THE PROJECT LOTS OF NGOS CORPORATE STATE GOVT. ANOTHER ORGANIZATIONS WERE INDULGED IN THE SAME FIE LD OF WORK SO THERE WAS A GREAT IMBALANCE OF DEMAND AND SUPPLY PROJECTS UNDERTAKEN BY THE CONTRACTORS WERE TO BE COMPLETED IN SPECIFIED FIXED TIME TO AVOID THE PENA LTY CLAUSES OF THE AGREEMENTS AND THE OTHER PROJECTS WHICH WERE NOT WITHIN THE AMBIT OF FIXED SPAN WERE DELAYED DUE TO ACUTE PROBLEM OF SHORTAGE OF MATERIAL LABOUR AND O THER FACILITIES AND MANY OF THE CORPORATE WHO HAD ADOPTED THE VILLAGES DELAYED THEI R PROJECTS DUE TO NON-AVAILABILITY OF BRICKS SAND KAPCHI ETC. AT HIGHER PRICES. SIM ILAR WAS THE POSITION IN THE CASE OF LABOUR AND TECHNICAL STAFF. BOTH THE SKILLED AND UN SKILLED LABOUR WAS SHAVING THE GOOD CHANCE DUE TO GREAT DEMAND SO THEY USED TO IMMEDIAT ELY SHIFT TO THE PLACE PAYING MORE CHANGE AND DUE TO THE SAME REASON LABOUR FROM DIFFERENT PLACES CAME TO AVAIL THE CHANCE. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED BEFORE THE AO TH AT IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR US TO PRODUCE THE LABOURS DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCE S AS STATED ABOVE. HOWEVER ASSESSEE ABOVE STATED NOT TO TREAT THE SAME AS BOGU S BECAUSE IT MAY BE VERIFIED OR CONFIRMED ALTERNATIVELY AS STATED BELOW:- A) YOUR HONOUR MAY VERIFY THE WORK DONE BY THE LAB OUR AS REFLECTED IN THEIR BILLS AND MAY VERIFY THE SAME FROM THE ACTUAL SITE WHERE WE HAD CARRIED OUT THE WORK. B) NATURE OF WORK WITH DETAILS IS ALREADY REFLECTED IN THE BILLS OF LABOUR VERIFIED BY YOUR HONOUR AND THE GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA HA D PAID FOR THE SAME WORK. SO YOUR HONOUR MAY VERIFY WHETHER SUCH SORT O F WORK WAS CARRIED OUT IN THEIR PROJECTS OR NOT. C) GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA HAD NOMINATED AN INDEP ENDENT AGENCY NAMED CONSULTANCY ENGINEERING SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. DE ALING IN ENGINEERING ARCHITECT AND PLANNING WORK WHICH HAD SUPERVISED AN D CERTIFIED THE WORK OF M/S. MAHESH & CO. YOUR HONOUR MAY VERIFY THE NATURE OF WORK DISCLOSED IN THE LABOUR BILLS FORM SUCH AGENCY. WE ARE PROVIDING HER EWITH THE ADDRESS OF THE AGENCY FOR YOUR HONOURS REFERENCE AS FOLLOWS:- CONSULTING ENGINEERING SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD. VAT 743 & 744 4 FLOOR TOWER NO. 7 VASHI RAILWAY STATION COMPLEX VASHI NAVI MUMBAI-400 073 D) IT IS TO TAKEN NOTE OF THAT THE OUR CONTRACTOR M /S. MAHESH AND COMPANY HAD GIVEN THE ABOVE WORK TO US AND WE HAD CARRIED THE S AME UNDER THE ITA NO.313/AHD/2008 A.Y.2002-03 MAHESHS & CO. (CONST.) PVT. LTD. V. ITO WD-4(4) ABD PAGE 4 SUPERVISION AND INSTRUCTION OF OUR CONTRACTOR M/S. MAHESH AND COMPANY AND MANY OF THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE BY YOUR CONTRACTOR O N OUR BEHALF TO THE DIRECT LABOURS AND THE SAME ARE DULY REFLECTED IN O UR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. HOWEVER WE ARE PROVIDING HEREWITH A CONFIRMATION I F PAYMENTS MADE BY OUR CONTRACTOR DIRECTLY TO THE PARTIES REFLECTED IN SR. NO. 7 TO 72 AS EXHIBT I. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT ACCEPTED THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE AND MADE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.11 10 183/- OUT OF LABOUR EXPENS ES PAID TO THESE PARTIES AT SL. NO. 7 TO 72. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF ASSESSING O FFICER ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A). CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF AO BY GIVING FOLLOWING FINDING IN PARA-6 OF HIS APPELLATE ORDER:- 6. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLA NT AND THE FACTS BROUGHT ON RECORD BY THE A.O. CAREFULLY. FROM THE FACT ON REC ORDS I FIND THAT THERE WAS NO WRITTEN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MAIN CONTRACTOR NAME LY M/S. MAHESH & CO. AND THE APPELLANT WHICH IS ALSO THE ASSOCIATE CONCE RN OF THE CONTRACTOR. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TWO THE TERMS OF SUB-CONTRACT ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE DEPARTMENT. IT HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED BY THE APPELLANT THAT MANY TIMES THE PAYMENT TO LABAOUR HAS BEEN DONE BY THE MAIN CONTRACTOR (M/S. MAHESH & CO.) AND NOT BY THE APPELLANT AND TH E ACCOUNT HAS BEEN SETTLED BETWEEN TWO. IN THE ABSENCE OF DIRECT PAYME NTS TO LABOUR BY THE APPELLANT THE ACTUAL VERIFICATION OF THE EXTENT OF PAYMENT TO LABOUR IS NOT VERIFIABLE. THE APPELLANT HAS PAID TO MOST OF THE L ABOUR AMOUNT APPROXIMATELY RS.19 500/- TO AVOID THE APPLICABILITY OF PROVISION S OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE I.T. ACT. IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IT WAS ESSENTIAL FOR TH E AO TO VERIFY THE PAYMENTS MADE TO LABAOUR. THEREFORE AO WROTE TO THE LABAOUR ON THE ADDRESSES GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT FOR VERIFICATION BUT NOT EVEN A SI NGLE REPLY WAS RECEIVED AS ALL THE LETTERS WERE RETURNED BACK WITH POSTAL REMARK NOT FOUND. THEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUESTED THE APPELLANT TO PRODUC E THE PERSON TO WHOM SUCH PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE IN CASH BUT THE APPELL ANT ALSO FAILED TO PRODUCE ANY SINGLE PERSON FOR VERIFICATION OR EVEN NO CONFIRMATION WAS FILED FROM ANY PERSON. THEREFORE THESE EXPENSES IN CASH WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 30% OF TOTAL LABOUR EXPENSES REMAINED UNVERIFIABLE . THE ONUS TO PROVE THE EXPENDITURE IS ON THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS NEITHER PRODUCED ANY PERSON FOR VERIFICATION NOR THEY WERE FOUND ON THE ADDRESS GIVEN. THE PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE ION CASH JUST BELOW RS.20 000 /- TO ABSTAIN FROM THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3). IN THE ABSENCE OF WRI TTEN CONTRACT AGREEMENT IT IS ALSO NOT ASCERTAINABLE AS TO UPTO WHAT EXTENT THE L ABOUR EXPENSES WERE TO BE BORNE BY THE APPELLANT AND WHY THE PAYMENT TO LABOU R IN CASH WAS DONE BY M/S. MAHESH & CO. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS AND THE RE ASONS GIVEN BY AO. I AGREE WITH AO THAT THE APPELLANT HAS FAILED TO PROV E THE GENUINENESS OF PAYMENT OF LABOUR AMOUNTING TO RS.11 10 183/- AND T HEREFORE THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO IS HEREBY CONFIRMED. 4. BEFORE US ALSO LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REIT ERATED THE SAME SUBMISSION AND URGED THE BENCH TO MAKE REASONABLE ESTIMATE IN VIEW OF REASONS THAT LABOURERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE FOR EXAMINATION. ON THE OTHER HA ND LD. SR-DR SHRI K. ITA NO.313/AHD/2008 A.Y.2002-03 MAHESHS & CO. (CONST.) PVT. LTD. V. ITO WD-4(4) ABD PAGE 5 MUDHUSUDUN HEAVILY RELIED ON THE ASSESSMENT ORDER A S WELL AS ORDER OF CIT(A) AND HE STATED THAT NO ESTIMATE CAN BE MADE WHEN A SPECI FIC DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THR OUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED TH E CASE RECORDS INCLUDING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS ORDER OF CIT(A). WE FIN D THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS WORKING IN A PECULIAR SITUATION FOR REHABILITATION PURPOSES OF EARTH QUAKE VICTIMS AND THE DELAY IN THEIR PROJECT WAS DUE TO NON-AVAILABILITY OF UN- SKILLED LABOURS WHO USED TO IMMEDIATE SHIFT FROM ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER WHO ARE PAYING MORE LABOUR CHARGES. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY TRIED THEIR EFFORTS BEST TO GE T DETAILED BILLS OF WORK DONE BY THE TEMPORARY LABOAURS AT SITE WITH A SPECIFIC DESC RIPTION OF WORK CARRIED OUT BY THEM. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAD ALSO TAKEN THEIR ADDRESSES PROVIDED BY THE LABOURS AT THE TIME OF WORK DONE. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY CARRIE D ON THE PROJECT OF MORE THAN RS.5.30 CRORES IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE COMPANY TO KEEP A TRACK RECORD OF TEMPORARY AND UNSKILLED LABOURS ENGAGED WITH THE COMPANY AT D IFFERENT TIMES WHO WERE NOT HAVING PERMANENT ADDRESS OR RESIDENCE SINCE THEY AR E BEING LIVED AT WORK SITE / PLACE IN SMALL TEMPORARY SHEDS AND AS SOON AS THE P ROJECT IS COMPLETED THEY SHIFTS TO ANOTHER SITE. WE FIND THAT IN THIS KIND OF CIVIL C ONSTRUCTION WORK NORMALLY NO FORMAL ATTENDANCE REGISTERS WOULD BE MAINTAINED AND IT COU LD ALSO NOT BE MAINTAINABLE DUE TO THE REASON THAT THERE ARE NO PERMANENT WORKERS A ND THE LABOURERS ARE RECRUITED ON DAILY WAGE BASIS FROM WORKERS MANDI IN DIFFERENT PARTIES OF THE DISTRICT AND DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE STATE WHERE THE WORK IS TO C ARRIED OUT. ACCORDINGLY THE NATURE OF WORK CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY THERE CAN NOT BE A PERMANENT WORKER AND HENCE IT IS NOT FEASIBLE OR POSSIBLE TO MAINTA IN REGISTER SHOWING THEIR FULL DETAILS AND IT IS ALSO A MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR TO BE TAKEN NOTE OF THAT A PARTICULAR WORKER IDENTIFIED FROM THE WORKERS MANDI ON A DAY AND HE M AY HAVE DONE THE WORK FOR ONE DAY AND MAY NOT TURN ON NEXT DAY AT THE WORK PLACE IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCES IT IS TO BE PRESUMED THAT HE DOES NOT WANT TO WORK AT THAT PLAC E. IN THE PRESENT CASE SINCE THERE WAS A GREAT DEMAND OF UNSKILLED WORKERS THEY WERE NOT WORKED CONTINUOUSLY AS THEY WERE LOOKING FOR MORE WAGES AND FLEEING ONE PLACE TO ANOTHER PLACE WHERE THEY GET MORE WAGES. THEREFORE THE ASSESSEE-COMPAN Y HAD TO SURVIVE ALL THE AFORESAID LABOUR PROBLEMS AND DIFFICULTIES IN CARRY ING OUT THE CONTRACT WORK. DUE TO THESE PROBLEM AFTER COMPLETION OF 50 HOUSES AT AAD HOI THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY HAD ITA NO.313/AHD/2008 A.Y.2002-03 MAHESHS & CO. (CONST.) PVT. LTD. V. ITO WD-4(4) ABD PAGE 6 GIVEN THE TOTAL WORK TO A SUB-CONTRACTOR FOR VONDH SITE. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY WERE NOT IN A POSITION TO BRING THE SAME LABOURERS WORKE D IN AADHO SITE TO ADJOURNING SITE AT VONDH BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THEY WERE SHIFTED TO ANOTHER SITE FOR OTHER WORK TO AVAIL MORE LABOUR CHARGES/WAGES AND THEREFORE IT W AS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE ASSESSEE- COMPANY TO PRODUCE THE SAME TEMPORARY LABOURS BEFOR E THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THAT APART THE UNSKILLED LABOURERS ENGAGED BY THE ASSESS EE-COMPANY WERE ILLITERATE AND IT WAS ALSO VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY TO GET THEIR CONFIRMATION IN WRITING AND TO PRODUCE THEM BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE REASONING WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES SHOULD NOT HAVE DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE LABOUR CHARGE S FOR THE PARTIES AT SL. NO. 7 TO 72. A REASONABLE DISALLOWANCE AT 25% OF THIS LABAOU R EXPENDITURE OF RS.11 10 183/- WILL MEET THE END OF JUSTICE. ACCORDINGLY WE DIRE CT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE- COMPUTE THE INCOME AFTER MAKING OF DISALLOWANCE OF 25% AS DIRECTED ABOVE. THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 01/07/2010 SD/- SD/- (A.N.PHAUJA) (MAHAVIR SINGH) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AHMEDABAD DATED : 01/07/2010 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)-VIII AH 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD