The DCITAnand Circle,, Anand v. Laxmi Protein Products Pvt. Ltd.,, Anand

ITA 3792/AHD/2008 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 379220514 RSA 2008
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 3792/AHD/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 20 day(s)
Appellant The DCITAnand Circle,, Anand
Respondent Laxmi Protein Products Pvt. Ltd.,, Anand
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 11-02-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 04-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 04-02-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 21-11-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI N.S.SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.3792 & 2582/AHD/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 DATE OF HEARING:4.2.10 DRAFTED:5.2.10 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ANAND CIRCLE ANAND INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) 3 RD FLOOR S.P. COMPLEX MAYFAIR ROAD ANAND V/S . V/S . LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. APPROACH ROAD VASAD ANAND 388 306 PAN NO.AAAACL3972F LAXMI PROTEINS PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. VASAD ANAND (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.2583/AHD/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ANAND CIRCLE ANAND V/S . LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. APPROACH ROAD VASAD ANAND 388 306 PAN NO.AAAACL3972F (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.2584/AHD/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX ANAND CIRCLE ANAND V/S . LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. APPROACH ROAD VASAD ANAND 388 306 PAN NO.AAAACL3972F ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 2 (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY :- SHRI ASEEM L THAKKAR AR REVENUE BY:- SHRI SANJAY RAI SR-DR O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THESE FOUR APPEALS ONE BY THE ASSESSEE AND THREE BY REVENUE ARE ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS)-IV BARODA IN APPEAL NO.CAB/IV-A-205 88-90/07-08 DIFFERENT DA TES 22-05-2008 AND 27- 08-2008. THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED BY THE ACIT ANAN D CIRCLE ANAND U/S.143(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 24-12-2007 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. THE ORDER U/S.201(1) 201(1A) R.W.S. 194C OF THE ACT WAS FRAM ED BY THE ITO ANAND VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 15-05-2007. FIRST WE WILL DEAL WITH REVENUES APPEAL ITA NO.379 2/AHD/2008. 2. THE FIRST ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN PARTLY DELETING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF PA YMENT MADE TO MUKADAMS WHICH IS FALLING WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SECTION 194C O F THE ACT. FOR THIS THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUND NO.1 :- 1) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN PARTLY ALLOWING THE ADDITIONS TO THE EXTENT OF RS.34 28 057 OVERLOOKING THE FACT THAT TH E PAYMENT MAID TO MU9KUNDAND IS FALLING WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SEC. 194 C AND IT CAN NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR REDISTRIBUTION AMONGST THE LABOURERS . 3. THE BRIEF FACTS LEADING TO THE ABOVE ISSUE ARE T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN BUSINESS OF PURCHASE PROCESSING AND SAL E OF TUR DAL AND A ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 3 SURVEY U/S.133A OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON THE B USINESS PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 13-02-2007 AT VASAD ANAND DISTRICT. D URING THE COURSE OF SURVEY THE STATEMENT OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMPANY SHRI DEVENDRA RAVJIBHAI PATEL WAS RECORDED WHEREBY THE DETAILS OF LABOUR C HARGES PAID FOR LOADING & UNLOADING SORTING AND CLEANING AND TRANSPORTATION CHARGES WERE REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN. DURING THE SURVEY SHRI DEVENDRA R PATEL STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE- COMPANY IS COMPILING THE DATA OF TDS AND ALSO THE D ETAILS OF TRANSPORTER TO WHOM THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE AND THE NATURE OF PAYME NT MADE TO ALL THE CONCERNS. HE ALSO EXPLAINED THAT THERE ARE TWO TYP ES OF EXPENSES BOOKED UNDER SORTING AND CLEARING/LOADING EXPENSES AND UNL OADING & LOADING EXPENSES IN THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY. HE STATED THAT ONE IS FOR LOADING AND UNLOADING GOODS IN MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY AND OTHER FOR LOADING & UNLOADING FOR SENDING FROM ONE SIDE TO OTHER SIDE FOR SORTING CLEANING AND GRINDING. HE STATED THAT ALL THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE SET OF LAB OURERS ON DAILY BASIS. IN REPLY TO QUESTION NO.4 HE STATED AS UNDER:- Q. NO. 4 PLEASE EXPLAIN THE NATURE AND IDENTIFICAT ION OF PERSON TO WHOM THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE. PLEASE ALSO SHOW THE SUPPOR TING DOCUMENTARY PROOF REGARDING SUCH EXPENSES? ANS. WE ARE MAINTAINING VOUCHERS FOR EACH PAYMENTS. THE PAYMENTS WERE GIVEN TO ONE PERSON WHO IS IN-CHARGE OR AUTHOR IZED BY THE LABOUER TO TAKE SUCH PAYMENT ON BEHALF OF THEM AND THE SIGN ATURE OF THAT PERSON TAKEN ON VOUCHER. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY A QUESTION WAS P OSTED THAT TDS PROVISIONS ARE BEING VIOLATED BY NOT DEDUCTING THE SAME. SUBSE QUENTLY A SHOW CAUSE NOTICED WAS ALSO ISSUE U/S.201 & 201(1A) OF THE ACT DATED 21-02-2007 REPEATING THE SAME. THE ASSESSEE REPLIED VIDE LETTE R DATED 08-05-2007 STATING THE FOLLOWING:- (1) COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNTS FOR THREE FINANCIAL YE ARS 2004-05 2005-06 AND 2006-07 OF (I) LOADING AND UNLOADING EXPENSES (II) UNLOADING AND LOADING EXPENSES ARE ENCLOSED HE REWITH. FURTHER WITH REGARDS TO ABOVE ALL PAYMENTS THOUGH ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 4 COMPANY HAS MADE PAYMENTS TO STAFF MEMBERS OR WORKE RS AND HE HAS PAID RELEVANT SUMS TO GROUP OF WORKERS W HO HAVE DONE THE LABOUR WORK. FURTHER ABOVE FACT CAN B E VERIFIED FROM RECORDS CONTAINING ALL DETAILS OF SUC H PAYMENTS. (2). WITH REGARDS TO NAME AND ADDRESS OF LABOURERS ENGAGED STATED ABOVE WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT THEY ARE COMING FROM NEARBY VILLAGES AND ARE NOT PERMANENT EMPLOYEES OF THE COMPANY HEN CE WE ARE ENABLE TO PROVIDE ADDRESS/PAN. (3) WITH REGARDS TO ADDRESS OF STAFF / WORKERS WHO HAVE RECEIVED ALL SUCH PAYMENTS ADDRESS OF STAFF AS UNDER:- (1) NATUBHAI K PRAJAPATI AT & POST: SUDAN TAL. AN AND. (2) RAJESHBHAI B RAJ AT & POST SUDAN TAL. ANAND (3) JAGDISHBHAI K RAJ AT & POST ADAS TAL ANAND (4) PRAVINBHAI B RAJ AT & POST ADAS TAL ANAND. (4)THERE ARE NO SEPARATE RECORDS OF ATTENDANCE BUT THERE ARE RECORDS IN SUPPORT OF ALL SUCH PAYMENT. (5 & 6). WITH REGARDS TO PAYMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CHARGES UNDER HEAD TOOR DAL EXPENSES. WE ARE SUBMITTING COPY OF LEDG ER ACCOUNT OF TOOR DAL EXPENSES A/C FOR YOUR PERUSAL. FURTHER WITH REGARDS TO DEDUCTION OF INCOME TAX WHI LE MAKING PAYMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION CHARGES WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THAT AT EACH TIME OF GOODS ARE RECEIVED / DISPATCHED NAMES / DE TAILS OF OWNERS OF TRUCKS IS NOT KNOWN AS DRIVERS / CLEANERS ARE BRING ING / RECEIVE DISPATCH GOODS. 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED IN THE ASSESSMENT OR DER THAT THESE LABOUR ACTIVITIES ARE ORGANIZED AND MAINTAINED AND CONTROL LED BY ONE PERSON LOCALLY KNOWN AS MUKADUM. ACCORDING TO HIM THESE PAYMEN TS WERE MADE TO SUCH MUKADUM AND ONLY RECORD IN RESPECT OF THESE PAYMENT S ARE MAINTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ONLY VOUCHERS AND THE COPIES OF VOUCHER S ARE KEPT ON RECORD. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THESE VOUCHERS A RE SIGNED BY THE MUKADUM WHO RECEIVED THE PAYMENTS ON DAY-TO-DAY BA SIS IN CASH. THE AO AFTER REFERRING THE BOARDS CIRCULAR NO.433 DATED 25-09-1985 STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS COVERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C OF THE ACT BUT HE ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 5 HAS FAILED TO DEDUCT TAX. ACCORDINGLY HE TREATED THE ASSESSEE AS DEFAULTER U/S.201 & 201(IA) R.W.S.194C OF THE ACT BY GIVING T HE FOLLOWING FINDING:- THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT PRODUCE ANY MATERIAL EVIDENC E ON RECORD TO PROVE THAT THE PAYEE HAS SHOWN THE INCOME AND PAID THE TAX IN RESPECT OF THESE PAYMENTS HENCE HE IS ASSESSEE IN THE FAULT U/S.201 OF THE ACT R.W.S. EXPLANATION TO THE SECTION 191 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF DISCUSSION MADE IN FOREGOING PARAGRAPHS IT IS ASCERTAINED THAT THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE TO MUKADUM FOR LABOUR CHARGES IS NOTHING BUT PAYMENT MADE TO CONTRACTOR WITHIN THE M EANING OF SECTION 194C OF THE I.T. ACT AND TDS WERE NOT DEDUCTED IN A CCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION 194C OF THE ACT. HENCE T HE ASSESSEE IS AN ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT WITHIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 2 01(1) R.W.S 194C OF THE ACT ACCORDINGLY HE IS LIABLE TO PAY TAX U/S.201 (1) AND CONSEQUENTIAL INTEREST U/S.201(1A) OF THE ACT. (TO ASCERTAIN THE MONETARY LIMIT PRESCRIBED IN THE SECTION 194C I.E. A SINGLE PAYMENT DOES NOT EXCEEDS SRS.20000/- OR PAYM ENTS WERE MADE DURING THE YEAR PER PERSONS EXCEEDING RS.50000/- T HE DETAILS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE SHORTED OUT PER PERSON I.E. PE R MUKKADAM WHICH WERE LIABLE FOR TDS. {ANNEXURE A}). 6. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT( A). THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY STATING THAT T HE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE LABOURERS W HO ARE MOSTLY THE EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY. THE RELEVANT FIN DING IN PARA-5 OF THE APPELLATE ORDER READS AS UNDER:- 5. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLANT COMPANY. THE PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE REP RESENTATIVE OF THE LABOURERS WHO IN MOST CASES IS AN EMPLOYEE OF T HE COMPANY. THE APPELLANT HAS PRODUCED BEFORE ME THE WAGE REGISTER WHICH SHOWS THAT THE NAMES MENTIONED IN THE ANNEXURE TO THE ORDER AR E THOSE OF PERSONS WHO ARE IN REGULAR EMPLOYMENT OF THE COMPANY. IN SO ME CASES EVIDENCE HAS ALSO BEEN PLACED ON RECORD TO SHOW THA T PROVIDENT FUND OF THESE EMPLOYEES IS BEING DEDUCTED THEREBY ESTABL ISHING THAT AN EMPLOYER EMPLOYEE RELATIONSHIP EXISTS. THE FACT T HAT ONE PERSON IS RECEIVING THE WAGES FOR FURTHER DISTRIBUTION IS MER ELY AN INTERNAL ARRANGEMENT WHICH IS ADMINISTRATIVELY CONVENIENT. I T IS NOT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE PAYMENT FOR SORTING AND CLEANING AND LOADING AND UNLOADING WERE SUCH SO AS TO MERIT THAT RECIPIENTS I.E. ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 6 LABOURRS TO FALL WITHIN THE TAX BRACKET. IT IS ALS O NOT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE PAYMENT CLAIMED BY THE A PPELLANT UNDER THIS HEAD IS NOT GENUINE. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE R ECEIPT BY ONE PERSON FOR FURTHER RE-DISTRIBUTION IS MERELY AN ADMINISTRA TIVE CONVENIENCE AND NO EXISTENCE OF A CONTACT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BETW EEN THE RECIPIENT AND THE APPELLANT COMPANY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 194C WOULD NOT APPLY AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIREC TED TO DELETE THE DEMAND RAISED UNDER SECTION 201(1) AND 201(1A)OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT FOR A.YRS. 2005-06 2006-07 AND 2007-08. 7. BEFORE US LD. SR-DR SHRI SANJAY RAI FIRST OF A LL RELIED ON THE STATEMENT OF SHRI DEVENDRA R PATEL RECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY U/S.133A OF THE ACT AND HE READ OUT THE STATEMENT A S REPRODUCED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S.201 201(1A) OF THE ACT . HE STATED THAT DURING THE COURSE SURVEY THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT EXPLAIN OR COULD NOT FILE ANY DETAIL OR EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT THE PAYEE HAS SHOWN THE INCO ME AND PAID THE TAX IN RESPECT OF THESE PAYMENTS OR PAYMENTS ARE MADE DIRE CTLY TO THE LABOURERS. FURTHER HE ARGUED THAT DURING THE COURSES ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS WHEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED SHOW CAUSE U/S.201 AND 201 (1A) OF THE ACT DATED 21-02-2007 THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT REPLY TO THE SAM E. HE SATED THAT THE AO HAS RIGHTLY RELIED ON THE BOARDS CIRCULAR NO.433 DATED 25-09-1985 WHICH WAS ISSUED IN RESPECT OF PAYMENTS MADE TO MUKADUM CLAR IFYING THAT PAYMENTS MADE TO THE MUKADUM IS PAYMENTS MADE TO THE CONTRA CTORS WITHIN THE MEANING IS MEANING OF SECTION 194C OF THE ACT. HE STATED THAT EVEN THE CIRCULAR COVER THE ORAL CONTRACTS UNDER THE PROVISI ONS OF SECTION 194C OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY HE STATED THAT THE ORDER OF CIT( A) HAS NOT DISCUSSED THESE FACTS AND WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE SAME HAS ALLOWED CLAIMED OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THESE ARGUMENTS LD. SR-DR URGE THE BENCH TO ALLOW THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE. ON THE OTHER HAND LD. COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE STRONGLY CONTESTED THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. SR-DR STATING TH AT THE COMPLETE DETAILS IN RESPECT OF LOADING AND UNLOADING EXPENSES FOR SHOR TING AND CLEANING / LOADING EXPENSES WERE FILED. HE STATED THAT COMPLETE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE LABOURERS ENGAGED WERE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO AS WELL AS BEFORE CIT(A) AND STATED THAT MUKADUM WERE MAINLY EMPLOYEES OF TH E ASSESSEE AND THE ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 7 PAYMENTS TO THE LABOURERS ARE MADE THROUGH MUKADUM WHO ARE EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE TO REPRESENT THE LABOURERS. THEY AR E NOT THE CONTACTORS OF THE ASSESSEE. THEY ARE DIRECTLY THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LABOURERS. ACCORDINGLY PAYMENT MADE IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT IN EACH OF THE LABOURERS AND THE COMPLETE DETAILS WERE FILED IN VIEW OF THE LETTER D ATED 08-05-2007 BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THR OUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. AS WE HAVE NOTED ABOVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED COMPLETE DETAILS VIDE LETTER DATED 08-05-2007 AND IT IS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE INSTEAD MADE PAYMENTS TO LABOURERS RATHER THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT TO THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LABOURERS THRO UGH THEIR MUKADUM WHO ARE EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE INDIVIDUAL PAYME NT IS NOT EXCEEDING THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT AND ONCE THIS IS NOT THE CASE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO DEDUCT TAX U/S.194C OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY THIS ISSUE OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 9. THE NEXT ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL OF REVENUE IS AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF PAYMENT MADE TO LABOURE RS IN CASH IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. FOR THIS THE REVENUE H AS RAISED THE GROUND NO.2 :- 2) ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW IN DELETING THE ADD ITION OF RS.1 41 550. OVERLOOKING THE FACT THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE TO LABO URERS IN CASH ARE IN VIOLATION OF SEC. 40 A (3). 10. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS WE FIND TH AT THE FACTS HAS ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED IN THE ABOVE GROUND THE LABOUR PAYMENT IS NOT EXCEEDING THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT FOR DEDUCTION OF TAX I.E. ABOVE RS .20 000/-. ACCORDINGLY WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE D ECISION OF THE ABOVE GROUND . ACCORDINGLY THIS ISSUE OF THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. COMING TO REVENUES APPEALS ITA NO.2582-2584/AHD/20 08. ITA NO.3792 & 2582-84/AHD/2008 A.YS.2005-06 TO 2007-08 DCIT AND CIR. V. LAXMI PROTEIN PRODUCTS P. LTD. PAGE 8 11. AT THE OUTSET IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT SINCE WE HAVE ALREADY HELD IN THE ABOVE APPEAL OF REVENUE IN ITA NO.3792/AHD/2008 THAT THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE TO REPRESENTATIVE OF THE LABOURERS AND IN EACH OF THE LABOURERSS CASE THE PAYMENT IS NOT EXCEEDING PRESCRIBED LIMIT THE DEFAULT OF TDS AND CONSEQUENTIAL INTEREST U/S.201 AND 201(1A) OF THE A CT CANNOT BE CHARGED. ACCORDINGLY THESE ISSUES OF THE REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 12. IN THE RESULT REVENUES APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11 /02 /2010 SD/- SD/- (N.S.SAINI) (MAHAVIR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD DATED : 11 /02 /2010 *DKP COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- IV BARODA 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER /TRUE COPY/ DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD