M/s DCM Shriram Consolidated Ltd.,, New Delhi v. Addll. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 4299/DEL/2009 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 23-04-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 429920114 RSA 2009
Assessee PAN AAACD0097R
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 4299/DEL/2009
Duration Of Justice 5 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant M/s DCM Shriram Consolidated Ltd.,, New Delhi
Respondent Addll. CIT, New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 23-04-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 23-04-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 15-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 15-02-2010
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 06-11-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI B BENCH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA ITA NO. 4299/DEL/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2005-06) M/S DCM SHRIRAM CONSOLIDATED LTD. VS. A.C.I.T. 6 TH FLOOR KANCHANJUNGA BUILDING 18 RANGE-10 B.K. ROAD NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN / GIR NO.AAACD0097R APPELLANT BY: S/SHRI PRADEEP DINODIA CA & V.P. GUPTA BASANT KUMAR ADVOCATES RESPONDENT BY: SHRI STEPHEN GEORGE CIT-DR ORDER PER R.C. SHARMA AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) DATED 04-09-2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 I N THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3)/115JB OF THE I.T. ACT. 2. RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PER USED. ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO ADJUSTMENT MADE BY THE AO IN COMPUTATION OF BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JB OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND ADVANCES OF RS.1 02 00 000/- . WHILE COMPUTING BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JB THE AO ADDED PROVISION FOR D OUBTFUL DEBT AMOUNTING TO RS.1.02 CRORES IN THE BOOK PROFIT ON T HE PLEAS THAT PROVISION IS IN THE NATURE OF UNASCERTAINED LIABILITIES. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF AO BY OBSERVING THAT AS PER THE AMENDED I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 2 PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB VIDE FINANCE ACT 2009 A NEW CLAUSE (I) HAS BEEN INSERTED TO PROVIDE THAT THE AMOUNT SET ASIDE AS PROVISION FOR DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF ANY ASSET IS TO BE ADDED IN THE BOOK PROFIT. AGAINST THIS ORDER OF CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER AP PEAL BEFORE US. 3. SHRI PRADEEP DINODIA CA APPEARED ON BEHALF OF T HE ASSESSEE COMPANY AND CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD MADE A PROVISION OF RS.102 LACS IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS BY DEBITING TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR BAD AND DOUBTFU L DEBTS. THE PROVISION WAS MADE IN RESPECT OF DEBTS RECOVERABLE FROM THE PARTIES TO WHOM SALES MADE IN EARLIER YEARS BUT AMOUNTS HAD NO T BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE PARTIES AND ON ANALYZING THE FINANCIAL POSITION IT WAS CONSIDERED THAT AMOUNTS MAY NOT BE RECOVERABLE FROM THE RESPECT PAR TIES. THE PROVISIONS HAD BEEN MADE ON A DEFINITE BASIS AND AS PER WELL S ETTLED ACCOUNTING POLICY AND PRACTICES. SIMILAR PROVISIONS HAD BEEN MADE IN EARLIER YEARS ALSO AND AS AND WHEN DEBTS WERE ACTUALLY WRITTEN OF F IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SAME WERE WRITTEN OFF BY DEBITING TO THE P ROVISIONS SO MADE. IN CASE PROVISION HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE IN EXCESS ON A CCOUNT OF ACTUAL RECOVERY FROM THE CONCERNED PARTIES SAME HAS BEEN WRITTEN BACK BY CREDITING TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNTS. 4. LEARNED AR ALSO PLACED ON RECORD COPY OF EXTRACT OF MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING PROVISIONS IN THE FINANCE BILL 1987 COP Y OF EXTRACT OF BUDGET I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 3 SPEECH OF THE FINANCE MINISTER INTRODUCING FINANCE BILL 1987 COPY OF EXTRACT OF MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING PROVISIONS IN THE FINANCE BILL 1996 MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING PROVISIONS IN FINANCE BILL 2 000 AND FINANCE BILL (NO.2) ACT 2009. SHRI DINODIA ALSO PLACED ON RECORD COPY OF ACCOUNTING STANDARD REGARDING REVENUE RECOGNITION A S PROVIDED UNDER AS-9 AND ALSO COPY OF ACCOUNTING STANDARD REGARDING ACCOUNTING OF INVESTMENT AS PROVIDED UNDER AS-13. 5. LEARNED AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT CLAUSE (I) IN EXPLANATION TO SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO PROVI SION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS AND IN ANY CASE THE CLAUSE CANNOT BE APPLIED WITH R ETROSPECTIVE EFFECT AND IN THIS REGARD HE SUBMITS AS UNDER:- A) CLAUSE (I) TO EXPLANATION TO SECTION 115JB PROVIDES FOR ADJUSTMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF AMOUNT SET ASIDE AS PROVI SION FOR DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF ANY ASSET. THE SCOPE OF ABOVE CLAUSE IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SC OPE OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT AND PARTICULARLY DETERMINATION OF BOOK PROFIT. THE SE CTION PROVIDES THAT BOOK PROFIT MEANS THE NET PROFIT AS S HOWN IN THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT. THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE SECTION IS TO BE PRE PARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART II AND III OF SCHEDULE VI T O THE COMPANIES ACT 1956. ACCORDINGLY THE MEANING AND SCOPE OF ABOVE CLAUSE HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE L IGHT OF PROVISIONS OF PART II AND III OF SCHEDULE VI TO THE COMPANIES ACT READ WITH RELEVANT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS. ACCOUNTING STANDARD 13 PRESCRIBED BY TH E INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA REQUIRE D THAT CURRENT INVESTMENTS WILL BE VALUED AT LOWER OF THE COSTS OR FAIR MARKET VALUE AND IN RESPECT OF LONG TERM INVESTMENTS WHERE THERE IS A DECLINE IN THE VALUE OTHER THAN TEMPORARY THE AMOUNT OF REDUCTION IN THE VALU E IS I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 4 TO BE CHARGED TO PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT. IT FURTHER PROVIDES THAT WHENE4VER THERE IS INCREASE IN VALUE OF SUCH LONG-TERM INVESTMENTS THE AMOUNT EARLIER CHAR GED WILL BE REVERSED. IN OTHER WORDS AFORESAID ACCOUN TING STANDARD WHICH IS MANDATORY IN NATURE REQUIRED A COMPANY TO MAKE PROVISIONS FOR DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF LONG TERM INVESTMENTS AND SUCH PROVISION IS TO BE REVERSED AS AND WHEN THERE IS INCREASE IN THE VALUE . THE CLAUSE (I) HAS TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE CONTEXT OF A BOVE REQUIREMENT OF THE COMPANIES ACT READ WITH ACCOUNTI NG STANDARD 13. PROVISIONS FOR BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBS IS RELATING TO THE ACCOUNTING POLICY FOR REVENUE RECOGNITION AS PER ACCOUNTING STANDARD 9. REVENUE IN RESPECT OF SALE OF GOODS IS REQUIRED TO BE RECOGNIZ ED AS AND WHEN PROPERTY IN THE GOODS IS TRANSFERRED TO TH E BUYER. IN VIEW OF ABOVE REQUIREMENT THE COMPANY I S FOLLOWING THE ACCOUNTING POLICY OF RECOGNIZING THE REVENUE IN RESPECT OF SALE OF ITS PRODUCT AT THE TI ME OF DISPATCH TO THE CUSTOMERS. ABOVE ACCOUNTING STANDA RD FURTHER REQUIRES THAT IN A CASE WHEN THERE IS UNCE RTAINTY IN RESPECT OF COLLECT ABILITY OF SALE PRICE A SEPAR ATE PROVISION TO REFLECT THE UNCERTAINTY IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE AND ADJUSTMENT IS NOT TO BE MADE IN THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE ORIGINALLY RECORDED. PLEASE REFER PARA 6 A ND PARA 9.3 OF ACCOUNTING STANDARD 9 GIVEN IN THE PAPE R BOOK ON PAGES 9 AND 11. PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEB TS IS ACCORDINGLY MADE IN VIEW OF ABOVE ACCOUNTING STANDA RD AND SAME REPRESENTS REVERSAL OF REVENUE EARLIER RECOGNIZED ON SALE OF THE PRODUCTS. HENCE IT IS SUBMITTED THAT NATURE OF PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEB TS IS QUITE DIFFERENT THAN THE PROVISION ON ACCOUNT OF DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF ASSETS AND THEREFORE SAME IS NOT COVERED IN CLAUSE (I) OF EXPLANATION TO SECTION 115 JB OF THE ACT. B) PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115J THEN 115JA AND 115JB OF THE ACT HAD BEEN INSERTED IN THE INCOME TAX ACT WITH A VIEW TO LEVY TAX ON AERO TAX COMPANIES. IT WAS FELT BY THE GOVT. THAT THERE ARE LARGER NUMBER OF COMPANIES WH ICH ARE THOUGH DECLARING DIVIDEND ON THE BASIS OF THEIR BOOK PROFIT BUT NOT PAYING ANY TAX. THEREFORE TAX SHOU LD BE LEVIED ON SUCH COMPANIES ON THE BASIS OF THEIR BOOK PROFITS. IN THIS REGARD REFERENCE CAN BE MADE TO I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 5 MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING THE PROVISIONS OF VARIOUS FINANCE BILLS AND ALSO THE SPEECH OF FINANCE MINIST ER VIDE WHICH AFORESAID SECTIONS WERE INSERTED IN THE ACT OR AMENDED SUBSEQUENTLY. COPIES OF RELEVANT EXTRACTS FROM MEMORANDUM AND SPEECH ARE GIVEN IN THE PAPER BOOK ON PAGES 1 O 7. OBJECTS OF INSERTION OF ABOVE PROV ISIONS HAD ALSO BEEN STATED AND DISCUSSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SURANA STEELS PVT. LTD . VS. CIT 237 ITR 777 A COPY OF WHICH DECISION IS ALSO G IVEN IN THE PAPER BOOK ON PAGES 36 TO 45 AND REFERENCE C AN BE MADE TO THE DISCUSSION ON PAGES 31-32. KEEPING IN VIEW THE OBJECT AND BACKGROUND FOR INSERTION OF ABO VE SECTIONS IT IS SUBMITTED THAT PROVISION FOR DOUBTF UL DEBTS IS A CHARGE ON BOOK PROFIT AS PER ACCOUNTING POLICY AND ACCOUNTING STANDARD. PROFIT FOR THIS PURPOSE WOULD BE AS PER PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PART II AND III OF SCHEDULE VI TO COMPANIES AC T WHICH WOULD BE DETERMINED AFTER PROVIDING FOR PROVI SION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS. THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE SAID TH AT KEEPING IN VIEW HE OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THE ACT PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS IS REQUIRED TO BE ADDE D IN DETERMINATION OF BOOK PROFIT. C) THE SCOPE OF CLAUSE (I) OF EXPLANATION IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN THE CONTEXT OF OTHER ADJUSTMENTS PROV IDED IN CLAUSES (A) TO (H) OF THE EXPLANATION. IN CASE WE GO THROUGH EACH OF ABOVE MENTIONED CLAUSES IT WILL BE APPARENT THAT EACH OF THE CLAUSES REFERS THE ITEM O F APPROPRIATION AND NOT THE CHARGE AGAINST PROFIT. N ONE OF THE ITEMS REFERS TO A LIABILITY OR EXPENSE WHICH AS PER THE ACCOUNTING STANDARD IS REQUIRED TO BE DEBITED TO PR OFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND REPRESENTS THE CHARGE ON THE PROFI T. IN OTHER WORDS THE SCOPE OF EXPLANATION IS ONLY TO MA KE ADJUSTMENTS IN RESPECT OF SUCH ITEMS WHICH DO NOT REPRESENT A CHARGE IN DETERMINATION OF PROFIT. ACCORDINGLY ADJUSTMENT ON ACCOUNT OF PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS CANNOT BE INTENDED WITHIN THE COPE O F CLAUSE (I) OF EXPLANATION TO SECTION 115JB OF THE A CT. D) AS STATED HEREINABOVE PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS IN EFFECT REPRESENTS REVERSAL OF REVENUE RECOGNIZED I N EARLIER YEARS PURSUANT TO SALE OF GOODS. IN THE Y EAR THE SALE WAS MADE BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY THE REVENUE HAD BEEN RECOGNIZED AND SALE PROCEEDS WERE INCLUDED IN I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 6 THE BOOK PROFIT AND TAX THEREON HAD BEEN DULY PAID. AS A RESULT OF PROVISION OR WRITE OFF OF THE DEBTS THE APPELLANT COMPANY IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF REVE RSAL OF SUCH REVENUE. I CASE PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEB TS IS ADDED BACK TO THE BOOK PROFIT THE APPELLANT WOULD NOT GET DEDUCTION IN DETERMINATION OF BOOK PROFIT ON AC COUNT OF REVERSAL OF THE REVENUE EARLIER TAXED AT THE STA GE OF SALE OF THE GOODS. FURTHER THERE IS NO PROVISION IN SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT FOR ALLOW ABILITY OF DEDUC TION IN DETERMINATION OF BOOK PROFIT EVEN AT THE STAGE W HEN DEBT IS ACTUALLY WRITTEN OFF. ACCORDINGLY IT WOUL D RESULT IN LEVY OF TAX TWICE OVER ON THE AMOUNT ONCE WHEN REVENUE IS RECOGNIZED ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF THE PRO DUCTS AND GAIN AT THE STAGE OF REVERSAL OF SAME IN THE BO OKS OF ACCOUNT. THIS CANNOT BE THE INTENTION OF THE ACT. THEREFORE CLAUSE (I) CANNOT BE INTENDED TO COVER PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBS. 6. SHRI DINODIA HAS ALSO DRAWN OUR ATTENTION TO THE MEMORANDUM EXPLAINING PROVISION IN FINANCE BILL 1987 WITH REG ARD TO LEVY OF MINIMUM TAX ON BOOK PROFIT. AS PER PARA 80 OF THE SAID MEMORANDUM AT PAGE 14 OF ITR 165 IT WAS STATED THAT IT IS FAIR A ND PROPER THAT PROSPEROUS COMPANY SHOULD PAY AT LEAST SOME TAX. ACCORDINGLY PROVISION WAS MADE FOR MINIMUM ALTERNATE TAX ON COMPANIES. OUR ATTENT ION WAS ALSO DRAWN TO THE AS 9 ISSUED BY THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED AC COUNTANT OF INDIA ON (REVENUE RECOGNITION) ACCORDING TO WHICH REVENUE I S THE GROSS INFLOW OF CASH RECEIVABLES OR OTHER CONSIDERATION ARISING IN THE COURSE OF THE ORDINARY ACTIVITIES OF AN ENTERPRISE FROM THE SALE OF GOODS FROM THE RENDERING OF SERVICES AND FROM THE USE BY OTHERS O F ENTERPRISE RESOURCES YIELDING INTEREST ROYALTIES AND DIVIDENDS. AS PER AS-9 REVENUE IS I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 7 MEASURED BY THE CHARGES MADE TO CUSTOMERS OR CLIENT S FOR GOODS SUPPLIED AND SERVICES RENDERED TO THEM AND BY THE CHARGES AN D REWARDS ARISING FROM THE USE OF RESOURCES BY THEM. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE CONTENTIONS SHRI DINODIA ARGUED THAT LOWER AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUST IFIED IN ADDING BACK PROVISION MADE IN RESPECT OF DEBTS RECOVERABLE FROM THE PARTIES TO WHOM SALES WERE MADE IN THE EARLIER YEARS BUT AMOUNTS HA VE NOT BEEN RECEIVED FROM THE PARTIES WHILE COMPUTING BOOK PROFIT U/S 1 15JB OF THE IT ACT. 7. WITH REGARD TO CLAUSE (I) OF SECTION 115JB AS IN TRODUCED BY THE FINANCE (NO.2) ACT 2009 AS APPLIED BY THE AO CONTE NTION OF SHRI DINODIA WAS THAT AS PER THE MEMORANDUM TO FINANCE B ILL (NO.2) ACT 2009 VIDE WHICH THIS CLAUSE WAS INSERTED NOWHERE I T HAS BEEN STATED THAT WHAT IS THE INTENTION AND REASON FOR APPLYING THE P ROVISIONS WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT. HE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT NO WHERE IT HAS BEEN STATED THAT THE AMENDMENT WAS WITH A VIEW TO EXPLAIN THE E XISTING PROVISION OR TO CLARIFY THE SAME OR TO BRING OUT THE PROVISION A S WAS INTENDED INITIALLY. AS PER SHRI DINODIA THE RETROSPECTIVE AMENDMENT IS TO MAKE THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE OR TO REMOVE THE DEFEC T IN THE EXISTING PROVISION. BY REFERRING TO THE DECISION OF THE HON 'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF TATA MOTORS LTD. VS. STATE OF MAHARASHT RA AIR (2004) SC 3618 AMENDMENT CANNOT HAVE RETROSPECTIVE OPERATION . HE ALSO RELIED ON THE PROPOSITION LAID DOWN BY THE HON'BLE SUPREME CO URT IN THE CASE OF I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 8 APOLLO TYRES LTD. 225 ITR 234 AND SUBMITTED THAT AO HAD NO JURISDICTION TO ALTER THE PROFIT AS CERTIFIED BY TH E STATUTORY AUDITORS. RELIANCE WAS ALSO PLACED ON THE DECISION OF THE HON 'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HCL COMNET SYSTEMS & SERVICES LTD. 30 5 ITR 409 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT PROVISION FOR DOUBTFUL DEBTS REPRE SENTED THE DIMINUTION IN THE VALUE OF ASSETS AND THE SAME IS NOT IN THE NATU RE OF AN UNASCERTAINED LIABILITY. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS VEHEMENTLY ARGUED T HAT BOOK PROFITS COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ENHANCED ON SUCH PROVISION HAVING BEE N MADE IN RESPECT OF ASCERTAINED LIABILITY. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND LEARNED CIT-DR SHRI STEPHEN G EORGE CONTENDED THAT AS PER AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB BY FINANCE ACT 2009 THE AO WAS PERFECTLY JUSTIFIED IN ADDING BACK THE AMOUNT OF PROVISION FOR BAD DEBTS. 9. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS IN THE LIGHT OF MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD VIS--VIS AMENDMENT BROUGHT IN PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 115JB BY THE FINANCE ACT 2009 BY INSERTION OF NEW C LAUSE (I). ACCORDING TO THE AMENDED PROVISION AMOUNT SET ASIDE AS PROVI SION FOR DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF ANY ASSET IS REQUIRED TO BE ADDED IN THE B OOK PROFIT. CLAUSE (I) HAS BEEN INSERTED RETROSPECTIVELY WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2001 MEANING THEREBY FROM AY 2001-02 SUCH PROVISION FOR BAD DEB TS IS TO BE ADDED IN THE BOOK PROFIT WHILE COMPUTING BOOK PROFIT U/S 115 JB. THE RATIO LAID I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 9 DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HC L COMNET SYSTEM & SERVICES LTD. 305 ITR 409 IS NO MORE APPLICABLE IN VIEW OF THE AMENDED PROVISIONS BROUGHT IN THE STATUTE WITH RETR OSPECTIVE EFFECT. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS AY 2005-06 TO WHICH AMENDED PROVISIONS ARE APPLICABLE. RECENTLY HON'BL E DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. ILPEA PARAMOUNT (P) LTD. 2 010-TIOL-155-HC- DEL-IT VIDE ORDER DATED 18.2.2010 AFTER CONSIDERIN G THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HCL COMNET SYS TEM & SERVICES LTD. (SUPRA) HELD THAT AMENDMENT BROUGHT IN SECTION 115JA WAS BROUGHT WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT ACCORDINGLY PROVISION FO R DOUBTFUL DEBTS ARE NOTHING BUT PROVISION FOR DIMINUTION IN THE VALUE O F THE ASSET COVERED UNDER CLAUSE (G) OF THE SAID EXPLANATION. IT WAS A CCORDINGLY HELD THAT SUCH PROVISION IS REQUIRED TO BE ADDED WHILE COMPUT ING BOOK PROFIT U/S 115JA. SIMILARLY AMENDMENT IN SECTION 115JB WAS A LSO BROUGHT BY THE SAME FINANCE ACT W.E.F. AY 2001-02 THEREFORE RESPE CTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 10. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23.4.2010. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 23 RD APRIL 2010 NS I.T.A. NO.4299/D/09 10 COPY FORWARDED TO 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR TRUE COPY DY. REGISTRAR