Smt. Kalyani Jayakumar, Madurai v. ACIT, Madurai

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH B CHENNAI BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AN D SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER .. I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 525/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 TO 2005-06 DR. V. JAYAKUMAR # 4 VAIDYANATHA IYER STREET SHENOY NAGAR MADURAI-625 002. V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-I MADURAI. (PAN: ACPPJ8538H) A N D I.T.A. NOS. 526 TO 529/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 2001-02 2004-05 & 2005 -06 SMT. KALYANI JAYAKUMAR V. THE ASSISTA NT COMMISSIONER # 4 VAIDYANATHA IYER STREET OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-I SHENOY NAGAR MADURAI-625 002. MADURAI. (PAN : AAIPJ5617J) (APPELLANTS) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANTS BY : SHRI PHILIP GEORGE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P.B. SEKARAN O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEES AGAINST THE ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS)-I MADURAI IN APPEAL NOS. 0200 TO 0205/08-09 AND 0196 TO 01 99 DATED 22-02-2010 I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 2 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2000-01 TO 2005-06 AND 200 0-01 2001-02 2004-05 AND 2005-06 RESPECTIVELY. AS THE ISSUES IN THESE A PPEALS ARE IDENTICAL THE SAME ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. SHRI PHILIP GEORGE ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHA LF OF THE ASSESSEES AND SHRI P.B. SEKARAN CIT-DR REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. THE FACTS RELATING TO THESE APPEALS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DR. V. JAYAKUMAR IS A PRACTIONER IN NEUROLOGY AT MADURAI A ND SMT. KALYANI JAYAKUMAR IS THE OWNER OF M/S. J.K. INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGY. SHE IS THE WIFE OF DR. V. JAYAKUMAR. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS COND UCTED ON THE BUSINESS AS WELL RESIDENTIAL PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEES ON 21-8- 2005. CONSEQUENTLY NOTICES UNDER SECTION 153A WERE ISSUED ON THE ASSESSEES ON 4-9-2006 AND SERVED ON 5- 9-2006. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES ISSUED UNDER SE CTION 153A THE RETURNS WERE FILED BY BOTH THE ASSESSEES ON 31-10-2006. HERE WE MAY MENTION THAT THE NOTICE U/S. 153A IN THE CASE OF SMT. KALYANI JAYAKU MAR WAS ISSUED ONLY ON 30- 11-2007 EVEN THOUGH THE RETURN WAS FILED ON 31-10-2 006. THE ASSESSMENT CAME TO BE COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 153A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 ON 28-12-2007 ACCEPTING THE RETURNS FILED. IN THE ASSESSMENTS NO INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT WAS CHARGED . SUBSEQUENTLY NOTICES U/S 154 DATED 05-01-2009 ON THE ASSESSEES WHEREIN IT WA S PROPOSED TO LEVY INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT FOR T HE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEARS ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. THE I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 3 ASSESSEES HAD REPLIED TO THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICES VID E LETTER DATED 12-01-2009 WHEREIN THEY HAD CHALLENGED THE LEVY ON THE GROUND THAT IT WAS A DEBATABLE ISSUE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OVERRULED THE OBJECTIO NS OF THE ASSESSEES AND PROCEEDED TO LEVY THE INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT. ON FIRST APPEAL THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE L EVY OF INTEREST. THE ASSESSEES HAD ALSO CHALLENGED THE QUANTIFICATION OF THE INTER EST BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THE SAME WAS ALSO DISMISSED. AGGRIEVED THE AS SESSEES HAVE FILED THESE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE L EARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEES THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAD SPECIFICALLY RECORDED IN HIS ORDER THAT NO ADDITIONAL TAX WAS PAYABLE. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE AS SESSING OFFICER WAS CLEAR IN HIS VIEW THAT NO INTEREST U/S. 234A. 234B AND 234C WAS LEVIABLE WHEN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S. 143(3) READ WITH SEC TION 153A WAS PASSED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE SUBSEQUENT ACTION OF AN OTHER OFFICER TAKING A DIFFERENT VIEW CLEARLY SHOWED A DIVERGENCE OF OPINI ON WHICH SHOWED THAT THE ISSUE WAS DEBATABLE AND CONSEQUENTLY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 COULD NOT BE INVOKED. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE DRE W OUR ATTENTION TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 OF THE ACT TO SAY THAT WH AT WAS EXPECTED U/S 154 WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. IT WAS THE SUBMI SSION THAT SECTION 154 DID I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 4 NOT SPECIFY AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTED A MISTAKE. AS TH E ISSUE WAS DEBATABLE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 COULD NOT BE INVOKED. 5. IN REGARD TO THE QUANTUM OF INTEREST IT WAS SUBM ITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT AS PER THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 234A AND 234B THE INTEREST WAS LIABLE TO BE COMPUTED FROM THE EXP IRY OF THE TIME LIMIT PROVIDED IN THE NOTICE U/S. 153A IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS O F SECTION 234A(3) AND 234B(3) OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER HAD LEVIED THE INTEREST FROM THE DATE OF THE ORIGINAL RETURN U/S. 139(1) WHICH WAS NOT PERMISSIBLE. IT WAS THE FURTHER SUBMISSION THAT WH ILE COMPUTING THE INTEREST THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT GIVE CREDIT FOR THE TAX A DJUSTED ON 13.2.2007. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ALSO IN THE CALCULATION OF THE INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234A 234B AND 234C THE ASSESSING OFF ICER HAS GIVEN THE CREDIT OF THE TAX PAID AFTER THE COMPUTATION OF THE INTEREST WHEREAS THE TAXES PAID SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN CREDIT BEFORE THE COMPUTATION AND I T IS ONLY ON THE BALANCE OF THE TAX DUE THAT THE INTEREST WAS CHARGEABLE. IT W AS THE SUBMISSION THAT IT HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY HELD THAT INTEREST IS ONLY COMPENSA TORY AND THEREFORE THE CREDIT OF THE TAXES PAID SHOULD FIRST BE GIVEN. 6. IN REPLY THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE FACT THAT THERE HAS BEEN NON- APPLICATION OF THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF SECTIONS 234A 234B AND 234C SHOWED THAT THERE WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT THE NON-APPLICATION OF SPECIFIC PROVISION OF THE AC T WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 5 THE RECORD WHICH WAS RECTIFIABLE BY INVOKING THE PR OVISIONS OF SECTION 154. IN REGARD TO THE QUANTUM OF INTEREST THE LEARNED DR S UBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RIGHTLY QUANTIFIED THE INTEREST AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAD RIGHTLY CONFIRMED THE SAME. HE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE OR DERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE WI LL FIRST ADJUDICATE ON THE QUANTUM OF INTEREST. FOR BETTER APPRECIATION OF TH E QUANTUM ISSUE IT WOULD BE WORTHWHILE TO EXTRACT THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS. SEC TION 234A(3) READS AS FOLLOWS: 234A(3). WHERE THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR ANY ASS ESSMENT YEAR REQUIRED BY A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 148 OR SEC TION 153A ISSUED AFTER THE DETERMINATION OF INCOME UNDER SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 143 OR AFTER THE COMPLETION OF AN ASSESS MENT UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 143 OR SECTION 144 OR SE CTION 147 IS FURNISHED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE TIME ALLOWED UNDE R SUCH NOTICE OR IS NOT FURNISHED THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE LIABLE T O PAY SIMPLE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF ONE PERCENT FOR EVERY MONTH OR PART OF A MONTH COMPRISED IN THE PERIOD COMMENCING ON THE DAY IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE EXPIRY OF THE TIME ALLOWE D AS AFORESAID AND -- (A) WHERE THE RETURN IS FURNISHED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE TIME AFORESAID ENDING ON THE DATE OF FURNISHING TH E RETURN; OR (B) WHERE NO RETURN HAS BEEN FURNISHED ENDING ON THE DATE OF COMPLETION OF THE REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTA TION UNDER SECTION 147 OR REASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 6 ON THE AMOUNT BY WHICH THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF SUCH REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION EXCEEDS THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED UNDER SUB-SE CTION (1) OF SECTION 143 OR ON THE BASIS OF THE EARLIER ASSESSME NT AFORESAID. SECTION 234B (3) READS AS FOLLOWS: 234B(3). WHERE AS A RESULT OF AN ORDER OF REA SSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION UNDER SECTION 147 OR SECTION 153A TH E AMOUNT ON WHICH INTEREST WAS PAYABLE UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) IS INCREASED THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY SIMP LE INTEREST AT THE RATE OF ONE PERCENT FOR EVERY MONTH OR PART OF A MONTH COMPRISED IN THE PERIOD COMMENCING ON THE DAY FOLLO WING THE DATE OF DETERMINATION OF TOTAL INCOME UNDER SUB-SEC TION (1) OF SECTION 143 AND WHERE A REGULAR ASSESSMENT IS MADE AS IS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1) FOLLOWING THE DATE O F SUCH REGULAR ASSESSMENT AND ENDING ON THE DATE OF THE REASSESSME NT OR RECOMPUTATION UNDER SECTION 147 OR SECTION 153A ON THE AMOUNT BY WHICH THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMI NED ON THE BASIS OF THE REASSESSMENT OR RECOMPUTATION EXCEEDS THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) O F SECTION 143 OR ON THE BASIS OF THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT AFORE SAID. 8. A PERUSAL OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A(1)(A ) OF THE ACT CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS TO ISSUE NOTICE ON TH E SEARCHED PERSON REQUIRING HIM TO FURNISH WITHIN SUCH PERIOD AS MAY BE SPECIFIED I N THE NOTICE THE RETURN OF INCOME IN RESPECT OF EACH ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING W ITHIN SIX ASSESSMENT YEARS I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 7 . AND THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT SHALL SO FAR A S MAY BE APPLY ACCORDINGLY AS IF SUCH RETURN WERE A RETURN REQUIRED TO BE FURNISH ED UNDER SECTION 139. THUS FROM THE ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT A RETURN FILED IN R ESPONSE TO A NOTICE U/S 153A IS TO BE TREATED AS A RETURN FILED U/S 139(1). THUS BY T HE ACT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A WHERE A NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED ON THE ASSESSEE THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 139(1) GET S SHIFTED TO THE DATE PRESCRIBED IN THE NOTICE U/S. 153A. THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE WO RDS APPLY ACCORDINGLY AS IF SUCH RETURN WERE A RETURN REQUIRED TO BE FURNISHED UNDER SECTION 139. A PERUSAL OF THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT IN T HE RETURNS THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID TAXES WHILE FILING THE RETURN ITSELF. IT HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE THAT CASH WHICH W AS FOUND IN THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND WHICH WAS SEIZED WAS ALSO IMMEDIATELY PR AYED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE TO BE ADJUSTED AGAINST THE TAX LIABILITY IN THE STATEM ENT RECORDED ITSELF DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH. THUS IT BECOMES CLEAR THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS PAID THE TAXED MUCH BEFORE THE FILING OF THE RETURNS. A PERUSAL O F THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234A(3) AS EXTRACTED ABOVE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE SAID SUB-SECTION TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR ANY ASSESSME NT YEAR REQUIRED BY A NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153A AND AS PRESCRIBED THAT THE ASSES SEE IS LIABLE TO PAY SIMPLE INTEREST AT THE PRESCRIBED RATE FOR EVERY MONTH OR PART OF THE MONTH COMPRISED IN THE PERIOD COMMENCING ON THE DAY IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW ING THE EXPIRY OF THE TIME ALLOWED IN THE SAID NOTICE. I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 8 9. A PERUSAL OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234B(43) AS EXTRACTED ABOVE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE INTEREST U/S 234B IS LEVIABL E IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT U/S. 153A ON THE AMOUNT WHICH IS INCREASED IN THE F INAL ASSESSMENT WHEN COMPARED TO THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT OR THE DETERMIN ATION U/S. 143(1). NOW A QUESTION COMES UP AS TO WHICH IS THE 143(1) OR THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT WHICH IS BEING TALKED ABOUT HERE. HERE WE MAY REFER BACK TO THE SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 153A WHICH SPECIFICALLY SAYS THAT ANY ASSES SMENT OR REASSESSMENT IF ANY RELATING TO ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR FALLING WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SIX YEARS REFERRED TO IN SECTION 153A(1) PENDING ON THE DATE OF THE INITI ATION OF THE SEARCH SHALL ABATE. IN SUCH A SITUATION OBVIOUSLY ONCE A NOTICE U/S. 15 3A IS ISSUED ALL PAST ASSESSMENTS AND REASSESSMENTS PENDING AS ON THE DAT E OF THE INITIATION OF THE SEARCH WOULD NO MORE SURVIVE. FURTHER IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 153A(1)(A) AS A RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOT I8CE U/S 153A IS TO BE TREATED AS A RETURN UNDER SECTION 139 THE SECTION 143(1) R EFERRED TO IN SECTION 234B(3) WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AS THE INTIMATION IN RE LATION TO SUCH RETURN WHICH HAS BEEN FILED IN RESPONSE TO A NOTICE U/S 153A. T HIS VIEW ALSO FINDS SUPPORT BECAUSE THE INTIMATION HAS TO BE ISSUED WITHIN 12 M ONTHS FROM THE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN AND AS PER THE SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 153A THE ASSESSMENT AND REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WHICH ARE PENDING AT THE T IME OF INITIATION OF THE SEARCH HAVE ABATED AND AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC TION 153A THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO SUCH NOTICES BECOMES BY ACT OF THE PROV ISIONS ITSELF A RETURN U/S. I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 9 139(1) WHICH EFFACES THE ORIGINAL RETURN. IN THE P RESENT CASE IT IS NOTICED THAT THE RETURNED INCOME HAS ALSO BEEN ACCEPTED. A PERU SAL OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 143(1) SHOWS THAT THE WORD USED IS SHALL I.E. WHERE A RETURN HAS BEEN MADE UNDER SECTION 139.SUCH RETURN SHALL BE PROCE SSED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER. FURTHER THE EXPLANATION (B) OF THE SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 143(1) CATEGORICALLY EXPLAINS THAT THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE RETURN SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE INTIMATION IN A CASE WHERE NO SUM IS PAYA BLE BY OR REFUNDABLE TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER CLAUSE (C) AND WHERE NO ADJUSTMENT HAS BEEN MADE UNDER CLAUSE (A). THUS THE INTIMATION OF THE RETURN FILE D IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE UU/S. 153A AUTOMATICALLY BY ACT OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE EXPLANATION TO SECTION 143(1) BECOMES THE INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1). THUS THE INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B WOULD BE LEVIABLE ONLY ON THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED IN THE ORDER PASSED U/S. 153A WHICH EXCEEDS THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 143 IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153A. 10. IN REGARD TO THE LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234C THERE IS NO PROVISION SIMILAR TO SECTION 234A(3) OR SECTION 234B(3) IN TH E SAID SECTION. THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAS ALSO NOT RAISED ANY S ERIOUS SUBMISSIONS IN REGARD TO THE LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234C OF THE A CT IN REGARD TO THE CALCULATION OF THE SAME. I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 10 11. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE COMPUTATION OF THE IN TEREST UNDER SECTION 234A IS TO BE DONE FOR EVERY MONTH OR PART OF THE MONTH COMPRISED IN THE PERIOD COMMENCING ON THE DAY IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE EXP IRY OF THE TIME ALLOWED IN THE NOTICE UNDER SECTION 153A. THE INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B IS TO BE COMPUTED ON THE AMOUNT BY WHICH THE TAX ON THE TOTA L INCOME DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 153A EXCE EDS THE TAX ON THE TOTAL INCOME DETERMINED UNDER SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 143 ON THE RETURN FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SECTION 153A. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THESE DIRECTIONS THE ISSUE OF COMPUTATION OF INTERE ST UNDER SECTIONS 234A AND 234B IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AND THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER ON THIS ISSUE STANDS SET ASIDE. 12. COMING TO THE ISSUE OF DEBATABLE NATURE OF THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S. 234A 234B AND 234C ADMITTEDLY THE LEVY OF INTEREST IS COMPENSATORY IN NATURE. THE METHOD OF COMPUTATION OF THE INTEREST IS SPECIFICAL LY PROVIDED IN THE SECTIONS 234A(3) AND 234B(3) IN THE CASE OF ASSESSMENTS UNDE R SECTION 153A AND SECTION 234C. NON-APPLICATION OF A PARTICULAR PROVISION OF THE ACT WHICH IS UNDISPUTEDLY IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD. THE NON-APP LICATION OF A SPECIFIC PROVISION BEING MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WE AR E OF THE VIEW THAT THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN HOLDING THAT THE A SSESSING OFFICER WAS RIGHT IN INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 IS ON A RIGH T FOOTING AND DOES NOT CALL FOR I.T.A. NOS. 520 TO 529/MDS/2010 11 ANY INTERFERENCE. FURTHER THERE CAN BE NO TWO VIEW S IN REGARD TO THE LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A 234B AND 234C ESPECI ALLY WHEN THE PROVISIONS OF THE SAID SECTION THEMSELVES SPECIFICALLY PROVIDE FO R THE LEVY. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RIGHT IN INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 154 FOR RECTIFYING THE MI STAKE OF THE NON-LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTIONS 234A 234B AND 234C OF THE ACT IN TH E ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. 13. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE PARTLY ALLOWED. 14. THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 04/02/ 2011. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI DATED THE 04 TH FEBRUARY 2011. H. COPY TO: ASSESSEE/AO/CIT (A)/CIT/D.R./GUARD FILE