M/s. Ashok Pesticides,, Baroda v. The Income tax Officer, Ward-5(3),, Baroda

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI JM AND N. S. SAINI A M) ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 A. Y.: 2001-02 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES SWAMI SADAN BUILDING RAJKAMAL ROAD OPP. KHANDERAO MARKET VADODARA PA NO. AAEFA 1006A VS THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5 (3) AAYAKAR BHAVAN RACE COURSE CIRCLE BARODA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI BHAVIN MARFATIA AR RESPONDENT BY SHRI C. K. MISHRA DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-V BARODA DATED 11-12-2 009 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON THE FOLLOWING EFFECTIVE GROUNDS: 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN CONFIRMING ACTION OF THE AO IN RE-OPENING THE ASSESSMENT BY INVOKING PROVISIONS OF SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME TA X ACT 1961 AND COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT COMMENCED UNDER INVALID EXERCISE OF POWER U/S 147 OF THE ACT DESPITE THE FACT THAT ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) WAS FRAMED IN THE CASE OF APPELLANT ON 27/02/2004. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN C ONFIRMING ACTION OF THE AO IN RE-OPENING THE ASSESSMENT WITHO UT SATISFYING THE CONDITIONS MENTIONED IN PROVISO TO S ECTION 147 ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE WAS REGULAR ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) AND THE NOTICE U/S. 148 WAS ISSUED BEYO ND THE PERIOD OF 4 YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN C ONFIRMING ACTION OF THE AO IN RE-OPENING THE ASSESSMENT ON TH E BASIS OF CHANGE OF OPINION RELYING ON THE PAPERS AL READY ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 2 FILED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME AND AVAILABLE AT TH E TIME OF REGULAR ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN FACT AND IN LAW IN C ONFIRMING ACTION OF THE AO IN DISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF BAD DE BT U/S 36(1) (VII) OF RS.11 03 569/- DESPITE THE FACT THAT ALL THE CONDITIONS MENTIONED IN THE SAID SECTION WERE FULFILLED. 2. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOT H THE PARTIES PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND C ONSIDERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SALE OF PESTICIDES. THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS FILED ON 24-10 -2001 DECLARING THEREIN TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2 78 767/-. THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S. 143(3) OF THE IT ACT WAS COMPLETED ON 27-02-2004. T HE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED U/S 147 OF THE IT ACT AND THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) READ WITH SECTION 147 WAS FINALIZED ON 29-12-2008 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.14 57 950/-. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29-12-20 08 WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A) CHALLENGING THE REOPENIN G OF THE ASSESSMENT OF THE ASSESSMENT U/S 147 OF THE IT ACT AND THE DISALL OWANCE OF BAD DEBTS OF RS.11 03 569/-. IT WAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LEAR NED CIT(A) THAT THE AO REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISAL LOWING THE CLAIM OF BAD DEBTS OF RS.11 03 569/- AND THE SAME ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE AO AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT. THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT ARE REPRODU CED AS UNDER: DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE F IRM HAS CLAIMED BAD DEBT OF RS.11 03 569/- IN RESPECT OF TH E FOLLOWING PARTIES :- 1. VIJAYRAJ AGRO INDUSTRIES RS. 26 266/- 2. BHARAT AGRO CHEMICALS RS.8 55 347/- 3. CHEMPEST (INDIA) LIMITED RS.1 21 069/- 4. BHUMI KRISHI KENDRA RS.1 00 887/- ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 3 SCRUTINY OF ASSESSMENT RECORDS REVEALS THAT DEBIT B ALANCE SHOWN AGAINST THESE PARTIES HAS BEEN REDUCED FROM THE PRE VIOUS YEAR BALANCE. IT SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECOVERED S OME AMOUNT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THEREFORE IN THE PREVAILING CIRCUMSTANCES IT WAS PREMATURE TO TREAT THE OUTSTAN DING DUES AS BAD DEBT. THEREFORE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FIRM REGARDING BAD DEBT WAS NOT CORRECT. THEREFORE I HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE ASSESS EE HAS NOT DISCLOSED TRUE PARTICULARS OF ITS INCOME FOR THE FR 2000-01 RELEVANT TO AY 2001-02. FURTHER I HAVE REASONS TO BELIEVE TH AT INCOME TO THE EXTENT OF RS.11 03 569/- HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT WIT HIN THE MEANING OF SECTION 147 OF THE ACT. 4. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID PROCEEDIN G WAS DROPPED VIDE ORDER DATED 24-12-2007. THEREAFTER THE AO REOPENED THE CASE U/S 147 OF THE IT ACT AGAIN BY RECORDING THE SAME REASONS FOR REOPENING VIDE LETTER DATED 05-03-2008. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT REOPENING O F ASSESSMENT WAS BAD IN LAW BECAUSE IT WAS ISSUED BEYOND THE PERIOD OF 4 YEARS FROM THE END OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT P ROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE IT ACT IS NOT COMPLIED WITH IN THIS CASE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED RETURN U/S 139(1) OF THE IT ACT AND DISCLOSED ALL PARTICULAR OF INCOME. THEREFORE THERE IS NO FAILUR E ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE THE CORRECT INCOME. IT WAS SUB MITTED THAT THE AO REOPENED THE ASSESSMENT MERELY ON CHANGE OF OPINION WHICH IS BAD IN LAW. THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON SEVERAL DECISIONS IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DETAILS O F CLAIM OF BAD DEBT WAS FILED BEFORE THE AO AND THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY OF FERED THE SALES AS INCOME IN THE EARLIER YEAR AND THE AO HAS ORIGINALL Y ALLOWED CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR BAD DEBT. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT AF TER THE AMENDMENT IT WOULD BE SUFFICIENT COMPLIANCE OF SECTION 36(1) (VI I) OF THE IT ACT IF THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN WRITTEN OFF AS IRRECOVERABLE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF IT AT SPECIAL BENCH IN THE CASE OF OMAN INTERNATIONAL 286 ITR 8 (AT) AND A NIL RASTOGI 86 ITD 193 (MUM) (TM).IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS WRITTEN OFF THE ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 4 DEBTS AS IRRECOVERABLE IN THE CASES OF M/S. VIJAYRA J AGRO AGENCY BHARAT AGROCHEMICALS CHEMPEST (INDIA) LTD. AND BHUMI KRIS HI KENDRA FOR WHICH REASSESSMENT HAS BEEN INITIATED IN THIS CASE. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE MADE EXTENSIVE EFFORTS TO R ECOVER THE AMOUNTS FROM THESE PARTIES BUT THE PARTIES PAID ONLY PART AMOUNT AND THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT RECOVER REMAINING AMOUNT THEREF ORE BALANCE WAS IRRECOVERABLE AND WAS NOT RECEIVED TILL DATE. THERE FORE SAME WAS WRITTEN OFF AS IRRECOVERABLE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE L EARNED CIT(A) HOWEVER NOTED THAT THE BALANCE OF THE ABOVE PARTIES HAD RED UCED IN THE CURRENT YEAR AS COMPARED TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR IMPLYING THER EBY THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS STILL RECEIVING THE DUES AND THUS DEBT CANNOT B E CONSIDERED AS BAD. THE LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT SINCE REOPENING WAS D ONE IN THIS CASE AFTER 4 YEARS THEREFORE SANCTIONING AUTHORITY FOR REOPE NING OF THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMMISSIONER OR CHIEF COMMISSIONER AND IN ORDER TO RECTIFY TECHNICAL MISTAKE FRESH NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE IT AC T WAS ISSUED BY DROPPING THE EARLIER PROCEEDINGS. THE LEARNED CIT(A ) ALSO NOTED HAT REOPENING WAS DONE BECAUSE AUDIT OBJECTION WAS RAIS ED AND ON THIS ISSUE OF BAD DEBT NO OPINION WAS FRAMED BY THE AO. THEREF ORE IT IS NOT A CASE OF CHANGE OF OPINION. THE LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT IN THIS CASE THERE WAS CHANCE OF RECOVERY. THEREFORE DEBT CANNOT BE CONSI DERED AS BAD AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON BOTH THE CO UNTS. 5. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND SUBMITTED THA T IT IS A CASE OF CHANGE OF OPINION BECAUSE THIS ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THE AO IN THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND THE ASSESSEE FI LED DETAILED REPLY BEFORE THE AO AND THE AO WAS SATISFIED THAT THE DEB T HAS BECOME BAD AND THEREFORE NO ADDITION WAS MADE IN THIS ISSUE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE ON M ERIT IS NOW COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CA SE OF T. R. F. LTD. VS CIT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.5293/2003 DATED 09-02-201 0. ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 5 6. THE LEARNED DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AO AND THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AND SUBMI TTED THAT REOPENING IS JUSTIFIED IN THE MATTER BECAUSE THERE WAS CHANCE D OF RECOVERY OF THE DEBTS. THEREFORE THE AO RIGHTLY REOPENED THE MATTE R BECAUSE AUDITOR HAD OBJECTION. THE LEARNED DR HOWEVER ON MERIT CONCEDE D THAT THE ISSUE IS NOW COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE JUDGME NT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF T. R. F. LTD. (SUPRA) 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HONBLE FULL BENCH O F DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF KELVINATOR OF INDIA LTD. 256 ITR 1 BY F OLLOWING CIRCULAR NO.549 OF CBDT HELD THAT ON MERE CHANGE OF OPINION OF AO CANNOT BE A GROUND FOR RE-ASSESSMENT AND THAT AMENDMENT OF SECT ION 147 WITH EFFECT FROM 01-04-1989 HAS NOT ALTERED THE POSITION. HONB LE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GARDEN SILK MILLS PVT. LTD. 23 7 ITR 668 HELD THAT HOWEVER WIDE THE SCOPE OF TAKING ACTION U/S 148 O F IT ACT IT DOES NOT CONFIRM THE JURISDICTION ON CHANGE OF THE INTER PRETATION OF A PARTICULAR PROVISION EARLIER ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSI NG AUTHORITY. FOR COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE HAS BEEN EX CESSIVE LOSS OR DEPRECIATION ALLOWANCE OR THAT THERE HAS BEEN UNDER ASSESSMENT OR ASSESSMENT AT A LOWER RATE OR FOR APPLYING OTHER PR OVISIONS OF EXPLANATION 2 TO SECTION 147 IT MUST BE ON MATERIA L AND IT SHOULD HAVE NEXUS FOR HOLDING SUCH OPINION CONTRARY TO WHA T HAS BEEN EXPRESSED EARLIER. EVEN AFTER THE AMENDMENT OF SECT ION 147 MERE CHANGE OF OPINION DOES NOT CONFIRM JURISDICTION ON THE ITO TO INITIATE PROCEEDING FOR REASSESSMENT MERELY BY RESO RTING TO EXPLANATION 1 TO SECTION 147. HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD. 245 ITR 648 HELD WHEN ANY PARTICULAR ISSUE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE ITO AND CIT(A) AND WHERE THERE IS NO FAILURE TO DISCLOSE THE FACTS THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE NOT VALID . HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. FORA NER FRANCE ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 6 264 ITR 566 HELD ASSESSMENT NOT ON BASIS OF MERE CHANGE OF OPINION LAW SAME BEFORE AND AFTER AMENDMENT BY DI RECT TAX LAWS. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF INDIAN OIL COR PORATION 159 ITR 956 HELD THAT NO CASE U/S 148 IS MADE OUT WHEN THE FACTS WERE KNOWN ALL ALONG WITH TO THE REVENUE WHILE MAKING TH E ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ASSOCIATED STO NE INDUSTRY LTD. 224 ITR 560 HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL HAVE TO DISCLOSE ONLY THE PRIMARY FACTS. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE LEGAL PROPOSITIONS DECIDED IN THE ABOVE CASES IT IS CLEA R THAT AO IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REOPENING THE ASSESSMENT ON MERE CHANGE OF OPINI ON. 8. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT REPLY FILED BEFORE THE AO AT THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS U/S 1 43(3) OF THE IT ACT (PB -67) IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED SPECIFIC R EPLY BEFORE THE AO REGARDING BAD DEBT WRITTEN OFF BY THE ASSESSEE IN T HE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS DURING ASSESSMENT YEAR IN QUESTION IN RESPECT OF AL L THE ABOVE PARTIES. THE AO ON CONSIDERATION OF THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSE E AND MATERIAL ON RECORD DID NOT MAKE ANY DISALLOWANCE OUT OF BAD DEB T WHILE FRAMING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 27-02-2004. IT IS THEREFORE CLEAR THAT ALL THE FACTS WERE ALL ALONG WITHIN THE KNOWLEDGE O F THE AO AT THE TIME OF FRAMING THE ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT. THE RETURN OF INCO ME WAS FILED ON 24-10-2001 AND ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FRAMED ON 27-02-2004 U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT. FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE IT ACT PROVIDES PROVIDED THAT WHERE AN ASSESSMENT UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 143 OR THIS SECTION HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE RELEVANT ASS ESSMENT YEAR NO ACTION SHALL BE TAKEN UNDER THIS SECTION A FTER THE EXPIRY OF FOUR YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR UNLESS ANY INCOME CHARGEABLE TO TAX HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT FOR SUCH A SSESSMENT YEAR BY REASON OF THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE T O MAKE A RETURN UNDER SECTION 139 OR IN RESPONSE TO A NOTICE ISSUED UNDER SUB-SECTIO N (1) OF SECTION 142 OR SECTION 148 OR TO DISCLOSE FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 7 NECESSARY FOR HIS ASSESSMENT FOR THAT ASSESSMENT Y EAR. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCLOSED ALL THE PARTICULARS AT THE T IME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT REGARDING BAD DEBT. THEREFORE THERE WAS NO FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE TO DISCLOSE RELEVANT FACTS FOR CLAIM OF BAD DEBT. THE AO HAS NOT MADE OUT ANY CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCLOSED FULLY AND TRULY ALL MATERIAL FACTS NECESSARY FOR HIS ASSE SSMENT FOR THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE IT IS A CLEAR CASE OF R EOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AFTER EXPIRY OF 4 YEARS FROM THE END OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND THE CONDITIONS OF FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 147 OF THE IT ACT HAVE NOT BEEN SATISFIED BY THE AO IN THIS CA SE. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF THE REPLY FILED BEFORE THE AO AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS HAS BEE N ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT THE ASSESSEE DISCLOSED ALL PRIMARY FACTS BEFORE THE AO AT THE TIME OF ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT DATED 27-02-2004 REGARDING CLAIM OF BAD DEBT. THE AO AFTER EXAMINING THE ISSUE ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE IT IS CLEAR CASE OF MERE C HANGE OF OPINION FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT WHICH IS BAD IN LAW. 9. WE MAY ALSO NOTE THAT THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN ITS RECENT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF T. R. F. LIMITED VS CIT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.5293/2003 VIDE ORDER DATED 09-02-2010 CONSIDERIN G THE ABOVE PROVISIONS AND THE EARLIER PROVISIONS ON THE SAME I SSUE HELD THAT THIS POSITION IN LAW IS WELL-SETTLED. AFTER 1 ST APRIL 1989 IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THE ASSESSEE TO ESTABLISH THAT THE DE BT IN FACT HAS BECOME IRRECOVERABLE. IT IS ENOUGH IF THE BAD DEBT IS WRITTEN OFF AS IRRECOVERABLE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWE VER IN THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS NOT EXAMINE D WHETHER THE DEBT HAS IN FACT BEEN WRITTEN OFF IN ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEN BAD DEBT OCCURS THE BAD DEBT ACCOUNT IS DEBIT ED AND THE CUSTOMERS ACCOUNT IS CREDITED THUS CLOSING THE A CCOUNT OF THE CUSTOMER. IN THE CASE OF COMPANIES THE PROVISION I S DEDUCTED FROM ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 8 SUNDRY DEBTORS. AS STATED ABOVE THE ASSESSING OFFI CER HAS NOT EXAMINED WHETHER IN FACT THE BAD DEBT OR PART THE REOF IS WRITTEN OFF IN THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE. THIS EXERCISE HAS NOT BEEN UNDERTAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR DE NOVO CON SIDERATION OF THE ABOVE-MENTIONED ASPECT ONLY AND THAT TOO ONLY T O THE EXTENT OF THE WRITE OFF. ADMITTEDLY IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS WRITTEN OFF THE BAD DEBT AS IRRECOVERABLE IN ITS ACCOUNT. THEREFORE THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE HO NBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF T. R. F. LTD. (SUPRA). NO DISA LLOWANCE COULD BE MADE U/S 36(1) (VII) OF THE IT ACT. 10. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS WE ARE OF TH E VIEW THAT INITIATION OF PROCEEDINGS U/S 147 OF THE IT ACT IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE AO THEREFORE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN INITIA TING THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER. THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN MAKING THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF BAD DEBT. WE ACCORDINGL Y SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND QUASH THE REASS ESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AS WELL AS DELETE THE ADDITION ON MERIT. AS A RESUL T THESE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 11. CHARGING OF INTEREST IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE . INITIATION OF THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS WOULD NOT ARISE OUT OF THE PRES ENT PROCEEDINGS. SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 12. AS A RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLO WED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 07-05-2010 SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 07- 05-2010 LAKSHMIKANT/- ITA NO.645/AHD/2010 M/S. ASHOK PESTICIDES 9 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD