Shri Ratimohan Prakashchand Modi, v. Jt.CIT, Dhule,

ITA 876/PUN/2006 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 13-08-2010 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 87624514 RSA 2006
Assessee PAN AHYPM7489G
Bench Pune
Appeal Number ITA 876/PUN/2006
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 2 day(s)
Appellant Shri Ratimohan Prakashchand Modi,
Respondent Jt.CIT, Dhule,
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 13-08-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 13-08-2010
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 10-08-2006
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV (JM) AND SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO (AM) ITA NO. 877/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2002 -03 UPTO 17.09.2002) SHRI. PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI OPP. AGRAWAL BHAVAN USS GALLI DHULE PAN : AHYPM7489G .. APPELLANT V. JT. C.I.T DHULE JT. C.I.T. RANGE C/O INCOME TAX OFFICE SAKRI ROAD DHULE . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 876/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2002 -03 UPTO 17.09.2002) SHRI. RATIMOHAN PRAKASHCHAND MODI OPP. AGRAWAL BHAVAN USS GALLI DHULE PAN : AHYPM7483N .. APPELLANT V. JT. C.I.T DHULE JT. C.I.T. RANGE C/O INCOME TAX OFFICE SAKRI ROAD DHULE . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 878/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2002 -03 UPTO 17.09.2002) MISS. ARCHANA PRAKASHCHAND MODI OPP. AGRAWAL BHAVAN USS GALLI DHULE PAN : AKWPM7960R .. APPELLANT V. JT. C.I.T DHULE JT. C.I.T. RANGE C/O INCOME TAX OFFICE SAKRI ROAD DHULE . RESPONDENT ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 2 ITA NO. 879/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2002 -03 UPTO 17.09.2002) SHRI. MAHENDRA PRAKASHCHAND MODI OPP. AGRAWAL BHAVAN USS GALLI DHULE PAN : AHYPM7465N .. APPELLANT V. JT. C.I.T DHULE JT. C.I.T. RANGE C/O INCOME TAX OFFICE SAKRI ROAD DHULE . RESPONDENT ITA NO. 880/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2002 -03 UPTO 17.09.2002) SMT. SAVITA PRAKASHCHAND MODI OPP. AGRAWAL BHAVAN USS GALLI DHULE PAN : AHYPM7488H .. APPELLANT V. JT. C.I.T DHULE JT. C.I.T. RANGE C/O INCOME TAX OFFICE SAKRI ROAD DHULE . RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUNIL PATHAK RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. KAUSHAL ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO AM ALL THESE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE ASSESSEES AGAINS T THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A)- I NASIK DATED 25.5.2006. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE I NVOLVED IN THESE APPEALS THE SAME ARE CONSOLIDATED HEARD TOGETHER AND DISPOSED BY COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. FIRST WE TAKE ITA NO. 877/PN/2006 FOR ADJUDICATION AND DISPOSAL. A. ITA NO. 877/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2 002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002) (SHRI. PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI) 2. THIS IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE CITA)- I NASIK DATED 25.5.2006. REVISED GROUNDS WITHOUT PRE JUDICE TO EACH OTHER ARE AS UNDER: ON FACTS AND IN LAW ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 3 1] AS THE REASONS FOR ISSUING NOTICE U/S 158BD DO NOT SATISFY THE CONDITIONS FOR ISSUANCE OF THIS NOTICE THE PROCEEDINGS ARE BAD IN LAW AND THE ASST. ORDER BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID. 2] THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT ACCEPTING THE A SSESSEES CONTENTION THAT THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD WAS RS. NIL. THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS MADE IN THE ASST. BY THE A.O. OUGHT TO HA VE BEEN DELETED. 3] THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN GIVING WEIGHTAGE TO THE CASH FLOW STATEMENT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE ADI NASHIK W HICH CONTAINED INADVERTENT MISTAKES. 4] THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESEES INCOME FOR THE VARIOUS YEARS IN THE BLOCK PERIOD WAS BELOW TAX ABLE LIMIT AND NO EVIDENCE WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH THAT IT WAS TAXABLE AND HENCE THE VARIOUS ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O WERE NOT JUSTIFIED. 5] THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESSEE AND HIS FAMILY MEMBERS HAD CERTAIN DEPOSITS PRIOR TO THE BL OCK PERIOD AND THE DEPOSITS FOUND WITH THE FAMILY WERE EXPLAINABLE TO A LARGE EXTENT OUT OF SUCH DEPOSITS. 6] WHILE COMPUTING THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR EACH OF THE ASST. YEARS IN THE BLOCK PERIOD THE DEDUCTION OF BASIC EXEMPTION LIMIT FOR EACH OF THE YEARS OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN GIVEN. 3. BRIEFLY STATED RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THERE WAS A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION IN THE CASE OF CHINTAMANI NAGRI SAH AKARI PAT PEDHI MARYADIT DHULE AND CERTAIN INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS ERE SEIZED BY THE DEPARTMENT. FROM THE SAID DOCUMENT IT IS FOUND OUT THAT ASSESSEE HAD CE RTAIN FIXED DEPOSITS WITH M/S. CHINTAMANI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT PEDHI MARYADIT. THE A.O BEING COMMON TO THE SEARCHED PERSONS AS WELL AS THE PRESENT ASSESSEE ISSU ED A NOTICE U/S. 158BD AFTER RECORDING REASONS FOR SUCH ISSUE OF NOTICE. THE ASSESSE E DID NOT FILE THE RETURN OF INCOME WITHIN THE TIME GIVEN IN THE NOTICE. THE BL OCK ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S. 158BD DETERMINING UNDISCLOSED INCOME AT RS.3 72 267/-. CIT(A) GRANTED PART RELIED TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDI NGS. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OR THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE US V IDE THE GROUNDS REFERRED TO ABOVE. FROM THE FACE OF THE GROUND IT IS FOUND OUT THAT THERE ARE THREE ISSUES FOR OUR ADJUDICATION AND THEY ARE: 1) WHETHER THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 158BD IS VALID? 2) WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR REDUCTION OF THE INCOME TO THE EXTENT BELOW THE TAXABLE LIMITS IN THE MATER OF SEARC H AND SEIZURE ASSESSMENT ? 3) WHETHER SOURCES OF THE DEPOSITS OF THE ASSESSEE WI TH M/S. CHINTAMANI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT PEDHI MARYADIT ARE EXPLAINED ? 4. WE SHALL PROCEED TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE-WISE ADJ UDICATION AS UNDER : ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 4 4.1. WHETHER THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 158BD IS VALID: IN THIS REGARD LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED THE ISSUE OF NON EXIS TENCE OF THE SATISFACTION BY THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US AFTER HEARING FROM THE BENCH THAT THE AO OF THE SEARCHED PERSON AND THE ASSESSEE ARE COMMON AND IN THAT CASE RECORDING OF THE SATISFACTION IS SUPERFLUOU S AS HELD BY US IN LARGE NUMBER OF CASES OF APPEALS IN PUNE LD COUNSEL RESTRICTED H IS ARGUMENTS TO THE ADEQUACY OF THE SATISFACTION RECORDED BY THE AO. IN THIS REGARD L D COUNSEL FILED THE COPY OF THE SATISFACTION RECORDED BY THE AO AND OBJECTED TO THE N ON SPECIFIC SATISFACTION RECODED BY THE AO. ON THE OTHER HAND LD DR FOR THE REVENUE DE MONSTRATED THE EXISTENCE OF COMMON AO AND READ OUT EVERY LINE OF THE IMPUGNED STA TISFACTION IN ORDER TO UNDERLINE THE PERSON SPECIFIC SATISFACTION AND THE PE RSON SPECIFIC UNDISCLOSED INCOME PARTICULARS. 4.2. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE S ATISFACTION WHICH IS IN DISPUTE. FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPLETENESS THE SAME I S REPRODUCED AS UNDER : ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 5 FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE A.O IS CATEGO RICAL IN STATING THAT (I) THE ASSESSEE ( SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI ) HAD A FIXED DEPOSIT OF RS 1.5 LAKHS (II) THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A TAX PAYER (III) HE HAS NOT FILED THE RETURNS OF INCOME FOR THE PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION ETC. FROM THE READING OF THE ABOVE SATISFACTION WE ARE OF THE OPINION THOUGH THE SAID SATISFACTION IS NOT ELABORA TE; BUT IT IS VERY SPECIFIC AND TO THE POINT REQUIRED FOR ISSUING THE NOTICE U/S 158BD OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE ASSESSEE. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTUAL FACTS WE FI ND A.O HAS CORRECTLY ARRIVED AT THE SATISFACTION THAT NOTICE U/S. 158BD HAS ISSUED FOR TAXING THE IMPUGNED DEPOSITS AMOUNTING TO RS. 1.5 LAKHS. ACCORDINGLY THIS PART O F THE ISSUE AND THE RELEVANT GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE APPEAL ARE DISMISSED . 4.3. WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR REDUCTION OF T HE INCOME TO THE EXTENT BELOW THE TAXABLE LIMITS IN THE MATER OF SEA RCH AND SEIZURE ASSESSMENT: IN THIS REGARD THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON PUNE BENCH DECISION IN THE CASE OF VIJAYSINGH GANPATRAO DONGALE ITA NO. 318/PN/2006 AND READ OUT PARA 19 TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE INCOME UP TO BASIC EXEMPTION LIMIT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR TH E PURPOSE OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT. IN THIS REGARD THE COUNSEL RELIED ON THE JUDGMENT OF THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHAIN SUKH RATHI 270 ITR 368. FURTHER HE RELIED ON A CO- ORDINATE BENCH DECISION REPORTED IN IN THE CASE OF M L JAIN (96 TTJ 362). LD D.R. RELIED ON PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT IN THIS REG ARD. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AS WELL AS THE JUDGMENTS RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE P ARA 19 OF THIS ORDER IN THE CASE OF VIJAYSINGH GANPATRAO DONGALE (SUPRA) IS RELEVANT A ND READS AS UNDER : 19. IN THIS APPEAL AN ADDITIONAL GROUND HAS ALSO BEEN RAISED FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE INCOME UPTO THE BASIC EXEMPTION LIMIT SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT . IN SUPPORT A DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHAIN SUKH RATHI VS. CIT (2004) 270 ITR 368 AND ALSO A DECISION OF RESPECTED CO-ORDINATE BENCH REPORTED IN 96 TTJ 362 HAVE BEEN CITED. SINCE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS TAKEN A VIEW THEREFORE THE ISSUE IS NOW SET AT REST AND TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. WE THEREFORE DIRECT THE A.O TO RE-COMPUTE THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME IN LINE WI TH THE VERDICT OF THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CHAIN SUKH RATH I (SUPRA). THIS GROUND MAY BE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 6 WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT JUDGMEN T IN THE CASE OF CHAIN SUKH RATHI (SUPRA) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE INCOME BELO W TAXABLE LIMIT CANNOT BE ASSESSED U/S. 158 BB. RELEVANT PARA IS REPRODUCED : WHEN SOME MATERIAL WAS SEIZED CONNECTING THE CONC EALED INCOME THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER CAN COMPUTE THE INCOME ON THAT B ASIS BUT THAT SHOULD BE COMPUTED AND TAXED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION S OF THE ACT 1961 THEREFORE THE TAX EXEMPTION LIMIT HAS TO BE KEPT IN MIND AND TO T HAT EXTENT INCOME NOT CHARGEABLE TO TAX TAX SHOULD NO T BE CHARGED ON THAT PART OF THE INCOME . WE AGREE WITH MR.JHANWAR THAT CONCEALED INCOME SHOU LD BE COMPUTED IN CASES OF SEARCH IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 158BB AND AFTER COMPUTING THE TOTAL CONCEALED INCOME IT SHOU LD BE TAXED AS PER THE RATES SPECIFIED FOR THE CONCEALED INCOME IN EACH Y EAR. REVENUE HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY DECISION CONTRARY TO THE ABOVE. ACCORDINGLY THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE APPEAL IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSE SSEE AND THEREFORE RELEVANT GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED . 4.4. WHETHER SOURCES OF THE DEPOSITS OF THE ASSESSEE WIT H M/S. CHINTAMANI NAGRI SAHAKARI PAT PEDHI MARYADIT ARE EX PLAINED: THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE DEPOSITS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID CONCERN BELONGED TO THE PERIOD PRIOR TO THE BLOCK PERIOD AND THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES MERELY RELIED ON THE STATEMENTS RECORDED DU RING THE SEARCH WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACTS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN POSIT ION TO EXPLAIN THE SOURCE OF THE SAID AMOUNT/INVESTMENTS AS WELL AS THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME TAXED BY THE REVENUE. THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IN THIS REGARD IS RELEVANT AND SAME READS AS UNDER :- 9] NO EVIDENCE WAS FOUND DURING THE SEARCH TO IND ICATE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD THE QUANTUM OF BUSINESS INCOME WHICH IS TAXED. THUS THE SAME CANNOT BE ESTIMATED IN THE BLOCK ASST. AT THE LEVEL AS MAD E BY THE A.O. THE FDS FOUND ARE PROPERLY EXPLAINED. THE OLD FDS WHICH A RE MATURED HAD TO BE GIVEN CREDIT FOR EXPLAINING THE NEW FDS MADE IN THE BLOCK PERIOD. A CHART GIVING THE LIST OF THE OLD FDS WHICH THE VARIOUS AS SESSEES IN THIS GROUP HAD PRIOR TO THE BLOCK PERIOD IS ATTACHED HEREWITH. TH E ASSESSEE IS A SMALL BUSINESSMAN WHO DOES NOT HAVE TAXABLE INCOME AND HE NCE THE ADDITIONS MADE SHOULD BE CANCELLED. THE D.R. FOR THE REVENUE ARGUED STATING THAT ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN STATEMENT AND THE SAME CANNOT BE NOW RETRACTED BY TAKING AN ARGUMENT WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY AN AFTER- THOUGHT. ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 7 4.5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE REL EVANT FACTS OF THE CASE. WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE REVENUE HAS MERELY REL IED UPON THE STATEMENT GIVEN DURING THE SEARCH OPERATIONS AND NO CREDIT WAS GIVEN T O THE EXPLANATIONS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE. IN ALL FAIRNESS AND IN THE INTEREST O F JUSTICE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE FACTS OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE MUST BE EXAMI NED IN DEPTH AND THE SAME MUST BE GIVEN WEIGHTAGE OVER THE STATEMENTS TAKEN O N OATH. OFTER ALL THE FACTS ARE MORE SACROSANCT. IN ALL FAIRNESS WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS ISSUE MUST BE REFERRED TO THE FILES OF THE A.O FOR DETAILED INVESTIGATION TO THE ISSUES AS TO WHETHER ASSESSEE HAS FIXED DEPOSITS PRIOR TO THE BLOCK PERIOD AND THE SOURCES THEREOF AND WHETHER THE INTEREST ACCRUALS ON THE SAID D EPOSIT ACCOUNTS FOR THE INCOME GENERATED IN ALL THE A.YS. OF THE BLOCK PERIOD AND OTHER RELATED ISSUES. THE A.O IS DIRECTED TO COMPUTE THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTUAL POSITION RATHER THA N ON MERE STATEMENT. WHILE COMPUTING THE UNDISCLOSED INCOME THE A.O SHALL REDU CE THE INCOME WHICH IS OTHERWISE NOT SUBJECT TO TAX AS PER THE LAW AND ALSO IN VIEW OF THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF CHAIN SUKH RATHI (SUP RA). ACCORDINGLY THIS PART OF THE GROUND IS SET ASIDE . 4.6. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED . 5. NOW WE SHALL TAKE UP THE REST OF THE APPEALS AND THE DETAILS OF THESE APPEALS ARE AS FOLLOWS. B. ITA NO. 876/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2 002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002) (SHRI. RATIMOHAN PRAKASHCHAND MODI) C. ITA NO. 878/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2 002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002) (MISS. ARCHANA PRAKASHCHAND MODI ) D. ITA NO. 879/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2 002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002)( SHRI. MAHENDRA PRAKASHCHAND MODI) E . ITA NO. 880/PN/2006 (BLOCK PERIOD: 1997-98 TO 2002 -03 UPTO 17.09.2002)( SMT. SAVITA PRAKASHCHAND MODI) 6. THESE FOUR APPEALS ARE ALSO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CITA)- I NASIK. THE ISSUES IN THESE APPEALS ARE ONE AND SAME AS DISCUSSED IN THE LEAD ORDER IN THE CASE OF SHRI. PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL M ODI. OF COURSE THE FIGURES OF ITA NO 877 876/PN/2006 878 TO 880/PN/2006 SHRI PRAKASHCHAND NANDLAL MODI BLOCK PERIOD 1997-98 TO 2002-03 UPTO 17.09.2002 PAGE OF 8 8 DEPOSITS ARE DIFFERENT AND THEY DO NOT MATTER AS LONG AS THE ARGUMENTS ARE THE ONE AND THE SAME. THE DISCUSSIONS AND THE DECISIONS GI VEN IN THE CONTEXT OF THE APPEAL ITA NO. 877/PN/2006 ARE SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE I SSUES RAISED IN THESE APPEAL TOO. THEREFORE THE PARA 4 WITH SUBPARAGRAPHS ARE APPLI CABLE TO THESE APPEALS. 7. IN THE RESULT ALL THE FIVE APPEALS OF THE ASSESS EE ARE PARTLY ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13 TH DAY OF AUGUST 2010. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (D. KARUNAKARA RAO ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE DATED THE 13TH AUGUST 2010 US COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT I NASHIK 4. THE CIT(A)-I NASIK 4. THE D.R. A BENCH PUNE 5. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE