M/s Berg Trading Ltd., Mathura v. A.C.I.T.(OCD), Agra

ITSSA 10/AGR/2010 | misc
Pronouncement Date: 23-11-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 1020316 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACS0731M
Bench Agra
Appeal Number ITSSA 10/AGR/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 11 day(s)
Appellant M/s Berg Trading Ltd., Mathura
Respondent A.C.I.T.(OCD), Agra
Appeal Type Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
Pronouncement Date 23-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 23-11-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 21-11-2011
Next Hearing Date 21-11-2011
Assessment Year misc
Appeal Filed On 12-11-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA BENCH AGRA BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.P. JAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 BLOCK PERIOD: 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 M/S BERG TRADING LIMITED VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) 747 DAMPAIER NAGAR CENTRAL CIRCLE AGRA. MATHURA. (PAN: AAACS 0731 M) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SAHIB P. SATSANGEE C.A. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.K. SHARMA JR. D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 21.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.11.2011 ORDER PER BENCH : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARISES FROM THE ORDER O F LD. CIT(A)-II AGRA DATED 16.08.2010 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD 01.04.1989 TO 17.01 .2000. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL :- 1. BECAUSE THE LEARNED AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRE D ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT ALLOWING THE CREDIT OF THE TDS IN TER MS OF SECTION 199 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 2 2. BECAUSE THE LEARNED AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT ALLOWING CREDIT OF TDS DEPOSITED AMOU NTING RS.4 83 615/- IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST PROVIDED O N ACCOUNT OF M/S LLOYDS REALITY LTD. WHICH HAS BEEN WRITTEN BACK IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE PRIOR TO SEARCH. 3. BECAUSE THE LEARNED AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT ANY TAX DEDUCTION M ADE AND PAID TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SHALL BE TREATED AS PAYMENT OF T AX. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS AS APPEARING FROM THE ORDER OF T HE A.O. UNDER SECTION 158BC/251/254 OF THE INCOME TAD ACT 1961 DATED 29. 05.2006 ARE AS UNDER :- IN PURSUANCE OF TRIBUNALS ORDER IT(SS)A NO.14/AGR A/04 DATED 16.5.2005 APPEAL EFFECT IS GIVEN AS UNDER :- INCOME ASSESSED U/S 158BC/251 DATED 25.5.2004 21 8 4 694/- LESS-RELIEF ALLOWED BY HONBLE ITAT VIDE PARA 18 & 20 21 84 691/- UNDISCLOSED INCOME NIL IN THIS CASE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED THE LIABILITY OF I NTEREST PAYABLE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 96-97 AND 97-98 AT RS.21 84 691 /- AGAINST M/S LLYOD REALITY LTD. ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN OF RS.1.5 CRO RE. TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- WAS DEDUCTED AGAINST THE LIABILITY OF THIS AMOUNT OF RS.21 84 691/- AND DEPOSITED ON 31.5.96 AND 31.5.97 . ANNUAL RETURNS IN RESPECT OF TDS U/S 206 FOR BOTH THE YEARS WERE F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE COURSE OF BLOCK ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS I T WAS CONTENDED THAT LIABILITY OF RS.17 01 076/- (21 84 691-4 83 61 5) HAD BEEN WRITTEN OFF DURING F.Y. 99-2000 BEFORE THE SEARCH ON 17.1.2 000. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE ASSESSEES CON TENTION AS THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT SHOWING WRITE OFF WAS NOT FOUND DU RING THE SEARCH HENCE ADDITION OF RS.17 01 076/- WAS MADE BY ASSESS ING OFFICER TREATING THE SAME AS UNDISCLOSED INCOME. IN THE AP PEAL THE CIT(A) NOT ONLY CONFIRMED ADDITION OF RS.17 01 076/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT ALSO ENHANCED THIS ADDITION BY FIGURE O F TDS OF IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 3 RS.4 83 615/-. THUS AFTER ORDER OF THE CIT(A) TOTA L UNDISCLOSED INCOME WAS COMPUTED AT RS.21 84 691/- (17 01 076+4 83 615) IN PLACE OF 17 01 076/-. VIDE THIS OFFICE ORDER U/S 1 58BC/251/154 DATED 23.8.2004 FOR THE BLOCK PERIOD FROM 1.4.89 TO 17.1. 2000 ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED CREDIT OF TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- WHICH WAS DE DUCTED AGAINST THE INTEREST PAYABLE OF RS.21 84 694/- TO M/S LLYOD REALITY LIMITED. NOW THE HONBLE ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 16.05.2005 DE LETED ENTIRE ADDITION. IT IS SEEN THAT TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SUM OF INTEREST PAYABLE TO M/S LLYOD REALITY LIMITED HENCE THIS AMOUNT OF TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- C ANNOT BE TREATED AS ASSESSEES OWN PAYMENT OF TAX IN ITS OWN CASE. THUS NO CREDIT OF RS.4 83 615/- IS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. CREDIT OF OTHER PAYMENT OF TAX IS ALLOWED AND ASSE SSEES REFUND IS WORKED OUT ACCORDINGLY. ASSESSEE HAS PAID TAXES AS UNDER :- DATED AMOUNT 24.12.2003 10 00 000/- 27.05.2004 2 27 026/- ADJUSTMENT OF REFUND VOUCHER FOR A.Y. 2002-03 DATED 28.11.2003 708/- ADJUSTMENT OF REFUND VOUCHER FOR A.Y. 01-02 DATED 28.5.2002 4 575/- 22.6.2004 3 03 017/- 29.8.2004 14 513/- 13.9.2004 43 321/- TOTAL 15 93 160/- INTEREST U/S 244A IS ALLOWED AS PER LAW. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) VIDE PARA 2.2 OF HIS ORDER OBSERV ED AS UNDER :- 2.2 I HAVE ANALYZED THE MATTER AND I FIND THAT THE ARGUMENT OF THE LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SOUNDS CONVINCING AT ITS FIRST LOOK BUT THE FACT IS THAT THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURC E FROM THE INTEREST INCOME OF M/S LLOYD REALITY LTD. ONCE THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE BY THE DEDUCTOR FROM THE INCOME OF THE DEDUC TEE ON ACCRUAL OR IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 4 PAYMENT BASIS THE CREDIT FOR THE SAME CAN BE CLAIM ED ONLY BY THE DEDUCTEE. THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.199 OF THE ACT ARE UNAMBIGUOUS AS TO WHO CAN CLAIM CREDIT FOR TDS. AS PER THIS SECTION WHERE DEDUCTION OF TAX HAS BEEN MADE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER XVIIB OF THE ACT THE DEDUCTION SO MADE SHALL BE TREATED AS A PAYMENT OF TAX ON BEHALF OF THE PERSON FROM WHOSE INCOME THE DEDUCTION WAS M ADE UNDISPUTEDLY THE DEDUCTION WAS MADE FROM THE INCOME OF M/S LLOYD REALITY LTD. AND CREDIT FOR TDS CAN BE CLAIMED ONLY BY THIS COMPANY. ONCE THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AND SUBSEQUENTLY PAI D TO THE GOVT. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT THE DEDUCTOR HAS NO LIEN ON THE TAX DEDUCTED AND CANNOT CLAIM CREDIT FOR THE SAME IN IT S OWN CASE. THE CREDIT FOR THE SAME CAN BE GIVEN ONLY TO THE PERSON FROM WHOSE INCOME TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. THE SUBSEQUENT EVENT S MAKE NO DIFFERENCE TO THE POSITION AS TO WHO CAN CLAIM CRED IT FOR THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. IT IS ONLY THE PERSON FROM WHO SE INCOME THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE CAN CLAIM THE CREDIT AS PER PROVISIONS OF SEC.199 OF THE ACT AND NOT THE DEDUCTOR AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. THEREFORE IN VIEW OF THIS LEGAL POSITION I DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE CASE AND THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RAISED ADDITION AL GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS UNDER: - GROUND NO.4 BECAUSE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IT IS PRAYED THAT DIRECTIONS FOR THE PROPORTIONATE CREDIT OF THE TDS OF RS.4 83 615 BE GIVEN IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2000-01 AND 2005-06 IN TERMS OF SECTION 199 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961. GROUND NO.5 BECAUSE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE ASSESSEE BEING DEDUCTOR OF TAX IS ENTITLED FOR REFUND OF TDS IN CONSONANCE WITH CBDT CIRCULAR NO.285 DATED 25 TH OCTOBER 1980. IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 5 6. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AGUED THAT THE SAID GROUNDS GO DEEP INTO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER AND THEREFORE THE SAME MAY BE A DMITTED. 7. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ON THE OTHE R HAND OPPOSED THE VERY ADMISSION OF THE SAID ADDITIONAL GROUNDS. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THE G ROUNDS WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO BE DECIDED SINCE THE SAME GO DEEP INTO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF N.T.P.C. VS . CIT 229 ITR 383. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE QUESTION WHICH HAS TO BE ANSWERED IN THE PRESENT CA SE IS WHETHER THE CREDIT OF TDS CAN BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE OR NOT. IF YES IN WH ICH YEAR SUCH CREDIT CAN BE GIVEN. WHETHER THE YEAR IN WHICH THE SAME WAS OFFERED TO T AX SHALL BE THE YEAR IN WHICH SUCH INCOME IS ASSESSABLE. IN THIS CONTEXT THE AR GUMENTS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE APPEARS TO BE CONVINCING THAT THE ONLY REASON THAT HAS PROMPTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECLINE THE CREDIT IN RESP ECT OF THE ABOVE TDS TO THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- WAS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SUM OF INTEREST PAYABLE TO M/S. LLYOD REALITY LTD HENC E THIS AMOUNT OF TDS CANNOT BE IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 6 TREATED AS ASSESSEES OWN PAYMENT OF TAX IN ITS OWN CASE. BUT THE LD. AO FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE FACTUAL AND LEGAL POSITION OF THE CA SE THAT AFTER THE INTEREST LIABILITY OF RS.21 84 691/- HAVING BEEN WRITTEN OFF THE SAME N O MORE REMAINED PAYABLE TO THE CREDITOR. RATHER THE AMOUNT OF ABOVE LIABILITY OF RS.21 84 692/- HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX AS ASSESSEES OWN INCOME I.E. RS.17 01 076 /- IN A.Y. 2000-01 (CREDITED IN P&L A/C ON 12.05.99) AND BALANCE RS.4 83 615/- IN A.Y. 2005-06 (PURSUANT TO ORDER DATED 23.08.04 U/S. 154 GIVING TDS CREDIT). THEREFORE IT CAN HARDLY BE SAID THAT THE AMOUNT OF TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- IS NOT THE ASSESSEES OWN PAYMENT OF TAX AS OBSERVED BY THE AO. SINCE THE AMOUNT OF RS.21 8 4 691/- HAS BEEN ADMITTED AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT OF THE DEDUCTEE THER EFORE THE TDS DEDUCTED AND DEPOSITED ON SUCH INCOME WHICH WAS NO LONGER PAYABL E OR PAID TO THE CREDITOR DESERVES TO BE REFUNDED OR ADJUSTED TO THE ASSESSEE -DEDUCTOR. 9(I) THE LD. CIT(A) IS ALSO QUITE WRONG TO OBSERVE THAT IT IS ONLY THE PERSON FROM WHOSE INCOME THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE CA N CLAIM THE CREDIT AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 199 OF THE ACT. HOWEVER THE LD. CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT OF SECTION 199. THE EQUITABLE AND PREDOMINANT CONSIDERATION OF TDS CREDIT IS THAT THE CREDIT FOR TDS IS GIVEN TO THE PERSON IN WHOSE HANDS THE CORRESPONDING INCOME ON WHICH THE TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AND DEPOSITED IS ASSESSABLE TO TAX. IN CASE THE CORRE SPONDING INCOME IS ASSESSABLE TO IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 7 TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE PERSONS OTHER THAN THE DEDU CTEE SUCH OTHER PERSON IS LEGALLY ENTITLED FOR TDS CREDIT. RELIANCE IS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF MADURA COATS LTD. VS. CIT (1986) 158 ITR 697 (MAD) FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT AN ASSESSEE IN WHOSE HAND S A PARTICULAR INCOME IS NOT TAXED IS NOT ENTITLED TO GET CREDIT IN RESPECT OF TDS IN RESPECT OF SUCH INCOME. IN THE INSTANT CASE IT IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE CORRE SPONDING INCOME OF RS.21 84 692/- HAS BEEN OFFERED TO TAX AS ASSESSEES OWN INCOME AS NARRATED ABOVE. IT IS ALSO NOT DISPUTED THAT THE IMPUGNED TDS CREDIT HAS NEITHER B EEN CLAIMED BY M/S. LLYOD REALITY LTD. NOR ANY SUCH CREDIT HAS BEEN GRANTED T O THEM NOR ANY SUCH INCOME CORRESPONDING TO THE TDS OF RS.4 83 615/- HAS BEEN SHOWN OR ASSESSED IN THEIR HANDS. IN SUCH STATE OF AFFAIRS THE CONCLUSION REA CHED BY LD. CIT(A) THAT ONLY THE DEDUCTEE CAN BE GIVEN CREDIT OF TDS IS NOT TENABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW. 9(II) THE AFORESAID CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE FUR THER GETS STRENGTH FROM THE BOARDS CIRCULAR NO. 285 DATED 21 ST OCTOBER 1980 WHEREIN THE MANNER OF REFUNDING THE AMOUNT PAID IN EXCESS OF THE TAX DEDU CTED OR DEDUCTIBLE HAS BEEN GIVEN DIRECTING THAT SUCH EXCESS PAYMENT CAN BE R EFUNDED INDEPENDENTLY OF THE IT ACT TO THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING SUCH PA YMENT. THIS CIRCULAR HAS ALSO BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PASUPATI ACRYLON LTD. VS. CBDT & ORS. (2011) 49 DTR 65 WHEREIN THE ISSUE FOR CONSIDERATION WAS IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 8 WHETHER TAX ADMITTEDLY PAID BY THE PETITIONER-ASSES SEE BY WAY OF TDS IN RESPECT OF THE ALLEGED INTEREST PAYABLE T O IDBI WHICH INTEREST HAD IN FACT NEVER ACCRUED TO IDBI AND HE NCE WAS NOT ITS INCOME LIABLE TO TAX COULD BE REFUNDED TO THE PETI TIONER-ASSESSEE. 9(III) ON THIS QUESTION THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COU RT HAS HELD AS UNDER : KEEPING IN VIEW THE STATEMENT OF MR. BHATT THAT TH E INTEREST HAD NEVER ACCRUED IN IDBIS FAVOUR AND FURTHER THAT THE IDBI HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE RETURN OF INTEREST TO PETITIONER-A SSESSEE WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID CIRCULAR AS W ELL AS THE JUDGMENT IN UNIVERSAL CABLES LTD. VS. CIT (2009) 26 DTR (MP) 98 THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DATED 23 RD FEB. 2007 AND 9 TH MAY 2007 DESERVE TO BE SET ASIDE. ORDERED ACCORDINGLY. CONSEQUENTLY RE SPONDENT NOS. 1 & 2 ARE DIRECTED TO REFUND THE TAX OF RS.40 65 917/ - AND RS.5159393/- PAID BY WAY OF TDS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 AND 2003-04 RESPECTIVELY TO THE PETITIONER-ASSESSEE. 9(IV) IN THE INSTANT CASE ALSO M/S. LLYOD REALITY L TD. HAS NO OBJECTION ON WRITTEN OFF INTEREST LIABILITY IN THE ACCOUNTS OF ASSESSEE. THEREAFTER THERE BEING NO STATUTORY OBLIGATION CAST ON THE ASSESSEE TO DEDUCT/DEPOSIT T DS THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO GET CREDIT THEREOF. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID SITUATION THE FIRST QUESTION DESERVES TO BE ANSWERED IN AFFIRMATIVE. 9(V) AS FAR AS THE SECOND QUESTION IS CONCERNED TH IS QUESTION STANDS ANSWERED IN THE DECISION OF HONBLE THIRD MEMBER IN THE CASE OF SMT. VARSHA G. SALUNKE VS. DCIT (2006) 98 ITD 147 (MUM)(TM) IN THE MANNER THAT THE AO IS BOUND TO GIVE IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 9 CREDIT IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE INCOME IS OFFERED T O TAX. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF HONBLE THIRD MEMBER DECISION IS REPRODUCED AS UNDE R : SEE. 199 OF THE ACT HAS TWO OBJECTIVESONE TO DECL ARE THE TDS AS PAYMENT OF TAX ON BEHALF OF THE PERSON ON WHOSE BEH ALF THE DEDUCTION WAS MADE AND TO GIVE CREDIT FOR THE AMOUNT SO DEDUC TED ON THE PRODUCTION OF THE CERTIFICATE IN THE ASSESSMENT MAD E FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR WHICH SUCH INCOME IS ASSESSABLE. THE SECON D OBJECTIVE MENTIONED IN S. 199 IS ONLY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION AS TO THE YEAR IN WHICH THE CREDIT FOR TDS SHALL BE GIVEN. IT LINKS UP THE CREDIT WITH ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH SUCH INCOME IS ASSESSABLE. IN OTHER W ORDS THE AO IS BOUND TO GIVE CREDIT IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE INCOME IS O FFERED TO TAX. THIS S. 199 DOES NOT EMPOWER THE AO TO DETERMINE THE YEAR OF AS SESSIBILITY OF THE INCOME ITSELF BUT IT ONLY MANDATES THE YEAR IN WHIC H THE CREDIT IS TO BE GIVEN ON THE BASIS OF THE CERTIFICATE FURNISHED. IN OTHER WORDS WHEN THE ASSESSEE PRODUCES THE CERTIFICATES OF TDS THE AO I S REQUIRED TO VERIFY WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED THE INCOME PERTAIN ED TO THE CERTIFICATE BEFORE GIVING CREDIT. IF HE FINDS THAT THE INCOME O F THE CERTIFICATE IS NOT SHOWN THE AO HAS NOT ONLY TO GIVE THE CREDIT FOR T DS IN THAT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND HAS TO DEFER THE CREDIT BEING GIVEN TO THE YEAR IN WHICH THE INCOME IS TO BE ASSESSED. 9(VI) IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE PROPORTIONATE CREDIT HAS TO BE GIVEN WHICH WILL WOR K OUT AS UNDER : ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2000-01: 4 83 615 X 17 01 076 = 3 76 559 21 84 691 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 4 83 615 X 4 83 615 = 1 07 056 21 84 691 IT(SS)A NO.10/AGR/2010 B.P. 01.04.1989 TO 17.01.2000 10 10. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND FACTS OF THE CASE ALL THE GROUNDS OF THE ASSESSEE INCLUDING ADDITIONAL GROUNDS ARE ALLOWED. 11. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN IT(SS) A NO.10/AGR/2010 IS ALLOWED. (ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23.11.2011). SD/- SD/- (H.S. SIDHU) (B.P. JAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE: 23 RD NOVEMBER 2011 PBN/* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT CONCERNED/CIT(APPEALS) CO NCERNED/D.R. ITAT AGRA BENCH AGRA/GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGRA TRUE COPY