Itta/471/2006 Of M/S. Shri Ram Chits Private Limited v. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF NOVEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYANAND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY INCOME TAX TRIBUNAL APPEAL Nos : 296. 316. 3't7. 419.47 1 &472 0F 2006LT.T.A. NO. 296 oF 2006 Appeal Under Section 260- A of the lncome Tax Act 1961, against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad"8" Bench, Hyderabad in l.T.A. Nos. 1916to 1919/Hyd/ 1996dated 31-01-2002 for the Assessment Year 1991-92 to [,1994-95) ]preferred againstthe order of the Commissioner of lncome Tax ( Appeals ) lll Hyderabadin Appeal No. 8 / DC (A)SR3/ CtT (A) [U 94-95 dared 19-09-1996preferred against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax( Assts ) Special Range -3 , Hyderabad in G.!. No. 5-230Between: Mls.^S^!{ra1n Chits (lndia ) Private Limited, 3:5-9Q9 , Himayathnagar , Hyderabad- [500 029, ][Represented ][by ][its ][Director Mr. ]KRC Sekhar ( Amended as per Court Order dated 30-11-2022 in l.A.No. 1 ot 2022) ...APPELLANT AND The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, [Assts] Special, Range-S Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: Mr R.V. EASWAR, Senior Counsel forMR. R. SIVARAMAN Counsel for the Respondents: SRI J.V. PRASAD SC FOR l.T. DEPARTMENT |.T.T.A. NO. 316 [(fF ]21106 Appeirl Under Section 260- A of the lncotne Tax Act , 1961against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad"8" Bench, Hyde abad in LT.A. No. [506 ][/ ][Hyd/ ][1999 ]dated [26-07-2004]for the Assessmert Years 1995-96 . [preferred ]against the order of theCommissioner of ncome Tax ( Appeals ) - l Hyderaltad in Appeal No.132 / DCSR [-3 ]/ C T [(A) ]-l / 98 99 dated 30-03-199 [preferred ]againstthe order of the Deputy Commissioner of lncome Ta:< [( ]Assts ) SpecialRange -3 , Hyderal ad dated 17-11-1997 in G.l. No. S-1 7/rSR 3 Between: M/s. Shriram Chits, ( ndia )Private Limited, 3-5-909, Hrmaya h,rag.ar, Hyderabad- [500 ][029, ][Represenl ][-.d ][by ][its ][Director ][IVlr. ] [Sekhar] ( Amended as per Oo rrt Order dated 30-11-2022in l.A.No 1 ol','O'.22) -,.APPELLANT AND The Joint Commissic ne.r of lncome Tax, [Assts] Special, tlange 5 Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appe llant: SRI R.V. EASWAR Senior Couns-.1 forMR. R. SIVARAMAN Counsel for the Res6 orrdents: SRI J.V. PRASAO SC FOR LT. DEP,\RTMENTI.T.T.A. NO. 317 0F 006' Appeal Under Section 260- A of the lncom-'Tax Act,1961against the order cf the lncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Hyderabad"8" Bench, Hyder: bad in l.T.A. No. 11751 Hydl 2003 dated 30-07-2OO4 tor the Assessrnent Year 2000 - 2001 preferred irgainst the orderof the Commissio nerr of lncome Tax ( Appeals ) l\/, Hyderabad inAppeal No. 79 DC [-3 ](1) CIT [(A) ]- lV / 2003 -04 datr:d 18-09-2003preferred against th l order of the Deputy Commissioncr of lncome Tax( Assts ) Special Ri nge -3 , Hyderabad dated 31-03-200it in G.l. No.AAFCS4916D/ S -12:: Between: Mlsr^S^[rIag Chits ( lndia )..Prrvate Limited, 3-5-909 . Himayathnagar, Hyderabad- [500 ][02S, ][Represented ][by ][its ][Director ][trrtr. ]kRC Sekfra. ( Amended as per Court Order dated 3O-11-2022 in l.A.No. 1 of 2OZ2 )) ...APPELLANT AND The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 3 (.1) , Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. R.V. EASWAR Senior Counsel forMr. R. SIVARAMAN counsel for the Respondents: SRr J.v. PRASAD sc FoR r.T. DEPARTMENT|.T.T.A. NO.41I OF 2006 Between: Mlsr^S^[rIag Chits ( lndia )..Prrvate Limited, 3-5-909 . Himayathnagar, Hyderabad- [500 ][02S, ][Represented ][by ][its ][Director ][trrtr. ]kRC Sekfra. ( Amended as per Court Order dated 3O-11-2022 in l.A.No. 1 of 2OZ2 )) ...APPELLANT AND The Deputy Commissioner of lncome Tax, Circle 3 (.1) , Hyderabad ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Appellant: Mr. R.V. EASWAR Senior Counsel forMr. R. SIVARAMAN counsel for the Respondents: SRr J.v. PRASAD sc FoR r.T. DEPARTMENT|.T.T.A. NO.41I OF 2006 Appeal Under Section 260- A of the lncome Tax Act 1961, against the order of the rncome Tax Appeflate Tribunar, Hyderabad"8" Bench, Hyderabad in l.T.A. Nos 327 tHyd 12001 dated: 26_0I-2004for the Assessment Year 1g97 -98 preferred against the order of theCommissioner of lncome Tax ( Appeals ) Vijayawada in ITA No. 135 /cSR 4 / Hyd/ CtT (A) / VJA / 2000-01 otd tTA No. 7/ JCSR 4 / ctT (A) it /2000'ol dated 22-02-2001 preferred against the order of the JointCommissioner of lncome Tax ( Assts ) Special Range -4 , Hyderabaddated 27-03-2000 in G.t. No. 5-122. Between: M/s ^s^hriram [chits ][( ][lndia ][).. ][private Limite-d, 3-5-909 ][, ][Himayathnagar ][, ][Hyderabad]- [500 ][029, Represented by ][its ][Director ]Mr. KRC Sekhar ( Amended as per Court Order dated 30.11-2022 in l.A.No. 1 ot 2022 )) ...APPELLANT AND The Joint Commissioner of lncome Tax, [Assts] Special, iange-S Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the A6 pr:llant: Mr. R.V. EASWAR, Senior Coun-..e1 r'orMr. R. SIVARAMAN Counsel for the Re spondents: SRI J.V. PRASAD SC FOR l.T D[:PARTMENT |.T.T.A. NO. 471 [(tF ]2006 Appeal Under Section 260- A of the lnccme ['1'ax ]Act, 1961against the order of the lncome Tax Appellate Tribrrrral, Hyderabad"B" Bench, Hyderabad in l.T.A. No.471 lHyd 12002 dated 26-07-2004for the Assessm, rnt Year 1998-99 preferred againsl the, order of theCommissioner of lncome Tax ( Appeals )lV Hyderab;rd in Appeal No.359 / JCSR -4 t Cll (A) / lV I 01-02 dated 28 -03- 2002 preferredagainst the order c,f the Joint Commissioner of ln<;ome Tax ( Assts )Special Range -4, Hyderabad dated 30-03-2001 in G.t. No S-122 Between: lvl/s. Shriram Chits ( lndia ) Private Limited, 3-5-909 , Himayirll-na(lar , Hyderabad- [500 ][029, ][Represer:er1 by ][its ][Director, ][lr/r. KRC ][Sekhar]( Amended as per Cc urt Order dated 30-1 1-2022 in LA.No. 1af 21 22 ) ...APPELLANT AND The Joint Commissi >ner of lncome Tax, [Assts] Special, Range ,4 Hyderabad. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the App ellant: Mr. R.V. EASWAR, Senior Coun,;el forMr. R. SIVARAMAN Counsel for the Res rondents: SRI J.V. PRASAD SC FOR I.T. I)EF,ARTMENT I.T.T.A. NO. 472 0F 2006 Appea Llnder Section 260- A of the lnconre Tax Act , 1961against the order [,rf ]the lncome Tax Appellate Triburra , Hyderabad"Bl'Bench, Hyderatrad in l.T.A. No. 1049 lHydl 200it oated 26-07- 2004fortheAssessmentYear,l999.2000)preferredagainsttheorderof the Commissioner [of ][lncome ][Tax ][( ][Appeals ][) ][lV, ][Hyderabad ][in]-lV [t ][2OO2'03 ][dated ][26-11'2002]Appeal [No. ][94 ][/ ] [-3 ][(1) ][/ ] [(A) ]preferred against the order [of ]the [Deputy ][Commissioner ][of ][lncome ][Tax], [Circle ][3 (1), ][Hyderabad ][dated ][28'03'2002 ][in ][G'l' ][No' ] ' 122 Between: M/s. Shriram chits [( ][lndia ]) [Private ][Limited, ][3-5-909 ][, ][Himayathnagar ][, ][Hyderabad]- [OZS, ][Represented ][by ][its ][Director, ][Mr. KRC ][Sekhar]( Amended as [per ]Court [Order ][dated ][30-11-2022 in ][l ] [No' ][1 ][of ][2022 ][)] ...APPELLANT AND The Deputy Commissioner [of lncome ][Tax, ][Circle ][3 ][(1), ][Hyderabad'] ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the [Appellant: ][Mr. ][R.V. ] [Senior Counsel ][for]MT. R. SIVARAMAN CounselfortheRespondents:SRIJ'v.PRASADScFoRI.T.DEPARTMENTThe Court made [the ][following: ] l I 'l l I lr {()N'BLE 'lI{E CfIIEF US'IICE U .lar= Ell !ll',\N ANT) '11 r r t r QN]B LE Sel_IUSTIe E!-Y-EIIA.q K4 Rl ( t D tl Y Between: M/s. Shriram chits [( ][lndia ]) [Private ][Limited, ][3-5-909 ][, ][Himayathnagar ][, ][Hyderabad]- [OZS, ][Represented ][by ][its ][Director, ][Mr. KRC ][Sekhar]( Amended as [per ]Court [Order ][dated ][30-11-2022 in ][l ] [No' ][1 ][of ][2022 ][)] ...APPELLANT AND The Deputy Commissioner [of lncome ][Tax, ][Circle ][3 ][(1), ][Hyderabad'] ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the [Appellant: ][Mr. ][R.V. ] [Senior Counsel ][for]MT. R. SIVARAMAN CounselfortheRespondents:SRIJ'v.PRASADScFoRI.T.DEPARTMENTThe Court made [the ][following: ] l I 'l l I lr {()N'BLE 'lI{E CfIIEF US'IICE U .lar= Ell !ll',\N ANT) '11 r r t r QN]B LE Sel_IUSTIe E!-Y-EIIA.q K4 Rl ( t D tl Y J,T.A.Nrl:s.296, [316. ][31L419. ][47I ][& 4l2 ][:r[ ]4t!tt COMIdONJ tll XiMENA, rt'r.rr.' [rlot ][hL ][th ][{.ttiet ]lrcrr,t [I.r:t ]"tu).,t Tlris .rrdcr wrll dispose of I.T.T.A.NoS.296, .\ 6. )17, 419,471 U472 o[ 2()06. 2. I{'ard I &. RV.Easwar, leamed Senior Cour.tse I ppearing forMr. I{sivann'an, leamed counsel for the app,'llanr (l/s. ShrirernChits Private i-imited) and Mr. J.V.Prasad, [lea..u,:d ]Standir.rg(bunsel, In,:o n,r Tax Depanment for the responden 3. Thcse ir )f'eals under Section 260A of the Incc,:ne Tax Act,1961 (brief ly 'rher Act' hereinafter) ar-ise out cf th,: ordersdated 31.01..20 [)-2,26.07.2A04 ]and30.07.2004 passt:d by tht: IncomeTax Appcllate ['I'ribunal, ]H/erabad Bench ['B', ]Hychrbatl [(briefly]'the TribLrnal' hereinafter) in I.T.ANo.1916/Htd/1'.)96 for theassessmentrcar 1991-92; I.T.ANos.5C6 [ill,d/1999, ]\327/Hyd,'2aa1 , +71 U 1049/Htd/2002 for the ass('sr:me nr yexrs1995-96, I)97-98, 1998-99 E( 1999ia00; endI.T.ANo. 117'5 , tl1,cV2003 for the assessment year [20CC)-01.] \ il 4. Though at the time of [filing ][appcal, ][substantial questions ][o[] law were not framed, [appellant ][has ][proposed ][the ][following ][two]quesdons as substantial [questions ][of ][law.] "1. \,Xr'hether on the [facts and ][in the ][circun-stances ][of ][rc ][c''r-se' ][the]Income Tax Appellate [Tribunal tras colrect ][in ][law ][in ][rejecting the]appellant's claim for [exemption ][of ][the ][chit ][fund ][incomc ][on ][the]principal of muualiry [on ][the ][ground ][that ][appellant ][is a ][business]concem [?] 2. \,(hether on the [facts ][and ][in ][the ][circumstances ][of ][tlre ][case' ][the]Income Tax Appellate [Tribunal ][was ][colrect ][in ][law ][in ][ignoring ][the ][fact]that when the appellant [subscribed ][to ][a ][chit, ][it ][does ][so ][in ][its ][character]as a subscriber [?] 5. The rwo [quesdons ][raise ][only one ][issue ][z'e', ][whether]claim [to ][exemPtion ][of ][the ][chit ][fund ][income ][on ][the]appellant's of [mutualiry ][was ][justified. ][\We ][may mention ][that]principle Tribunal had rejected [the ][claim ][of ][the appellant ][for ][exemption ][of]its income from chit [fund ][busrness ][on ][the ][principle ][of ][mutualiry]holding that appellant is a [btsiness concem.] 6. f'his r ur:stior.r has .rlready been decicied b r :his Co,ut inc.,.rissr.r Lcr .f Inc,,rc-Tzrx r.. Kovur l'cxtil,rs h.lding thatpnnciplc r:l nr-rttnlity cannot be extended to inco rrc e;rmerl 1r1.. achjt I'und c:)r rpany. 7. Appt,ll. nr has proposed two more quesrion:; :Ls :;ubstrntialqrresrions ol I t.s, in I.T.T.ANo.i 1 6 of 2006, which a t as r1n6l6r. 1. [\i7]rerlrt,r' ]ol rhc facts and in the circumstan( cs oi rr r c;,sc, rlrelnconic ['l',r ]-{ppcllate Tribunal rvas right in not co;r,;iCenng tl.rcappell.rnt's s:bmrssions that the retrospecrive amcndme rr ro :jecri()rl4.-) I] of rht Incorne T:r-x Act, 1961 by Finance Ac , 2O[r3 rv.rs,:larilit :rto rr,. ard ircnce retrospective ? 2. \X4rerixrr .h,: I ribunal on rhe facs and in the circums ru ces of thecasc, e rrcd i r holding that the pa)lnents. ro ESI Ea pF (;,r?o:rtiorrsnrarle aftc,-rlre duc dates under the respective stanrtes br r bef< u-e rheduc daLe lor f i[inq of the retum of income was inadrn ss ble a-s ,rnexpenditurc i 8. 7. Appt,ll. nr has proposed two more quesrion:; :Ls :;ubstrntialqrresrions ol I t.s, in I.T.T.ANo.i 1 6 of 2006, which a t as r1n6l6r. 1. [\i7]rerlrt,r' ]ol rhc facts and in the circumstan( cs oi rr r c;,sc, rlrelnconic ['l',r ]-{ppcllate Tribunal rvas right in not co;r,;iCenng tl.rcappell.rnt's s:bmrssions that the retrospecrive amcndme rr ro :jecri()rl4.-) I] of rht Incorne T:r-x Act, 1961 by Finance Ac , 2O[r3 rv.rs,:larilit :rto rr,. ard ircnce retrospective ? 2. \X4rerixrr .h,: I ribunal on rhe facs and in the circums ru ces of thecasc, e rrcd i r holding that the pa)lnents. ro ESI Ea pF (;,r?o:rtiorrsnrarle aftc,-rlre duc dates under the respective stanrtes br r bef< u-e rheduc daLe lor f i[inq of the retum of income was inadrn ss ble a-s ,rnexpenditurc i 8. 8. Though nvo quesrions have been proposed, Lhe issuc isbasically ofl( . o(l the same. The question is whet.urr paymenrcmade on accc urlt of enrployees' contribution to tilll and pFColporati,rns a r(,r rhe due date under the respectiv(. : rat rtes bLrt before the duc date of filirrg of return of incomc *,as inadmrssibleas an expendirure. 9This issue is also no longer res integru in view o[ the decisionrendered by the Supreme Court in Checkmate Services pLimitcd v. Comrnissioner of Income T ax-12. In the saidLimitcd v. Comrnissioner of Income T ax-12. In the saiddecision, Supreme Court has held as follows : The distinction berween an emplopr's contributionwhich is is primary liabiliry under law - in terms of Section36(1Xr"), and ia liabilfuy to deposit amounrs received by it ordeducted by it (Section 36(1X"d) is, thus crucial. The formerforms pan of the employers' income, and the lamer retairx itscharacter as an income (a,lbeit deemed), by vinue of Section2Q4)(x) - unless the conditions spelt by explanation to Section36(1X"d are satisfied ie., deposiring such amount received ordeducted from the employee on or before the due date. In otherwonds, there is a mad<ed distinction berween the nature andcharacter of the rwo amounrs - the emplopr,s liabiliry is to bepaid out of its income vtereas the second is deemed an income,by defrnition, since it is ,the deduction from the emploJees,income and held in ffust by the emplopr. This marlreddistinction has to be bome while interyreting rhe obligation ofevery assessee under Section 43B. t\ t\ ln tlre opinion of [this ][C-ourt, ][the ][teasor ][irrg ][in ][tht:]irnprrgrrt'tl it [di;me ][nt that ][the ][rtttrr ][rtltsltrrtle ][clausc ][u'o ][ulci ][rtot in ][lni']trilnlle r tlrltr [e or ][ove ][nrcle ][the ][employer's ][obligation ][ti) ][drlposil-]the amorutts [n,trined by it ][or ][deducted ][by ][it fro'n ][the ][er ][opl'r1ee's]irrcom.'. ur.il, [ss ]tlre [condition that ][it ][is ][deposited ][on ot'['efore ][thc]duc clatc. is o'rect [and ]rt,stilicd. [The ]o!)s/ltttlt claw( [ras ][to ][be]"o" Lrnclentocd [n the context ][of ][the entire ][provision ][c'f ][5r''.tion ][4JB]r,,,.hich is t) [( ][n!.ure ][timelv ][pa1'rnent ][before ][the ][rerums ][rt' ][fil':d' ][ol]cen.rin L.rbil [ti,:s rvhich ][,rre ][to ][be ][bome ][by ][thc ][asse;s':e ][rn ][the]iomr c,l- ter. inrercst Pavnlent [and ][other statutorv ][liabilit ]['z' ][ln ][the]c;rse ot thes [liabilities, what constitutes ][the ][due ][datt ][ir; dt ][fined]by the st,r.trt :. [Nevet'theless, ][the ][xsessees are ][given ][son ][te ][lt:ewa1']in that ;rs [lc ][nei ][as ][deposits ][are ][made ][beyond ][the ][du: ][latt:, ][but]before th,: [t ][ate ][of ][filhg ][the ][retu-m' ][the ][deducti<>n ][is ][albwed']'Ih;rt, lrol,,cr er, cannot ,rpply in the case of anrounts [s'hich ][are]held in trus, as it [is in ][the ][case ][of ][emplopes' ][coruribur'ions-]u,hich ,rre dt drrcted [from ][their ][income. ][They ][are ][not ]P;ft [()f ][the]$sessec [e ]m [rkry:r's ][income, ][nor ][are ][they ][heads ][of ][dedtction]per v itt [tLLe ]['onn ][of ][statutory ][pay ][out. ][They ][are ][othes' ][inc ][ome']monies. onl', deemed [to ][be income, ][wth ][the object ][of ][ensuring]that they,rrt [pairl ][within ][the ][due ][date ][specified ][in ][th': ;'anicular]law. ['I ]her' [, ][ra're ][to ][be ][deposited ][iri ][rcrms ]'rf [su':h ][w:lfare]enactments. [.t ][is upon deposit, ][in ][terms ][of ][thost' ][enacr ][Ir:ents ][and]on or befc,r-e tl [e ][tlue ][date s ][mandated by such concemt ][d ][lau; that]tire amotutt vhich [is ][otherwise ][retained, and ][detued ][tr ][income,]is treatcd es rcleduction [Thus, ][it ][is ][an ][essential ][conditio ][r ][fc'r ][the]deductLon th rt such [xmounts ][are ][deposited on ][c'r ][bef<'tr' ][th': ][due] date. If such interpretation [were ][to ][be ][adopted, ][the ][mt ][obrltult]clause under [Section ][4lB ][or ][anything ][conaircd ][h ][that ][pro"ision]would not absolve [the ][assessee ][from its ][liability ][to ][deposit ][the]emplope's contribution [on ][or ][before ][the ][due date ][as ][a ][condition]for deduction. i0.In view of above, [all ][the ][questions proPosed are ][answered] the [apPellant/assessee ][and in ][favour ][of ][the]agairxt revenue/ respondent. 11. Appeals [are ][accordinglydismissed' ][No ][costs'] fu a sequel, [miscellaneous ][petitions, pending ][if ][any' shnd] dismissed. Sd/. B.S. CHIRANJEEVIJOINT L]DSECTION ,/TRUE To 1. The [lncome Tax Appellate ][Tribunal' ][Hyderabad ]["B" ][Bench']HvderabadHvderabad Hvderabad2. ;il:"6;rrissioner [of ][lncome ][Tax ][( ][Appeals ][) ][lll ][Hvderabad]Tax i Appeals ) [lV' ][Hvderabad]Tax i Appeals ) [lV' ][Hvderabad]3. The The [[Commissioner ]]"f [i;;;; ]"f [i;;;; ]il ior.i"tion"' [[or ][in"o'nu ][Tax ][( Appeals ]][[in"o'nu ][Tax ][( Appeals ]][[Tax ][( Appeals ]][[( Appeals ]][[) ][Vijavawada]][[Vijavawada]] 3. The The [[Commissioner ]]"f "f il ior.i"tion"' [[or ][in"o'nu ][Tax ][( Appeals ]][[in"o'nu ][Tax ][( Appeals ]][[Tax ][( Appeals ]][[( Appeals ]][[) ][Vijavawada]][[Vijavawada]];: ;: ii;; [c1-rnrni..ion"t of ][lncome Tax ][(Appeals)-l' Hvderabad]6. The [Deputy ][co*'i""jJn"itrr*"titj ][Tax ][( ][Assts ][) ][Special Range ][-3 ][']Hyderabad[[('l ]][)' ][Hyderabad];: ii;; [c1-rnrni..ion"t of ][lncome Tax ][(Appeals)-l' Hvderabad]6. The [Deputy ][co*'i""jJn"itrr*"titj ][Tax ][( ][Assts ][) ][Special Range ][-3 ][']Hyderabad[[('l ]][)' ][Hyderabad] 3. The The [[Commissioner ]]"f "f il ior.i"tion"' [[or ][in"o'nu ][Tax ][( Appeals ]][[in"o'nu ][Tax ][( Appeals ]][[Tax ][( Appeals ]][[( Appeals ]][[) ][Vijavawada]][[Vijavawada]];: ;: ii;; [c1-rnrni..ion"t of ][lncome Tax ][(Appeals)-l' Hvderabad]6. The [Deputy ][co*'i""jJn"itrr*"titj ][Tax ][( ][Assts ][) ][Special Range ][-3 ][']Hyderabad[[('l ]][)' ][Hyderabad];: ii;; [c1-rnrni..ion"t of ][lncome Tax ][(Appeals)-l' Hvderabad]6. The [Deputy ][co*'i""jJn"itrr*"titj ][Tax ][( ][Assts ][) ][Special Range ][-3 ][']Hyderabad[[('l ]][)' ][Hyderabad] Hyderabad7. The [Deputy Commissioner ][of ][lncome ][Tax '.Circle ][3 ][[('l ]][)' ][Hyderabad]8. The [Joint ][Commis"#;;;ii;;ffie ][rat ][t Assts ][) ][Special Range ][-4 ][']:. H{:1i'L'si [t ][? ][8lw%f ]"#liE'F,!"d' "18. The [Joint ][Commis"#;;;ii;;ffie ][rat ][t Assts ][) ][Special Range ][-4 ][']:. H{:1i'L'si [t ][? ][8lw%f ]"#liE'F,!"d' "1 11.One [to Mr. ] [RAO KUNCHEAM' Advocate ] 'l2.Two CD CoPies ,r\^- HIGH COUFIT' DATED:30 t11t2O2Z --- [-_ ]--:'/..._,' ij4 l,jit [iii123]jCOMM()N JI]D(;1II,]NTttNcOME TAX TRlBLr NAL APPEAL Nos:296316 317 41917'| &472OF 2006 DISMISSING THI A r.r 1\.pl,EAr.sWITHOUI'COSTS tt\$l t-)