TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 31X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that as to on what basis it is averred by the AR that the said amounts so received by the assessee would not fall within the realm of Section 206C(1C) - As the assessee in the case before us had not only received royalty from the illegal miners/transporters of minerals as it would have in the normal course received in case of a regular lease or license, but in fact was in receipt of 10 times of royalty amount from them, therefore, the contention of the Ld. AR that the assessee was not exigible for collection of tax at source (TCS) on the amounts received from the illegal miners/transporters of minerals being devoid and bereft of any substance is liable to be rejected. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, finding no infirmity in the view taken by the lower authorities that the assessee who was liable to collect tax at source (TCS) on the amounts received from illegal miners/transporters, having failed to do so, was to be treated as assessee-in-default u/s. 206C(6) of the Act, uphold the same. Thus, the Ground of appeal No.1 raised by the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. TCS on the amounts deposited by the lease holders towards DMF - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to whether the assessee was in receipt of contributions towards NMET from the lease holders; or as claimed by the assessee the amounts were paid by the respective lease holders directly to NMET. In case the claim of the assessee, that the lease holders were directly making payments to NMET is found to be in order, then as observed by us hereinabove, no obligation would be cast upon the assessee to collect tax at source (TCS) on the amounts paid by the lease holders to NMET. Needless to say, the A.O shall in the course of the set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. - ITA Nos. 8 to 14/RPR/2023, 120 to126/RPR/2023, 64 to 69/RPR/2023, 243 to 245/RPR/2022, 207 to 214/RPR/2022 and 158 to 164/RPR/2023 - - - Dated:- 21-7-2023 - SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri G.S. Agrawal, CA For the Respondent : Shri Choudhary N.C Roy, Sr. DR ORDER PER BENCH : The captioned thirty-eight appeals filed by the aforementioned assessee s are directed against the respective orders of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC), Delhi, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntribution towards District Mineral Foundation. The appellant neither received amount towards DMF nor it go to State Revenue. Prayed that there was no liability and demand be cancelled. Grounds of Appeal 5. That under the facts and the law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) further erred in confirming the Order of Ld. AO who raised demand of Rs. 262/-which includes interest amounts at Rs. 82/-, dismissing the explanation that there was no liability u/s. 206C(1C) on the Appellant to collect tax at source on contribution towards National Mineral Exploration Trust. The appellant neither collected amount towards NMET nor go to coffers of State Government. Prayed that there was no liability and demand be cancelled. CONDONATION OF DELAY:- 3. We find that out of the captioned appeals those filed by the respective assessee s in ITA Nos. 64 to 69/RPR/2013, ITA Nos. 120 to 126/RPR/2023 and ITA Nos.158 to 164/RPR/2023 involves a delay of 36 days (wrongly mentioned as 28 days), 117 days (wrongly mentioned as 272 days) and 157 days (wrongly mentioned as 351 days), respectively. (A) As regards the delay involved in filing of the appeals in ITA Nos. 64 to 69/RPR/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y this office. The office works with limited staff, there is undersigned, who is Officer, there are two clerks and one Inspector. The Appellant is to pay attention in the cases detected for illegal mining transportation and the compounding procedures to be followed, then Appellant also devotes time when there is Vidhan Sabha session for preparing replies to various questions raised. The Appellant is also given the assignment with regard to checking of procurement of paddy of Co-operative Societies during the period November to January every year. This is one of the priorities of the State Government. 4. In the meanwhile, the E-mail Id which was miningkanker@gmail.com became full, and therefore, the earlier Mining Officer amended the same as miningkanker2@gmaiLcom . This was not known to the Appellant. Therefore, Notices order uploaded by Ld. CIT(A) on e-Mail could not reach the appellant, as it was not updated. Moreover, the Appellant is not computer savvy and is to rely on the person who has skill. Apart from that, the Appellant is not aware of the Income Tax proceedings. When the counsel of the Appellant opened the portal on 18.02.2023, it came to the knowledge that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng tasks. During the relevant period, as many as 58 cases of illegal mining and transportation were deducted. This consumes lot of time registering seizure of the vehicle and material then handing over the material vehicle to the police station, subsequent compounding etc. This resulted in collection of revenue at Rs. 10,38,423/- as Compounding Fees. Some time was also consumed in first week of November, 2022 during one Jan Sunwai (Public Hearing) case with regard to Deposit 14 wherein the production capacity was to be increased. This turned violent. The public stopped production in the Mines and that continued for 3 days. The Appellant is also required to visit various places and also head-quarters for meetings from time to time. On 8th March, 2023 there was visit of Chief Minister, and therefore, there was 'protocol duty of the Appellant. Further, to achieve the target, the Appellant was busy in month of March. This delayed filing of appeal timely. (C) Ostensibly, a perusal of the application filed by the assessee seeking condonation of delay involved in filing of the appeal in ITA Nos.158 to 164/RPR/2023 a/w. an affidavit filed in support thereof, reveals multi facet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ' as per the statutes mainly Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 ( MMDR ) and for that purpose visit various Mines sites and regularly do vigilance for the offenders who are making illegal mining, illegal transportation without valid Licence. The Appellant is also to attend meetings called by the Collector from time to time. The Appellant is also required to give attention, leaving all the other assignments, to the questions being raised by the Members of Legislative Assembly in the Chhattisgarh State Assembly. 3) The officers of the Appellant department are not conversant with the newly introduced Faceless Appeal system. They are also not computer savvy. Government work is carried out in Hindi language. Therefore, the Order passed by the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi dated 25.03.2022 did not come to the knowledge of the Appellant. 4) The above Order was located by the counsel on the Income Tax Portal on 04.10.2022. Counsel thereafter informed about passing of above order. 5) Shri Hemant Cherpa, Assistant Mining Officer took charge on 15.03.2019 and was transferred to Dantewada on 22.08.2022. In his place Shri Shiv Shankar Nag joined as Deputy Di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t for filing the same within the stipulated time period prescribed under the statute. At the same time we cannot remain oblivion of the aforesaid multi-facet reasons, which in our considered view are not merely an eye-wash and inspires confidence as regards veracity of the explanation of the assessee about the reasons leading to delay in filing of the captioned appeals. Admittedly, it is a matter of fact that the procedure of framing faceless assessments/disposing off the appeals during the relevant period were in its infancy stage. Also, the offices of the aforementioned assessees during the period under consideration was functioning in far flung areas with skeletal staff, which as brought to our notice was neither computer savvy not had any exposure about the obligations under the Income-tax Act, had witnessed transfers/shuffling that had adversely hit its functioning. Inadvertent failure of the concerned staff members to access the email account had resulted to the order of the CIT(Appeals), NFAC going unnoticed, which thereafter was brought to its knowledge by their counsel who had learnt about the same from the income tax portal. Considering the aforesaid multiple reasons whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and market value of mineral, therefore, as per the mandate of Sec. 206C(1C) of the Act it was obligated to have collected tax at source (TCS) on the said amount. Referring to the fact that the very mechanism for computing the amount of compounding fees in itself was based on the amount of royalty which the assessee would have otherwise recovered, the AO was of the view that the amounts recovered by the assessee from the illegal miners/transporters of minerals was not in the nature of penalty but was a compensatory payment. Also the AO rejected the claim of the assessee that as per Section 23A of Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 ( MMDR Act , for short) as the amounts collected from illegal miners and transporters was for compounding of offence, therefore, no obligation was cast upon it to collect tax at source on the same. It was further observed by the A.O that as the assessee had failed to provide any bifurcation of the amounts that were received on the compounding of the offence of illegal mining and transportation of minerals, viz. (i). amount of penalty/fine; (ii). value of minerals; and (iii). receipts on account of other factors, thus, he had failed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and State government funds would vary from year to year as the same would be dependent on the quantity of mineral explored and royalty received during the year, but the percentage of the apportioned amount was static. It was further observed by him that the aforesaid amounts which the lease holders had to pay towards the aforesaid funds were in addition to royalty that was separately collected from them. Adverting to the mechanism that was adopted, it was observed by the A.O that the lease holders remained under an obligation to deposit the amounts separately and submit copy of challans of the amounts deposited in the aforesaid funds a/w. challan for royalty paid with the Mining Officer. It was observed by him that it was only on receipt of the aforesaid challans that the Mining Officer would issue a pit-pass to the lease holder for exploring minerals. Referring to the aforesaid methodology that was adopted for collection of the aforesaid funds, it was observed by the A.O that the District Mining Officer (DMO) i.e. the assessee while calculating its gross revenue from mineral exploration had failed to include the aforesaid amounts that were collected from lease holders towards thei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ailed to come forth with any explanation for not having collected tax at source on the amounts collected towards DMF and NMET from the lease holders, the A.O after treating the assessee as assessee-in-default under sub-section (6) to Section 206C of the Act saddled it with an obligation to make good the said non-collection of tax at source amounting to Rs. 2534.60/- [Rs. 2273.00/- (TCS a/w. interest on DMF) (+) Rs. 261.60/- (TCS a/w. interest on NMET)]. 14. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(Appeals) on both the aforesaid issues, viz. (i) saddling it with the liability for failure to collect tax at source (TCS) on the amount of compounding fees received from illegal miners/transporters of minerals; and (ii) saddling it with the failure to collect tax at source (TCS) on the contributions made by the lease holders towards DMF and NMET. However, the CIT(Appeals) not finding any infirmity in the view taken by the A.O, upheld the same. For the sake of clarity the relevant observations of the CIT(Appeals) are culled out as under: As per Section 206(1C) (1C) Every person, who grants a lease or a licence or enters into a contract or otherwise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the credit of the Central Government in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3). 206 (7) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (6), if the person responsible for collecting tax does not collect the tax or after collecting the tax fails to pay it as required under this section, he shall be liable to pay simple interest at the rate of one per cent per month or part thereof on the amount of such tax from the date on which such tax was collectible to the date on which the tax was actually paid and such interest shall be paid before furnishing the quarterly statement for each quarter in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (3): Thus 206(6) clearly provides that any person responsible for collecting the tax, even if he fails to collect the tax in accordance with the provisions of the said section, shall not withstanding such failure, be liable to pay the tax to the credit of the Central Government. In such a case of failure, this section fixes the liability of the collector, who in case of failure too is required to pay the tax to the Central Government. The provisions of TLS are unambiguous. It was the statutory liability of the District mini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not on tax liability of deductee-contractors - Held, yes [In favour of revenue]. c. Girijan Co-op. Corporation Ltd, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Range-2(TDS), Visakhapatnam. Section 206C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Collection of tax at source - Assessment year 2005-06 Assessee was cooperative society engaged in collection of forest produce and selling them to various organization - During relevant assessment year, assessee sold minor forest produce and agriculture produce for certain sum - Assessing Officer noticed that product sold by assessee fell under category of forest produce and assessee was required to collect tax at source - He raised demand under section 206C - Assessee contended that sales were made to buyers who had already been assessed to tax and who had filed their Income-tax returns disclosing impugned transaction arid, therefore, assessee was not liable under section 206C since buyers had already paid tax thereon - Whether as per section 206C(6), person being seller of specific goods, is not deemed to be an assessee-in-default; however, is made liable to pay TCS amount - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, assessee was liable to pay demand raise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R 226 unequivocally stated that where the payees have already paid tax on the income on which there was a short deduction of tax at source, recovery of tax cannot be made once again from the tax deductor. While rendering the above decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court took into account Circular No. 275/201/95- IT(B), dt. 24 January, 1997 issued by the CBDT wherein it was clarified no demand visualized under section 201(1) of the IT Act should be enforced after the tax deductor has satisfied the officer incharge of TDS, The taxes due have been paid by the deductee assessee. However, this will not alter the liability to charge interest under 201C1A) of the IT Act till the date of payment of taxes by the deductee assessee or the liability for penalty under section 271C of the IT Act . However, this is the position of law insofar as, the provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) are concerned section 206C(6) and section 201(1) are not similarly worded. While section 201(1) treats an assessee AS who fails to deduct the tax at source or after deduction, does not pay the same to the Government as an assessee in default, section 206C(6) clearly provides that any person responsible for co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... actments, viz (i). The Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation), Act 1957 (Act No. 67 of 1957), (ii). Chhattisgarh Minor Minerals Rules, 2015 (Extract); and (iii). The Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act. 1957 (Extract) as had been pressed into service by the ld. AR. 17. Controversy involved in the present appeal lies in a narrow compass, viz. (i) that as to whether or not the assessee i.e. DMO was liable for collection of tax at source (TCS) u/s. 206C of. the Act on the amount of compounding fees received from persons involved in illegal mining and transportation of minerals; and (ii) that as to whether or not any obligation was cast upon the assessee to have collected tax at source (TCS) on the amount of contributions made by the lease holders i.e. lessees towards DMF and NMET. 18. Before dealing with the aforesaid issue, it would be relevant to cull out the provisions of Section 206C(1C) of the Act, which reads as under: (1C) Every person, who grants a lease or a licence or enters into a contract or otherwise transfers any right or interest either in whole or in part in any parking lot or toll plaza or mine or quarry, to another person, other th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome-tax: Provided that the authorised dealer shall not collect the sum, if the amount or aggregate of the amounts being remitted by a buyer is less than seven lakh rupees in a financial year and is for a purpose other than purchase of overseas tour program package: Provided further that the sum to be collected by an authorised dealer from the buyer shall be equal to five per cent of the amount or aggregate of the amounts in excess of seven lakh rupees remitted by the buyer in a financial year, where the amount being remitted is for a purpose other than purchase of overseas tour program package: Provided also that the authorised dealer shall collect a sum equal to one half per cent of the amount or aggregate of the amounts in excess of seven lakh rupees remitted by the buyer in a financial year, if the amount being remitted out is a loan obtained from any financial institution as defined in section 80E, for the purpose of pursuing any education. It transpires on a careful perusal of the aforesaid statutory provision that the same in clear and unequivocal terms contemplates that every person, who grants a lease or a licence or enters into a contract or oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act could have been fastened upon the assessee w.r.t the amount of compounding fees received from the aforesaid persons is devoid and bereft of any force of law and cannot be accepted. As observed by us hereinabove, what is material for triggering the aforesaid statutory provision is as to whether or not the assessee i.e. DMO had transferred any right or interest either in whole or in part in a mine, to another person, for use of the same for the purpose of business. Albeit, the Ld. AR s claim that in absence of any legal transfer of any right or interest by the assessee to the illegal miners/transporters of minerals the provisions of sub-section (1C) of Section 206C could not be invoked, at the first blush appeared to be very convincing, but on a careful perusal of the aforesaid statutory provision which states otherwise the said claim does not merit acceptance and is liable to be rejected. 21. We shall now deal with the issue that as to whether or not the assessee had transferred any right or interest either in whole or in part in the mine to the illegal miners/transporters of the minerals. As no definition of the term transfer can be traced in Section 206C of the Act, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carrying out illegal mining /transportation of minerals. 22. As brought to our notice by the Ld. AR an Inspector of Mining Department on detection of illegal mining would as per sub-section (2) of Section 71 of the Chhattisgarh Miner Mineral Rules, 2015 (for short CMMR ) prepare a report as regards the said activity, i.e. illegal extraction or illegal transportation of minerals so carried out by the said person. Our attention was drawn by the Ld. AR to the CMMR a/w. copy of the report of the Mining Inspector, Bemetara wherein the latter had reported an instance of detection of illegal mining carried out by a person, viz. Shri Dinesh Kothari, Parpaudi, Page 24 of APB. It transpires on a careful perusal of the aforesaid report of the Mining Inspector that the same, inter alia, refers to the quantity of the minerals extracted by the illegal miners, viz. Shri Dinesh Kothari (supra) a/w. amount of royalty as regards the same i.e. Rs. 9,000/-. Further, as per the aforesaid report the illegal miner, viz. Shri Dinesh Kothari (supra) as per Rule 71(5) of CMMR was called upon to pay royalty of Rs. 90,000/- i.e. @ 10 times of the amount of royalty on the extraction, Page 24 of APB. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment and Regulation) Act, 1957, Page 55 of APB, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the lease holders of land remained under a statutory obligation to pay royalty in respect of any minerals removed or consumed from the leased area at the rate that was for the time being specified in the Second Schedule in respect of those minerals. It was the claim of the Ld. AR that as the assessee i.e. DMO had neither granted any lease to the illegal miners/transporters of minerals nor they had any obligation to pay royalty in respect of any minerals removed or consumed from the leased area at the specified rates contemplated in Section 9(2) of the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, therefore, the amount that was received towards compounding fees from the said illegal miners /transporters of minerals could by no means be placed at par as against royalty that was otherwise received as per the mandate of law from the lease holders. 24. Also the Ld. AR had drawn support from Section 4 of the Chhattisgarh Miner Mineral Rules, 2015, as per which, there was a clear prohibition on prospecting or carrying out quarry operations in absence of a prospecting license or quarry li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scitur a sociis the term or otherwise used by the legislature in all its wisdom in Section 206C(1C) of the Act, it can safely be concluded that even in absence of any lease or license or contract, if there is any transfer by the assessee of any such right or interest in the mine, then, the case of the assessee would clearly fall within the meaning of Sec. 206C(1C) of the Act. 28. Now this takes us to the scope and gamut of the term transfer in so far the facts involved in the case of the assessee are concerned. As observed by us hereinabove the Explanation 2 to Section 2(47) of the Act, as had been made available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2012 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1962 would be applicable to the case of the assessee for the year under consideration. As per the Explanation 2 (supra) the term transfer includes and shall be deemed to have always included disposing of or parting with an asset or any interest therein, or creating any interest in any asset in any manner whatsoever , directly or indirectly, absolutely or conditionally, voluntarily or involuntarily or otherwise , by way of an agreement or otherwise . Now a bare ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part from that a reference to a letter dated 12.01.2018 of the Deputy Collector, District-Bemetara i.e. DMO which is addressed to the Police Officer, P.S.-District: Bemetara (as reproduced by us hereinabove), Page 40 of APB, the assessee had itself stated that as the royalty/fine for the illegal mining/transportation of minerals had been received from the illegal miners/transporters, viz. Shri Dinesh Kothari (supra), therefore, his vehicles may be released. 31. On a perusal of the aforesaid facts, we are of the considered view that the assessee by receiving the aforesaid amount i.e. 10 times of royalty from the illegal miners/transporters of minerals had, in turn, clearly vested/parted with the interest and right in the mine in their favour, which the latter had undeniably used for the purpose of her business. Considering the fact that the orders w.r.t amounts collected by the assessee i.e. DMO from illegal miners/transporters of minerals in itself states that an amount i.e. 10 times of the royalty amount is to be recovered from the illegal miners/transporters, therefore, we are unable to comprehend that as to on what basis it is averred by the Ld. AR that the said amounts s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led Areas) Act, 1996 (40 of 1996) and the Scheduled Tribes and Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 (2 of 2007). (5) The holder of a mining lease or a [composite licence] granted on or after the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015[other than those covered under the provisions of sub- section (2) of Section 10A], shall, in addition to the royalty, pay to the District Mineral Foundation of the district in which the mining operation are carried on, an amount which is equivalent to such percentage of the royalty paid in terms of the Second Schedule, not exceeding one-third of such royalty, as may be prescribed by the Central Government. (6) The holder of a mining lease granted before the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 and those covered under the provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 10A], shall, in addition to the royalty, pay to the District Mineral Foundation of the district in which the mining operations are carried on, an amount not exceeding the royalty paid in terms of the Second Schedule in such manner and subjec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it-pass would be issued by the assessee to the lease holders only after he would produce evidence of having paid the amount of royalty a/w. payments towards DMF/NMET, but on the basis of the said fact on a standalone basis de-hors satisfaction of the aforesaid requisite conditions contemplated in sub-section (1C) of Section 206C of the Act, no obligation could have been saddled upon the assessee to collect tax at source (TCS) on the amount of DMF paid by the lease holders. 34. Although we are principally clear that as per Sec. 9B of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 the lease holders remained under an obligation to pay the specified amount of DMF, and no involvement of the assessee can be traced in the scheme of the MMDR Act, but we are afraid that the said factual position cannot be gathered on a perusal of the accounts of the assessee as had been placed before us. We, say so, for the reason that a perusal of the Receipts and Payments account of the assessee i.e. DMO for the year ending 31.03.2017 reveals reference of District Mineral Foundation Trust on the same, Page 38 to 41 of APB. Also, a similar position prevails in the audited accounts of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osite license] shall pay to the Trust, a sum equivalent to two per cent of the royalty paid in terms of the Second Schedule , in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. Nothing is discernible from a bare reading of the aforesaid statutory provision that the lease holder was required to make payment of the aforesaid amount to the assessee i.e. DMO; nor there is anything which would reveal that it was the assessee i.e. DMO who had deposited the aforesaid amounts with the NMET. In sum and substance, we are of the considered view that now when the leaseholder had made the payment towards NMET, therefore, in absence of satisfaction of the pre-condition set out in Section 206C(1C) of the Act, i.e. shall, at the time of debiting of the amount payable by the licensee or lessee to the account of the licensee or lessee or at the time of receipt of such amount from the licensee or lessee in cash or by issue of a cheque or draft or by any other mode, whichever is earlier, collect from the licensee or lessee , an obligation to collect tax at source would stand triggered either at the stage of debiting of the amount payable to the account of the licensee or lesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs; or as claimed by the assessee the amounts were paid by the respective lease holders directly to NMET. In case the claim of the assessee, that the lease holders were directly making payments to NMET is found to be in order, then as observed by us hereinabove, no obligation would be cast upon the assessee to collect tax at source (TCS) on the amounts paid by the lease holders to NMET. Needless to say, the A.O shall in the course of the set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 38. In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 11/RPR/2023 for A.Y.2016-17 is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 39. As the facts and issues involved in the captioned appeals remains the same as were there before us in ITA No.11/RPR/2023 for A.Y.2016-17, therefore, our findings recorded while disposing off the appeal in ITA No.11/RPR/2023 for A.Y. 2016-17 shall mutatis-mutandis apply for disposing off the captioned appeals, i.e. ITA Nos. 8 to 10, 12 to 14/RPR/2023, ITA Nos. 120 to126/RPR/2023, ITA Nos. 64 to 69/RPR/2023, ITA Nos. 243 to 245/RPR/2022, ITA Nos. 207 to 214/RPR/2022, ITA Nos. 158 to 164/RPR/2023. Accordingly, we dispose off the capti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
