Sr. No. Name of Members Profession Zone
1 Anil Deshpande Adv. West
2 Anil Kumar Agrawal CA. Central
3 Akshay Mitishkumar Modi CA. West
4 Raghavendra D. Hebballi GSTP South
5 K. Venkat Reddy CA. South
6 Ashwini Tijare CA. West
7 Rohit Ruwatia CA. Central
8 Mohit Kumar Goyal Adv. North
9 Anand Pareek Adv. Central
10 Vaibhav Sharma CA. Central
11 Manish Kumar Banetia Adv. East
12 Kalpesh N. Mistry CA. West
13 Shreyas Hiremath GSTP West
14 Rishabh Mittal CA. Central
15 Shrikishan Yadav Adv. Central
16 Deepak Rahangdale CA. West
17 Amit Khandelwal CA. Central
18 Ram Ratan Modi CA East
19 Vikas Milan Maity CA. West
20 Pravin B. Kante GSTP West
21 Alok Kumar Jain Adv. North
22 Shailajeet S. Chafekar Adv. West
23 Vijay Kumar Roy GSTP East
24 Mukesh Sunderlal Nanwani CA. West
25 Bhushan Mahaveer Hounje GSTP West
26 Dharmendra Shekhar CA. Central
27 Vipul Lukka Adv. West
28 Vijaykumar S. Konapure Adv. West
29 Manmath Pralhad Korulkar Adv. West
30 Ravi Nandan Prasad Adv. East
31 Uttam Chand Choudhary CA. East
32 Bhavesh Manoj Moryani Adv. West
33 Prasanta Kumar Patnaik Adv. East
34 Glen Richard Gonsalves CA. West
35 Shweta Glen Gonsalves CA. West
36 Rohit Glen Gonsalves CA. West
37 Kandula Srinivasa Reddy GSTP South
38 P. K. Nayak Adv. East
39 Dhrub Narayan CA. East
40 Akshat Agarwal Adv. East
41 Chitta Ranjan Das Adv. East
42 Sushil Kumar Samantray Adv. East
43 Annapurna Mishra Adv. East
44 Shambhu Dayal Gupta CA Central
45 Mukesh N. Kishnani CA. West
46 Jagjeet Singh Adv. East
47 Simanchal Maharana Adv. East
48 Krushna Chandra Panda Adv. East
49 G. Ram Narayan Patro Adv. East
50 Atul Kakkad Adv. East
51 Vuppala Venkataramana Adv. South
52 Sunil Dandekar CA. West
53 Soham Jayeshbhai Shah GSTP West
54 Bappa Paul Adv. East
55 Manish Kumar Adv. East
56 Vivek Kumar Pasari Adv. East
57 Satish Moreshwar Joshi CA. West
58 Swarnalata Panigrahi Adv. East
59 Bansidhar Swain Adv. East
60 Harish Sharma GSTP Central
61 Nitin C. Parmar GSTP West
62 Hiren Pravinbhai Devani CA. West
63 Abhishek Jalani Adv. East
64 Kabindra Kumar Choudhary CA. East
65 Krishna Kumar Chhaparia CA. East
66 Chetan Gandhi Cost Accountant West
67 Shrujal Swami Adv. West
68 Vikash Rungta CA. East
69 T. Akhaya Kumar Shroff Adv. East
70 Dipen Bharatbhai Parmar Adv. West
71 Anup Kumar Saha Adv. East
72 Jawahar P. Purohit Adv. West
73 Soubhik Sarkar Adv. East
74 Piyush G. Panchal Adv. West
75 Apurva N. Mehta Adv. West
76 Kalpesh K. Jaiswal Adv. West
77 Sohag Nayan Patel Adv East
78 Shyam Vijaybhai Unadkat Adv. West
79 Nupur Agrawal Adv. East
80 Radha Mohan Mishra Adv. East
81 Dharmesh Nalinbhai Parmar GSTP West
82 Arvind Narayan Ramani CA. West
83 Hiteshkumar Nareshbhai Devnani CA. West
84 Vikram Chawla Adv. North
85 Pradeep Kumar Panda Adv. East
86 Amitkumar Chimanbhai Sanghvi GSTP West
87 Jyotirmaya Das Adv. East
88 Anvesh Anil Vakharia CA. West
89 Saktikanta Das Adv. East
90 Zarna P. Chandwani CA. West
91 Janvi C. Joshi CA. West
92 Mujahid Akhter Adv. Central
93 Ekta J. Ramrakhyani CA. West
94 Lalit Panchal Adv. Central
95 Rajendra Kumar Agrawal CA. Central
96 Pradeepkumar Gupta CA. West
97 Dilip Panjwani CA. West
98 Biswa Ranjan Das Adv. East
99 Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Adv. East
100 Gnanesh Bhatt Adv. West
101 Pradeep Kumar Mohapatra Adv. East
102 Maheshkumar Jasmatbhai Bhesaniya Adv. West
103 Prem P. Thakkar Adv. West
104 Sahadev Kanchanbhai Patel Adv. West
105 Shailendra Narayan Thakur Adv. East
106 Ranjit Kumar Bachha CA. East
107 Kushal Pradeep Lohiya CA. West
108 Tanuj Agrawal Adv. Central
109 Hardik Mevada CA. West
110 Amit Bhandari CA. Central
111 Jeetu Amar Ramrakhiyani CA. West
112 Rajendra Kumar Soni CA. Central
113 Jeetendra Kumar Thani CA. Central
114 Pinkushree Tripathy Adv. East
115 Amit Singhania CA. East
116 Prativa Dakua Adv. East
117 Navesh M. Totlani CA. West
118 Rajib Ray Mohapatra Adv. East
119 Laxmi Kant Agrawal Adv. Central
120 Prabhat Kumar Mishra Adv. East
121 Hetal Hasmukhbhai Rupani GSTP West
122 E. Venkateswar Patro Adv. East
123 Raveendran P. M. CA. West
124 Dharmendra Shrimal CA. West
125 Neeraja B. Sachdev CA. West
126 Santosh Borkar CA West
127 Santosh Kadam CA. West
128 Jayant Madhukar Chavan CA. West
129 Padmanabhan Nair Adv. West
130 Rohan N. Dedhia CA. West
131 Sanjay Kumar Adv. East
132 Sanjay Pandey Adv. East
133 A. Dharani T.P South
134 Vidhi Lalwani CA. West
135 Divya Lalwani CA. West
136 Harish Hegde CA. West
137 Subhash Patil STP West
138 Yadnesh Chitnis Adv. West
139 Vidisha Ajit Rohira Adv. West
140 Raghvendra Upadhyay Adv. East
141 Manoj Kumar Jha Adv. East
142 B. Ganesh Prabhu CA. South
143 M. Yamini Priya T.P South
144 Sunita Singh Cost Accountant East
145 Ashish Kumar Samal Adv. East
146 Soubhagya Swain Adv. East
147 Akshay S. Hegde Adv. West
148 Prabir Kumar Datta Cost Accountant East
149 Kotni Karunakar Rao CA. East
150 Asadhi Maheswara Patro CA. East
151 Sachitra Kumar Das Adv. East
152 C. L. Bhanushali Adv. West
153 Pankaj Vyas Adv. East
154 Badri Narayan Patro CA. East
155 Agrajit Panigrahi Adv. East
156 Lalitsingh Chauhan CA West
157 Anandi Charan Panigrahi Adv. East
158 E. Kishore Kumar Patro Adv. East
159 Tusar Kumar Barik Cost Accountant East
160 Zulfikarali H. Saiyed Adv. West
161 Mohammedshakil Abdulhamid Halawala Adv. West
162 Jayesh Sureshchandra Doshi T.P West
163 Aditya Agarwal CA. Central
164 Manoj Padhi Adv. East
165 Udai Maheshwari CA. West
166 Manish Jagdishkumar Balani Adv. West
167 Jitendra Kumar Singh Adv. East
168 Atul Pandya GSTP West
169 Pooja Chhugani CA. West
170 Epari Ashok Kumar CA. East
171 Ashwini Kumar Pandey Adv. East
172 Ravi Gupta CA. West
173 Manish Ramesh Khushalani CA. West
174 Ramesh Gopaldas Khushalani Adv. West
175 Rakesh Lalchand Yadav CA West
176 Ashok Kumar Agarwal Adv. North
177 K. V. S. S. Ram Prasad Adv. East
178 Adhiraj Mohanty Adv. East
179 Goutam Kumar Bera Adv. East
180 Laxmidhar Sahoo Adv. East
181 Paresh Chandra Dash Adv. East
182 Prasanta Kumar Sahu CA. East
183 Beeraka Vijay CA. East
184 Ashis Kumar Mishra Adv. East
185 Beeraka Gangarju CA. East
186 Linalin Mohanti Adv. East
187 Pratap Chandra Tripathy Adv. East
188 Kailash Choudhury Adv. East
189 Debananda Panda CA. East
190 Pramod Kumar Panda CA East
191 Manoj I. Dodeja CA West
192 Sadananda Mahapatro Adv. East
193 Radha Krishna Sahu Adv. East
194 Priyanka Sahu CA. East
195 Tanaji Ambaji Salunkhe GSTP West
196 Pravin Patil GSTP West
197 Aashish Ashok Jain GSTP West
198 Niranjan Chaurasia GSTP West
199 Madhav S. Oza GSTP West
200 Rakesh Kumar Adv. North
201 Rohidas Mapari T.P. West
202 Vishnu Kumar Gupta Adv. Central
203 Dillip Kumar Sahoo Adv. East
204 Javed Jafar Mulla GSTP West
205 Rahul D Prabhu Mhambre CA. West
206 Dastgir Ilai Momin GSTP West
207 Shradha Mohanti Adv. East
208 Susanta Kumar Panda Adv. East
209 Shailendra Jain CA. West
210 Amiya Kumar Sahu Adv. East
211 Chandan Patel CA. West
212 Niranjan M. Vaidya Adv. West
213 Sanjay R. Pradhan GSTP West
214 V. Krishna Adv. East
215 Mallinath Kalyanappa Patil Adv. West
216 Binod Sahu Adv. East
217 Susanta Kumar Pradhan Adv. East
218 Rajesh G. Dasija CA. West
219 Kumar Ishwarlal Khatwani Adv. West
220 Saurabh Sodani CA. Central
221 Tapeshwar Nayak Adv. East
222 N. J. Prabhudesai CA. West
223 Yula Glenn Gonsalves Adv. West
224 Navin Gopalika CA. East
225 P. Ramakrishna Patro CA. East
226 Rajesh Kumar Tripathy Adv. East
227 Kamal Kumar Gupta Adv. East
228 Sandip Kumar Singh Adv. East
229 Manilal Virji Shah CA. West
230 Virendra Harshadrai Thakkar GSTP West
231 Mahesh V. Keswani CA. West
232 Dinesh Lodha CA. West
233 Amar Kumar Adv. East
234 Subash Chandra Nayak Adv. East
235 Rakesh Kumar Kedia CA. East
236 Anup Kumar Sanghai CA. East
237 Ramesh Agarwal Adv. East
238 Rajesh R. Navelkar CA. West
239 Chinmaya Kumar Swain Adv. East
240 Anil Kumar Rajgariah CA. East
241 Murari Lal Rajgariah Adv. East
242 Atul Gupta Adv. Central
243 Ramesh Jugalkishor Bharadia Adv. West
244 R. Laxmi Tarun CA. East
245 Kailash Chaudhari GSTP West
246 Raghu Arakshit Das Adv. East
247 Manoj Kumar Pattnaik Adv. East
248 Dachepalli Srinivas Adv. South
249 Alok Satyanarayan Agrawal CA. West
250 Ila Popat CA West
251 Ketankumar Mansukhlal Modi Adv. West
252 Nabajyoti Panda Adv. East
253 Tarun Sharma Adv. Central
254 Manoj Kumar Agarwalla CA East
255 Kailash Chand Jain Adv. East
256 Eaga Srinivas GSTP South
257 Praveen Ganapatrao Atadkar GSTP South
258 Subrata Ray Adv. East
259 Dr. Vivekanans Lingappa Urankar GSTP South
260 Debayan Patra CA. East
261 Vinay Srichand Ahuja CA. West
262 Dhaval Harishchandra Patwa Adv. West
263 Upendrasinh S. Chavda Adv. West
264 Choudhury Manash Ranjan Mishra Adv. East
265 Anubhav Pradhan CA Central
266 Pragnesh Bhagat Adv. West
267 Ribhav Ghiya CA. Central
268 Arunjay Kumar Singh CA East
269 Doki Lakshmi Narayana CA. East
270 Kirtibhai Shah GSTP West
271 Prakash Shivandas Pamnani CA. West
272 Narendra Babu Katragadda Adv. South
273 Nirod Kumar Pal Adv. East
274 Swapnil Jain CA. East
275 Amit Basant Otwani CA. West
276 Farukahamad Ibrahim Mulla GSTP West
277 Takshil Shah CA. West
278 Rajesh P. Shah CA. West
279 Sachin Gupta CA. Central
280 Dipak Mahaveer Khot STP West
281 Sujit Mohanty Adv. East
282 Fayazan Imtiyaz Dabhoiwala CA. West
283 Sandeep Jhanwar CA. Central
284 Dr. P. K. Goyal Adv. Central
285 Murahari Sriraman Adv. East
286 Keshav Baheti CA. Central
287 Aayush Toshniwal CA. West
288 Prasanna Kumar Ray Adv. East
289 Shailesh Rastogi CA West
290 Kalpesh Magan Patil CA West
291 Saksham Garg Adv. Central
292 Biswajit Mishra Adv. East
293 Rakesh Kumar Vijay Adv. Central
294 Ashish Khandelwal CA. Central
295 Pramit Kumar Gupta Mittal Adv. Central
296 Kamal Kumar Ray Adv. East
297 S. L. Poddar Adv. Central
298 Shivam Adv. East
299 P. Sanjeev Kumar Patro Adv. East
300 Nachiket Biswal Adv. East
301 Krishan Kumar Bengani CA. East
302 Arun Kumar Das Adv. East
303 Pradeep Dattatray Gavade GSTP West
304 Susil Pattnaik CA. East
305 Lingraj Singh Adv. East
306 Saroj Kumar Sahu Adv. East
307 Sanjay Swain Adv. East
308 Bhabani Shankar Chaudhury Adv. East
309 Tikam Chand Changoiwala Adv. East
310 Kiran Kumar Mohanty Adv. East
311 Ankur Yogendra Vakharia CA. West
312 Ashok Bhandari Adv. West
313 Natwar Kumar Sarda CA. Central
314 Surya Narayan Das Adv. East
315 Vinod Rangraoji Rahate GSTP West
316 Jitendra Amrutlal Dhamecha CA. West
317 Badri Dash Adv. East
318 Manuj Sharma Adv. North
319 Krushna Chandra Sahu Adv. East
320 Vivek Patni Adv. Central
321 Satish Kumar Kushwah Adv. North
322 Braja Bandhu Sasmal Adv. East
323 Amit Kumar Adv. North
324 Vivek Agarwal CA Central
325 Juned Farukhbhai Kathiwala Adv. West
326 Bharat Shantilal Patel CA. West
327 Vishal Bindal Adv. North
328 Shiva Sharma Adv. Central
329 Debesh MIshra Adv. East
330 Rahul M. Agarwal CA. Central
331 Abdul Akhtar Khan Adv. North
332 Ashutosh Subhash Trivedi CA. West
333 Swayangbhuba Baral Adv. East
334 Nisha Vinod Oswal CA. West
335 Atul Sundrani CA. Central
336 Rajanish Satyanarayan Sharma CA. West
337 Sachin Damodhar Dhannawat CA. West
338 Avinash Raju Vysyaraju CS East
339 Dilip Shamrao Dhere STP West
340 Soorayya Raju Vysyaraju CA. East
341 Manya H. Dudani CA West
342 Varsha M. Dhameja CA. West
343 Dipti Ranjan Nanda Adv. East
344 Arun Kumar Nayak Adv. East
345 Arvind Jain CA. West
346 Pradnya Pethe CA. West
347 Vijay Kumar Agrawal CA. Central
348 Ratan Lal Goyal CA. Central
349 Sanjay Kumar Rathi CA. Central
350 Nitin Jolly Adv. Central
351 Gyan Chand Jain CA. Central
352 Girraj Prasad Gupta CA. Central
353 Sumantra Guha CA. East
354 Rabinarayan Pattanaik Adv. East
355 Shiv Kumar Bhuwania CA. East
356 Madhabi Chakraborty Adv. East
357 Somnath Roy Choudhury Adv. East
358 Amaresh Chaturbedy Adv. East
359 Dhinal A. Shah CA. West
360 Lakhan Balani CA. West
361 Shiwbhagwan Assawa CA. West
362 Darshan Sangurdekar CA. West
363 Jyothi Anchan CA. West
364 Karunakar Anchan CA. West
365 Asha A. Desai Adv. West
366 Vinesh R. Pikale CA. West
367 Vashdev Arjandas Dodeja CA. West
368 Pawan Singhal CA. West
369 Gulzar Khute GSTP West
370 Ataur Rehman Ansari GSTP West
371 Sunil Maloo CA. West
Sr. No. Name of Members Profession Zone
1 Vijay Kumar Mahto Adv. East
2 Shashikumar N. Nair Adv. West
3 Pramod Popat Adv. West
4 Sanjoy Saha Adv. East
5 Jugangsu Saha Adv. East
6 U. Susanta Patra Adv. East
7 Sanjay Kumar Mahato Adv. East
8 Naveen Kumar Sharma CA. North
9 Pramod Kumar Mishra Adv. East
10 Anilkumar V. T.P. South
11 Abhinav Bansal Adv North
12 Farhaad G. Jiwani GSTP West
13 S. R. Biju Prasad Adv. South
14 Parth Jayant Bhatt Adv. West
15 H. B. Hariprasad GSTP South
16 Anand Kumar Nema Adv. Central
17 S. Raja Adv. South
18 Akram A. Khan CA. West
19 Kartikeya Gupta CA. North
20 Ravasaheb G. Khot Adv. South
21 Somalingappa G. Solargoppa Adv. South
22 Jainendra Sitaram Yadav GSTP West
23 Shashi Bekal Adv. West
24 T. Sreenivasulu Reddy GSTP South
25 Nawab Kafeel Ahmed GSTP South
26 Vishal Agarwal Adv. East
27 Rohit Gupta CA. North
28 Keshav Rajendra Sodani GSTP Central
29 Nitesh Kumar Adv. East
30 Zafar Iqbal Adv. East
31 Prem Kumar Adv. East
Sr. No. Name of Members Profession Zone
1 Franson Michael Edakulathur T.P. South
2 Prateek Kumar Agarwal CA. East
3 Deelip Vitthaldasji Zanwar S.T.P. West
4 Vijay Kumar Rara Adv. East
5 P. Masthan T.P. South
6 Dhiraj Agarwal CA East
7 Laxman Gehlot CA. Central
8 Archit Bohra Adv. Central
9 Bhoopendar P. Maheshwari CA. West
10 Satish Dattatray Kale T.P. West
11 Krunal Bhupendra Katwala CA. West
12 Balakotaiah Puttamsetty GSTP South
13 Allu Radha Krishna Adv. South
14 D. M. Bhattad T.P. South
15 Siddharth S. Surana GSTP Central
16 Balannagari Srinivasulu GSTP South
17 Devendrakumar Govindbhai Patel Adv. West
18 Jinesh S. Vanzara CA. East
19 Bapi Roy Adv. East
20 Bhadresh Shah CA. West
21 Ankit Bharat Shah Adv. West
22 Rajesh Pd Singh Adv. East
23 Krishna Kishore Valluri Adv. South
24 Chakka Venkata Subba Rao GSTP South
25 Shahabaz Mohammedrafiq Galgali Adv. South
26 Satyajit Dey Adv. East
27 Varis V. Isani Adv. West
28 Rajeev S. Joshi Adv. West
29 Mukund L. Dhunisingani Adv. West
30 Nandisha S. CA South
31 Pranjal Sudhir Waghmare CA West
32 Rakesh Kumar Sharma Adv. Central
33 Arun Dadhich CA. Central
34 K. Balasubramanian T.P. South
35 Manideep Sarma Adv. East
36 Sowdagar Khaja Reehan UZ Zama GSTP South
37 Rabindra Kumar Panigrahi Adv. East
38 Suman Kumar Prusty Adv. East
39 Dr. Narendra Kaler Adv. Central
40 Ravi Dineshkumar Desai Adv. West
41 Manan Shah Adv. West
42 Sudhesh Bordia Adv. Central
43 Dharmnath V. Avhad Adv. West
44 Anil Adarsh Jain Adv. North
45 Pitambar Panigrahi Adv. East
46 Sunil Dattatray Choramale Adv. West
47 Balamurali D. GSTP South
48 Sanjay Jawalkar Adv. West
49 R. Vivekanandan I.T.P. South
50 Roopak Agarwal CA. North
51 Umang Talati CA. West
52 Raghavendra Rao SVS Adv. South
53 Anil Kumar Adv. North
54 Suresh S. I.T.P. South
55 Navin Dokania CA. East
56 Umag Vasantlal Panchal Adv. West
57 Pawan Goyal CA. Central
58 Preetam R. Batra CA. West
59 Ram P. Poddar Adv. Central
60 Vishal Marne GSTP West
61 Ravi Madhukar Kandekar I.T.P. South
62 Chirag Modi GSTP West
63 Mohan Choudhary GSTP East
64 Vadiraj Parmali CA South
65 Nishant Modi Adv. East
66 Fenil Paresh Shah CA West
67 S. Sankar Ganesh GSTP South
68 Kota Naresh GSTP South
69 Zulfequar Amir Husain CA. West
70 Deepak Dhanuka Adv. East
71 Pratik Rajendra Shah GSTP West
72 Kapil Sanghvi CA. West
73 Jitendra Bairagi Adv. Central
74 Kundan Kumar Adv. East
75 Adilsha GSTP South
76 Syed Ismail GSTP South
77 Manjunath Kudarimati GSTP South
78 Ankit Jain Adv. North
79 Gangu Laljani Adv. West
80 Bhagat Singh Tomar CA. North
81 Darshit Naik CA. West
82 Veeral Katkoria CA. West
83 Gaurav Grover Adv. North
84 Rajkumar Almale GSTP South
85 Prasanta Kumar Panigrahi Adv. East
86 Sujay Ajgaonkar CA. West
87 Narayanan P. Potty Adv. South
88 Karthikeyan S. GSTP South
89 Swapnil Dutt Vyas Adv. Central
90 Rakesh Dhiman Adv. North
91 A. Palani GSTP South
92 Ashish Shah CA. West
93 Nimesh B. Shah Adv. North
94 Atanu Adhikari Adv North
Sr. No. Name of Members Profession Zone
1 Ramesh Pandey CA. West
2 Sunil Mundravale GSTP West
3 Krishna Agrawal Adv. North
4 Ronak Shah CA. West
5 Kishor Kumar Mandal CA. East
6 Rajendra Bajanna Adep STP West
7 Nitin C. Bang T. P. West
8 Krishna Prasad Adv. East
9 Ruchi M. Rathod Adv. West
10 Manju Jha Adv. East
11 Ganesh Bhonde STP West
12 Jitendra S. Ghundiyal GSTP West
13 Sandeep K. Sharma GSTP North
14 Sanjeevkumar S. Konasirasgi Adv. West
15 Tarun Airi Adv. North
16 Bondada Venkata Sesha Linga Murty CA South
17 Ashish Jain CA. South
18 Rajneesh Singhvi CA. Central
19 Rajesh C. Karadkar Adv. West
20 Jai Moti Vatnani CA. West
21 Pramod Kumar Ojha Adv. East
22 Shailendra Shantilal Shah Adv. West
23 Bharat Jagraj Sancheti T.P. West
24 Neelesh Bhingarde Adv. West
25 Ujwal Shriram Bapat Adv. West
26 C. V. Ramachandran STP South
27 Kishorilal Tekriwal Adv. East
28 Pesala Murali Adv. South
29 Anupam Lahiri Cost Accountant North
30 Sarvesh Kala T.P. West
31 Sanjay Asopa Adv. Central
32 Bhaskar Kumar Adv. East
33 Ayushi Sachdeva Adv. North
34 M. Tilagavathy Raja Adv. South
35 M. Essakki Pandi CA. South
36 Chetan H. Chhadwa CA. West
37 Sarthak Suresh Saraf T.P. West
38 Sanjay H. Modi CA West
39 Ajay Kumar Das GSTP West
40 Muthyala Maheesh GSTP South
41 Naishadam Chandrashekar CA. South
42 Subramanya Sreenivas Garimella Cost Accountant South
43 Sudhir Kumar Agarwal CA. North
44 Amit Kumar Adv. North
45 Ajay Kumar Bhalotia CA. East
46 Kishore Kumar Agarwal GSTP East
47 L. Sivaraman Adv. North
48 Venkatesh Popuri Adv. South
49 Govind P. Chauhan Adv. West
50 Mukund Kumar Adv. East
51 Kirankumar Savar Adv. West
52 Narayan Sadhuram Ghodke T.P. West
53 Nitesh Shinde Adv. West
54 Nitin Sharma Adv. West
55 Aslesh Ramchandra Parannawar CA. West
56 Madhav Nilkanth Kulkarni GSTP West
57 Sachin Nilkanth Gidde GSTP West
58 Gautam Sharma CA. East
59 K. D. V. V. Subrahmanyam CA. South
60 Tanvi Sahai Adv. Central
61 D. Parthasarathi GSTP South
62 Apurva Murarka GSTP South
63 Umesh Chand Goyal CA. North
64 Subodh Chandra Sarkar Adv. East
65 Prem Nath Arora Adv. North
66 S. V. S. S. R. Subrahmanyam Sarma CA. South
67 Rajesh Condoor CA. South
68 Sumeet R. Agrawal GSTP West
69 Ankur Maheswari CA. East
70 Umeshkumar Madhukar Mali CA. West
71 Gaurav Kenkre CA. West
72 Rajesh Kumar Agrawal Adv. East
73 Ashwin Varanashi CA. South
74 M. N. Venkatesh Murthy Adv. South
75 Kailash Chandra Sharma Adv. East
76 Subash Ranjan Acharya Adv. East
77 Nirmal Kumar Panda Adv. East
78 Nitin Kumar Pasari Adv. East
79 Pankaj Kumar Jain Adv. Central
80 Sunandita Agarwala GSTP East
81 Rajat Subhra Agarwala I.T.P. East
82 Amar Kumar CS North
83 Vinod Laxman Tikmani CA. West
84 Palak Vinod Tikmani CA. West
85 Meghana Belawadi CA. South
86 Gopalaswamy Suresh GSTP South
87 Narender K. Kalra CA. West
88 Ramesh Guddeti Adv. South
89 Aditya Seema Pradeep CA. West
90 Jinal Girish Rathi Adv. West
91 Parag Eknath Ghag Adv. West
92 Deepak Chandrasen Raje CA. West
93 Anuj Kumar CS North
94 Rohit Vaswani CA North
95 Radharaman Karmakar Adv. East

On behalf of all the members of Ranka family, we thank you sincerely from the bottom of our hearts for your well wishes, blessings and condolences. We are truly overwhelmed with the support we have received, giving us comfort and peace through this difficult time.

Our beloved and most respected Dr. N. M. Ranka Sb. served society in an utmost dedicated, devoted and honest manner. Reflecting upon his life, we recognize that his philosophy was one that revolved primarily around contribution to society, as he believed that it was his duty to give back to the community that had given so much to him. He shaped the lives of countless youth, students and extended his support to young lawyers and Chartered Accountants; imbibing values of integrity, authenticity and simplicity. Serving the needy and uplifting the downtrodden was a crucial part of his legacy.

Although a great void has been created with his passing, we assure you that we, his future generations, will carry on his legacy. We will miss him dearly, but aspire to honour him by continuing his work. The organization of several Moot Courts, scholarships, educational programs alongside the establishment of statues of Mahatma Gandhi (Father of the Nation) will continue with the same zeal and enthusiasm.

Lets pray the departed soul rest in eternal peace, solace and may Lord give him appropriate place in his laps. We appreciate your warmth and continuous blessing.

Thank you. With Regards, (]. K. Ranka)

Respectful Homage to Dr. N. M. Ranka, Sr. Advocate & President, AIFTP (2000-02)

I am extremely sorry to learn about the sad demise of Shri N. M. Ranka Saheb. My heartfelt condolences to the entire family. May the departed soul rest in peace.

Justice R. M. Lodha, Former Chief Justice of India

Please accept our deepest condolences on the sad demise of your father. Though my association with him was extremely short yet it was very meaningful. His gentlemanly behaviour will always remain etched in my mind. I had the privilege of hearing him in a tax matter at Jodhpur immediately after taking oath. Having been told that he was a leading tax practitioner, I was obviously worried having practically no sufficient experience in tax matters. I distinctly remember how courteous he was to ensure that I was at ease. A very bold and appreciative succession taken by the family in furtherance of a person duly deserving for his memory to live on. May god give you and your family the courage to bear this irreparable loss.

Justice Naveen Sinha, Judge, Supreme Court of India

Dear Brother : My heartfelt condolences to all of you on this bereavement a great Jurist, an Advocate of eminence is no more with us. May his soul rest in peace.

Justice Deepak Verma, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India

I am very sorry to hear about the passing away of your beloved father. A colossal figure and an eminent member of the Bar, his loss is shared by all of us and members of the Bar.

Please accept heartfelt condolences on behalf of my colleagues and on my behalf. We pray that the almighty give you and members of your family the strength to bear this irreparable loss.

Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Chief Justice, Rajasthan High Court

Heartfelt Condolences. May his noble pious and simple soul rest in eternal peace. He was crusader of Moot Courts and installing Gandhi statues in courts all over the country. He was Palakhivala of Rajasthan. A great loss to our fraternity.

Justice N. K. Jain, Former Chief Justice, Karnataka High Court and Madras High Court.

My heartfelt condolences on the loss of the great stalwart and legend in the legal world Shri N. M. Ranka Saheb.

Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, Judge, Rajasthan High Court

We are deeply grieved to know about the sad demise of your beloved father Shri N. M. Ranka saheb. Our heartfelt condolences. May the departed soul rest in eternal peace.

Justice Sangeet Lodha, Judge, Rajasthan High Court

Heartfelt Condolences on sudden and sad demise of Uncle Ranka Saheb. Ranka Saheb a Sr. Advocate was full of grace and dignity. He maintained highest traditions of legal profession and followed standards of ethics. An un-parallelled expert in Taxation laws. My sincere homage to the departed soul. I pray Almighty to grant eternal peace to noble soul and bestow courage and fortitude to you and all the members of Ranka family. Om Shanti.

Justice P. K. Lohra, Judge, Rajasthan High Court

Deeply saddened to learn. He was a leading lawyer in tax law. Heartfelt condolences to bereaved, family and more particularly brother Justice J. K. Ranka Sb. Pray god that the departed pious soul rest in peace.

Justice Sandeep Mehta, Judge, Rajasthan High Court

Very sorry to learn about the demise of your revered father Shriyut N. M. Ranka sahib, a Legend of Tax Bar of India. His contribution to legal fraternity can never be forgotten… We deeply condole the Demise & pray God to confer eternal peace to the departed noble soul… may all around him, specially the Family get enough courage to tide over the enormous loss… We will miss his smiling face and very soft demeanour forever…..

Vineet Kothari, Judge, Madras High Court

Deeply shocked to know that doyen of the Bar, an ardent scholar, great philanthropist, genuine Gandhivadi and above all a Gentleman to the core is no more.

My heartfelt condolences to Mrs. Ranka, Justice J. K. Ranka & all family members. May God bestow eternal peace to noble soul.

Justice V. S. Dave, Former Judge, Rajasthan High Court

Matter of sorrow to know the sad demise of Shri N. M. Ranka ji heartfelt condolences. I pray to almighty God to rest the departed soul in peace & give enough strength to all family members to bear this loss.

Justice L. C. Bhadoo, Former Judge, Chhattisgarh High Court

Heartfelt condolences to brother Justice Ranka and his family. May God grant eternal peace to departed soul.

Justice J. R. Goyal, Former Judge, Rajasthan High Court

Saddened to learn. He was a leading lawyer in tax law. Heartfelt condolence to bereaved family. Pray god departed pious sole rest in peace.

Justice N. N. Mathur, Former Judge, Rajasthan High Court

My heartfelt condolence to Justice Ranka and bereaved family on sad demise of legal doyen Shree N. M. Ranka Saheb, pioneer in tax consultancy. May Almighty bestow him with eternal peace and utter salvation.

Justice Vijay Kumar Vyas, Former Judge, Rajasthan High Court

Our deepest condolences. We pray God for eternal peace to the departed noble soul. May God give strength to the bereaved family to bear the loss. Namo Arihantanam

Justice Tated and family, Mumbai

Shree Ranka ji had always considered his primary duty and responsibility to cultivate fairness in his clients. He would always be fair in all his renditions with his clients. Every statement advanced before a Bench would be factually correct. He would always explain the facts to the bench and would carry the bench to appreciative level. Bench will shed prejudices on hearing his statements. He always made clear efforts to explain the facts as it happened and thus leaving no doubt therein. He would explain each and every doubt that Bench may raise up in a pleasing constant tone and emotions were never there. He believed and practiced that roots make the tree. My wife Jayanthi, daughter Balambika and son Jairam join me in expressing our respects to the great soul.

A. Kalyanasundharam, Former Senior Vice President, ITAT

Very sad to hear about great Ranka Ji. He was a very pious soul. Pray to God that his soul rests in peace. God will give you and your family strength to bear this great loss.

Hari Om Maratha, Ex-Member, ITAT

Shocked to know about this sad news. I am indeed nostalgic about the time during 1988 to 1990 when I was Sr. DR at the ITAT Jaipur and almost daily I had to argue case with Shri Ranka as an adversary. During those days he was at the pinnacle of his professional career and he left an indelible impression as a bold and efficient advocate who commanded respect of the Bench. You may be aware that my association with Respected Ranka Saheb started from 1975 when I came to Jaipur as ITO CC and again as Sr. DR and I have learnt a lot from him about the art and science of effectively presenting a case before the Bench. I always held him in high regards. His passing away is a tremendous loss for the family and l send my heartfelt condolences. Thanks for updating. He was undisputedly a great and noble person and has set an example to be emulated by all.

K. K. Boliya, Former Member, ITAT

On 31st May, 2019 I was shocked to learn about the sudden departure of my near and dear Rankaji to Heavenly Abode.

Shri N. M. Ranka, was personification of truth, non-violence, non-possessiveness, compassion and broad mindedness.

He was the follower of Gandhian Principles in his day-to-day life. He installed statues of the Father of the nation, in the courtyards of several High Courts in the Country, which continue to inspire younger generation for all time to come.

He regularly encouraged young law students by organising annual Ranka National Moot Court Competitions for Five Year Law Course students. He was actively associated with several Charitable Trusts as well as social organisations.

My relation with him date back to 1981 when as a Secretary General of AIFTP, I visited Jaipur and successfully organised the convention with his active help. Since then we became so close to each other that we used to exchange our views on all problems faced in life. I have lost a personal elder brother and a great irreparable loss to AIFTP. The void so created cannot be filled up. Destiny has suddenly snatched away such a great gentle human being.

I am sure his advice, views and learning will continue to guide all of us in future.

I PRAY LORD MAHAVIR TO BESTOW ETERNAL PEACE TO THE GREAT DEPARTED SOUL BY ABSORBING IT TO THE SOUL OF PARMATMA SO AS TO AVOID ANY REBIRTH ON THIS PLANET.

I had the privilege of my paying personal homage by attending the condolence meeting on 2nd June, 2019 at Jaipur along with my friend Dr. K. Shivaram and Mrs. Nikita Badheka.

P. C. Joshi, Past President, AIFTP

I was saddened to know that Dr. N. M. Ranka Saheb, Sr. Advocate has gone to his Heavenly Abode on 30th May, 2019. He was a very learned, sober & simple man and having in-depth knowledge particularly of tax laws. He spread the message of Federation – “Ethics, Education & Excellence” all over India. He will always be remembered for his services rendered to the Federation as a Lifetime Member of the Federation. He was a man who will be remembered by the tax fraternity for the years together because of his qualities of firm determination, humbleness and promoting young generation in the field of law.

At the time when he was National President of AIFTP, I worked as Secretary General of the Federation with him for the term 2000-2002 and became more aware of his activities of the All India Federation of Tax Practitioners. He selflessly promoted the Federation and served the tax fraternity. The Federation has lost a sincere, devoted, dedicated, determined, courteous member, who promoted and spread the Federation all over the country. The Federation, AIFTP shall never forget him and his name would be stamped in golden words in the history of the AIFTP for his dynamic leadership and spreading the light of AIFTP. He also introduced Awards in the Federation from Ranka Charitable Trust which are continuing till now. He will be remembered for organizing Moot Court Competitions with Law Colleges & Universities for young upcoming law students for making their future better.

In this critical hour of grief, I express my heart-felt condolences and pray to the Almighty to give peace to the departed soul and strength to the members of the bereaved family. We hope that his son Justice J. K. Ranka and other family members will follow the path paved by him, support the activities of the Federation and glorify his name.

M. L. Patodi, Past President, AIFTP

Dr. N. M. Ranka the scion of the All India Federation of Tax Practitioners, was the guiding force behind the functioning of the AIFTP.

He was like an elder brother to me and whenever I used to call him for any guidance, he was always willing to help and support

He has been an Advocate par excellence in the matters of Direct Taxes and he was well respected in the fraternity and also among the judges, a very learned and knowledgeable person who had authored books on Direct Taxes and got various articles published on various topics.

He was also a philanthropist, who was spiritually inclined and advocated the path of dharma and peaceful non violent living. He not only encouraged the satvik way of life and also practiced what he preached.

He was a caring husband and an affectionate father who brought up his children with dedication and discipline.

I bow down to Late Dr. N. M. Rankaji and pray to God that his soul rest in peace. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti

J. D. Nankani, Past President, AIFTP

The unprecedented demise of Sr. Advocate of Rajasthan High Court from Jaipur Dr. N. M. Ranka is an unrecoverable blow to the members of AIFTP Family and at the same time it’s a loss of a legend to the legal fraternity. He was a great and glorious leader of national repute who commandeered great respect as well earned inexpressible amount of love and affection from one and all. As I used to confide with some of my close friends in him have been seeing the real virtues and qualities of Gandhi especially in times of the growth and March of the Federation. He was always outspoken on every issue with no compromise. He stood firm for his values. A great loss that cannot be compensated. I convey my deepest heartfelt condolences to the members of the bereaved family. Apart from the family I am also individually a bereaved friend.

Dr. M. V. K. Moorthy, Past President, AIFTP

A Tribute to the pillar of Federation Dr. N. M. Ranka Ji My introduction with Dr. Ranka Ji was on the platform of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners. I found a very distinct personality in him, very calm and cool but clear in his thoughts. His speech was so influensive that he used to fascinate others.

With the passage of time, I saw in him the image of “True Gandhian”. He was a follower of Gandhi Ji by “cevemee, Je®evee Deewj keÀce&Cee” (by soul, to mind and by deeds). He always used to say that follow the ideals of Gandhi Ji and dedicate yourself towards the Federation, the Society and ultimately the Nation. He was vegetarian and non-alcoholic and always pressed others to be the same.

His contribution to AIFTP is commendable, it was a difficult task to bring the Advocates, CAs and Tax Professionals on one platform, to co-ordinate and to work for a common cause.

He used to give importance to unity of thoughts, unity of understanding and unity of action to achieve the goals with due regards to the duties. He used to preach that you will be tested by your deeds and therefore,

lead a life full of duties.

His sudden demise has created a vacuum in the Federation. Not only his family has been shocked but the Federation has also become orphan.

Today Ranka Ji is not amidst us but his ideals, his values, his principles are with us which will guide to achieve the goals and to bring the Federation to greater heights of his dreams.

May the departed soul rest in peace. We pray Almighty to give strength to us, to the Federation and to the members of his family to bear this irreparable loss.

Prem Lata Bansal, Past President, AIFTP

Our beloved fatherly figure and strongest pillar of AIFTP in India particularly in Rajasthan has passed away leaving all of us in grief.

It is a great loss to the fraternity, AIFTP and personally to me. I was fortunate to receive his love and affection and guidance, he was instrumental in guiding me to establish M.P. Tax Consultants Association and organising first ever all India Tax Conference at Jabalpur in the year 1995.

Dr. Rankaji had been a great source of inspiration for all of us in each and every aspect of profession and application of low. He had been regularly guiding the fraternity by his articles in various journals, his own publications and deliberation during the conferences as Chairman on papers of particular aspects of the Act

It is difficult to fill the vacuum created due to passing away of Ranka Saheb. The Jabalpur Tax Bar Association had also organised a condolence meeting at Jabalpur to express condolence of Jabalpur Tax Bar.

I pray almighty God to grant eternal peace to the departed soul and strength to the family and all of us to bear the irreparable loss.

Ganesh Purohit, Past President, AIFTP

I had the privilege of interacting on several occasions with Dr. N. M. Ranka in Mumbai and Jaipur when one of us visited the normal place of residence of the other. We had extremely fruitful discussions on subjects not only of professional but general interest. In addition, we often bumped into each other on various professional occasions at different places.

He was always calm, unruffled and conscientious with a creative approach for tackling legal and other problems arising in life. He had a strong sense of legal ethics and of ethics in everyday living. He took very keen interest in professional matters. I am personally aware of the quickness and regularity with which he would react most appropriately to articles and issues which came to his notice. Despite his very busy professional practice, he found time to write several articles and authored many educative books. He was a constant and easily approachable guide and mentor to several individuals and various associations and institutions which he nurtured with great success.

He has left a rich, admirable and enviable legacy for all of us to pursue.

Soli E. Dastur, Sr. Advocate, Mumbai

The sad demise of Dr. N. M. Ranka is a great blow to All India Federation of Tax Practitioners. He was the heart and soul of the institution and his close association with the institute will be long remembered. He was at the fore front of all the activities of the institute and wrote several articles in the institute journal which showed his great scholastic ability and love for the subject. It is difficult to imagine our refresher courses without his presence and he will be missed by each and everyone in the Federation. The legal profession is poorer by his untimely departure.

Dr. Y. P. Trivedi, Sr. Advocate & Former Member of Parliament (Rajya Sabha)

Dr. N. M. Ranka, a Senior Advocate and Past President of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners, has left for his heavenly abode on 30th May, 2019. He was a practicing lawyer for the last over six decades. He was a friend, philosopher and guide for all professionals associated with AIFTP, Rajasthan Tax Consultants

Association and other similar bodies. He was recognized as “AIFTP Man of the Millennium”. He was an inspiration to all young and senior professionals. He has contributed more than 300 Articles and Papers in various Seminars, Conferences, Residential courses and Journals. His Articles on various subjects were exhaustive and thought provoking. There is no Tax Seminar or conference organized by AIFTP in which he was not present. He enlightened the participants of all such Seminars and Conferences in his capacity as either Chairman. Paper Writer or Trustee of the Brains’ Trust. He had traveled extensively all over the globe and participated in various conferences world over.

Besides his professional career as a Senior Advocate, he was a Philanthropist. As Chairman of Ranka Public Charitable Trust, he sponsored Ranka Best Tax Seminar Trophy and Awards as well as Ranka Best Management Student Trophy and Award. He was associated with various Charitable Trusts such as Jaipur Rural Health and Development Trust, Shri Amar Jain Medical Relief Society, Social Security Foundation, Ritu Sharda Mandir Foundation and other Public Trusts as a Trustee or Chairman. He was awarded ‘SAMAJ GAURAV” for taking active interest in the unity of Jains.

We all professional brothers and Sisters pay our respectful homage to this stalwart in our profession. We shall always feel his absence. We all pray that this noble soul may rest in peace.

CA. P. N. Shah, Past President, ICAI

Dr. N. M. Ranka not only initiated me to join legal practice and All India Federation of Tax Practitioners after my retirement in 1999, but also sort to inculcate in me the values of a model professional.

Father is God’s precious gift and it is very very painful to lose it. But, I have to go before the will of almighty.

Shri S. R. Wadhwa, Former Chairman, Income Tax Settlement Commission

Please accept my sincere condolences at the passing away of N. M. Ranka sahib. He was a towering personality who left his indelible imprint both in the profession and in community. For the family is a grief which, perhaps, time alone may reduce, but a void that would be difficult to fill. May his soul Rest in Peace and he continue to guide you all. I am out of Jaipur and will be back only in mid-June. So please excuse my not being there to personally to be with you. Regards.

Satish Mehta, Indian Foreign Service Former Ambassador

With deep sense of grief, I on behalf of School Law, MUJ, convey my heartfelt condolences on the said demise of your beloved father, Advocate Shri N. M. Ranka Saheb (as we fondly called) was a hardcore Gandhian and very kind hearted person. He was a renowned advocate, true professional, visionary leader and famous philanthropist.

His departure is a great loss personally for me as I have been associated with him for a decade or so and with his initiatives & vision we could jointly organize a number of moot courts / events. He will be remembered for several decades for his noble deeds.

I pray the Almighty for his soul to rest in eternal peace and grant strength and courage to you and the bereaved family to bear this irreparable loss.

In bereavement.

Dr. Mridul Srivastava, Dean Faculty of Arts & Law, Manipal University, Jaipur

Late Shri Ranka sahib was not only a notable jurist, but was also a large hearted philanthropic personality. His association with various organizations like Bar Association, Amar Jain Medical Relief Society, S. S. Jain Subodh Samiti, etc. will always be remembered.

The family of Maharaja Sawai Man Singh Vidyalaya pray that almighty God grant peace to the noble soul.

Please accept our deepest condolence & prayers.

Rani Vidya Devi, Chairperson & Vikramaditya, Secretary, Maharaja Sawai Man Singh Vidyalaya

We pray the Almighty to give peace to the departed soul and enough strength to the bereaved family to bear this irreparable loss.

May His Soul Rest in Peace. Om Shanti, Shanti, Shanti.

S. L. Agrawal, Registrar, JECRC University, Jaipur

Late Shri N. M. Ranka Ji was like a fatherly figure for our association and had been guiding us since many years. All the members of Direct Tax Professional Association are saddened by this loss, and will miss his words of wisdom and inspiration.

We know first hand how profound a loss it is when you realize that he will no longer be there for all the events in your life. We can tell you though that the very best way to mark his passing is by filling your mind with all of the wonderful memories you have of happier times.

CA. Vikash Parakh, President, Direct Taxes Professionals’ Association

The Trustees of the Rajasthan Education Trust resolve to express their heart-felt condolences on sad and sudden demise of Shri N. M. Ranka S/o Late Shri Moti Lal Ji Ranka Sr. Advocate, Rajasthan, Tax consultant and a philanthropist, on 30-05-2019 who was associated with this Trust since its creation. His contribution to the growth of the Trust shall always be remembered.

Justice (Retd.) V. S. Dave, Trustee, Rajasthan Education Trust

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq, Judge, Rajasthan High Court

My Esteemed Colleagues on the Bench

Shri Mahendra Singh Singhvi, Advocate, Rajasthan

Shri Chiranji Lal Saini,

Chairman, Bar Council of Rajasthan

Shri Anil Upman,

President, Rajasthan High Court Bar Association, Jaipur

Shri Narpat Singh Tanwar,

General Secretary, Jaipur Bar Association, Jaipur

Learned Senior Advocates, Learned Members of the Bar, Officers of the Registry &

Mr. Justice J. K. Ranka, former Judge of this Court, and other Members of the bereaved family.

With a profound sense of grief, we have assembled here to mourn the sad demise of Dr. N. M. Ranka, learned Senior Advocate who left for heavenly abode on 30th May, 2019, leaving all of us in shock and pain.

Dr. Ranka was born at Beawar on 27th September, 1933. He did his Graduation in Commerce in 1953 and obtained degree in Law in 1955. He joined the Profession in 1953 and was enrolled as a Pleader in 1956 and thereafter as an Advocate in 1962. He was having specialization in the field of tax laws and was an expert of national repute. He is one of the eminent names in the domain of tax consultancy. By utilizing the vast knowledge of this field, he remained involved in propounding reliable services. He was also engaged in a lot of philanthropic activities. During his lifetime participated in more than 750 Tax Conferences, Seminars or Workshops organized in different parts of India. He has contributed more than 500 articles and papers, to various National Tax Journals. He was felicitated by a large number of Tax and other Associations. All India Federation of Tax Practitioners has honoured him as “AIFTP Man of the Millennium” and “Jain Sewa Ratna” by Shree Jain Sewa Sangh, Mumbai. On 5-1-2019 Dr. Ranka was conferred with the Degree of ‘Doctor of Philosophy’ by Honoris Causa in recognition of his eminence and contributions in Legal Practices and Public Life by JECRC University, Jaipur.

Dr. N. M. Ranka was earlier President of Rajasthan Tax Consultants’ Association, and later he became its patron. He was President of the Jaipur Tax Consultants’ Association. He was also President of Mansarovar Advocates Club Trust, Chairman of Ranka Public Charitable Trust and Trustee of a large number of Charitable Trusts and Societies in educational and medical field. He was Secretary and also Vice-President of Amar Jain Medical Relief Society for over 35 years and was instrumental in setting up a Medical Hospital with all facilities. He was Member of Supreme Court Bar Association, Bar Association of India, All Gujarat Federation of Tax Consultants and many more professional associations. He was also life member of Indian Law Institute. He was conferred honourary membership of Direct Taxes Professionals’ Association, Kolkata and Rotary Club of Beawar. He believed in Gandhian philosophy and, through his trust, installed 39 marble statues of Father of the Nation Mahatma Gandhi including one in the premises of this Court. He had been organizing ‘Ranka National Moot Court Competitions’ since 2011. All India Federation of Tax Practitioners had instituted ‘Ranka Awards’ in his name. He also founded ‘Ritu Sharda Mandir Foundation’ for orphans and presented more than 3,100 precious law books to Rajasthan University, Direct Tax Professional Association, Kolkata & others.

Hearing Dr. N. M. Ranka was a matter of pleasure. He would place his case before the Court coolly but firmly. He never raised his voice but always argued his cases with smile and softness. He was very simple, yet sophisticated and gentle in his arguments. He argued the cases in a simple and understandable way. While arguing a matter, he was never in hurry. He would present a most difficult case at great ease. He had a pleasing personality. Out side the court also, he would always meet you with a smile on his face.

Dr. N. M. Ranka was not only soft spoken, humble and very courteous to all but was very friendly and an enthusiastic personality. Hardly he would step in the Court without full and complete study of the facts. He practiced with a sense of dignity and pride, and dispensed all the best of his own art. He was possessing sharp legal acumen and was very hardworking personality and fully dedicated to his professional commitments. Recognizing his talent, the High Court designated him as Senior Advocate in 1990. Though he was ailing for last about one month but he never lost the touch and thread till last of his work. He set standards of exemplary character and conduct to be emulated by young members of the Bar.

The profession has been rendered poor, indeed, by his sad and sudden departure. We have lost an advocate of unique qualities.

Sad demise of Dr. N. M. Ranka has resulted in an irretrievable loss not only to his family but to the fraternity as a whole. He is survived by his wife, three daughters and a son Justice

J. K. Ranka, former Judge of this Court. His grandsons Shri Siddharth Ranka and Shri Sambhav Ranka are continuing the law tradition in the Ranka family.

The great personality, who by his accomplishments has enhanced the esteem and majesty of the institution, whose heartrending departure, we have assembled here to mourn, indeed has by his character, conduct and deeds, set for us landmarks to be achieved.

On behalf of my colleagues and on my own behalf, I share the sentiments expressed and the tributes paid to the departed soul by learned representatives of the Bar and offer our heartfelt condolences to the members of the bereaved family. I pray the Almighty to provide strength and courage to the bereaved family to bear the loss and grant eternal peace to the departed soul.

************

May I now request you all to pay homage to the departed soul by standing in silence for two minutes.

*************

As a mark of respect, the Court shall not sit for rest of the day.

*************

A copy of the resolution be forwarded to the bereaved family.

*************

  1. Words and phrases – Word ‘Accident’ under terms of insurance policy – Does not include death due to encephalitis malaria caused by mosquito bite

    At one end of the spectrum is the theory that an accident postulates a mishap or an untoward happening, something which is unexpected and unforeseen. This understanding of what is an accident indicates that something which arises in the natural course of things is not an accident. This is the basis for holding that a disease may not fall for classification as an accident, when it is caused by a bodily infirmity or a condition. A person who suffers from flu or a viral fever cannot say that it is an accident. Of course, there is an element of chance or probability in contracting any illness. Even when viral disease has proliferated in an area, every individual may not suffer from it. Getting a bout of flu or a viral illness may be a matter of chance. But a person who gets the flu cannot be described as having suffered an accident: the flu was transmitted in the natural course of things. To be bitten by a mosquito and be imbued with a malarial parasite does involve an element of chance. But the disease which is caused as a result of the insect bite in the natural course of events cannot be regarded as an accident. Particularly, when the disease is caused in an area which is malaria prone. On the other hand, there may well be instances where a bodily condition from which an individual suffers may be the direct consequence of an accident. A motor car accident may, for instance, result in bodily injuries, the consequence of which is death or disability which may fall within the cover of a policy of accident insurance. Hence, it has been postulated that where a disease is caused or transmitted in the natural course of events, it would not be covered by the definition of an accident. However, in a given case or circumstance, the affliction or bodily condition may be regarded as an accident where its cause or course of transmission is unexpected and unforeseen. The death of the insured in the present case was caused by encephalitis malaria. The claim under the policy is founded on the hypothesis that there is an element of uncertainty about whether or when a person would be the victim of a mosquito bite which is a carrier of a vector borne disease. In light of these statistics, the illness of encephalitis malaria through a mosquito bite cannot be considered as an accident. It was neither unexpected nor unforeseen. It was not a peril insured against in the policy of accident insurance. The interpretation placed on the terms of the insurance policy was manifestly incorrect and that the impugned order of the National Commission is unsustainable.

    The Branch Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd v. Smt. Mousumi Bhattacharjee & Ors, AIR 2019 Supreme Court 1570.

  2. Dishonour of Cheque – Cheques issued in pursuance of agreement to sell – constitutes a legally enforceable debt – Complaint cannot be quashed: Negotiable Instruments Act, S. 138

    In present case, cheques were issued under and in pursuance of the agreement to sell. Though it is well settled that an agreement to sell does not create any interest in immovable property, it nonetheless constitutes a legally enforceable contract between the parties to it. A payment which is made in pursuance of such an agreement is hence a payment made in pursuance of a duly enforceable debt or liability for the purposes of Section 138. The question as to whether there was a dispute as contemplated in clause 4 of the agreement to sell which obviated the obligation of the purchaser to honour the cheque which was furnished in pursuance of the agreement to sell to the vendor, cannot be the subject matter of a proceeding u/s. 482 and is a matter to be determined on the basis of the evidence which may be adduced at the trial. The finding of the High Court that the cheques were not issued for creating any liability or debt, but ‘only’ for the payment of balance consideration and that in consequence, there was no legally enforceable debt or other liability cannot be acceptable. Hence, order of the High Court quashing complaint u/s. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act holding that accused did not owe any money to complainant was erroneous and unsustainable.

    Ripudaman Singh v. Balkrishna, AIR 2019 Supreme Court 1625.

  3. Deficiency in service – Delay in handling–over possession of flat Refund of amount – Consumer Protection Act, Ss. 2(1)(g), (r)

    Purchaser entered into an agreement with builder for purchase of a flat. Builder obtained Occupancy Certificate after delay of more than 2 years. One side clauses in agreement constitute unfair trade practice and cannot bind purchaser. Purchaser justified in terminating agreement and cannot be compelled to accept possession. Purchaser entitled to refund of entire amount deposited by him with interest @ 10.7% p.a.

    Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Govindan Raghavan, AIR 2019 Supreme Court 1779.

  4. Probate of will – Succession Act, 1925, S.222 – Evidence Act 1872, S.68

    Executors, son and daughter-in-law of testator. Will written by testator in his own handwriting. At time of execution of will, he was in good physical health and sound state of mind without any undue influence or coercion. No objection from near relatives. Signature of all attesting witnesses recognized and exhibited by one living witness. Executors entitled to grant of probate of Will.

    In Re: In the Goods of Dhirendra Mohan Das AIR 2019 Patna 94.

  5. Secondary evidence – Photostat copy of pro-note produced as originals not Traceable – Evidence Act 1872, S.65 Comparison of signatures – Evidence Act 1872, S. 73

    Plaintiff stating that he had handed over original pro-note and receipt to his counsel but those were not found in his custody. Attesting witness stating that pro-note was attested on 6-5-2004, had seen original pro- note. Report regarding loss of original lodged on 21-3-2003. Story put forward by plaintiff that originals had lost from custody of his counsel, falsified. Failure of plaintiff to prove loss of original pro-note and receipt. Execution and attestation of same could not be read into evidence.

    Comparison of signatures from Photostat copy with standard signatures is impermissible.

    Gurdial Singh v. Dalveer Kaur AIR 2019 Punjab and Haryana 66.

  6. Word “trespass” – Means unlawful interference with one’s person, property or rights

    A “trespass” is an unlawful interference with one’s person, property or rights. With reference to property, it is a wrongful invasion of another’s possession. If a person enters on the land of another under an authority given him by law, and while there, abuses the authority by an act which amounts to a trespass, he becomes a trespasser ab initio, and may be sued as if his original entry were unlawful. Instances of an entry under the authority of the law are the entry of a customer into a common inn, of a reversioner to see if waste has been done, or of a commoner to see his cattle.

    Indira v Arulmighu Apparswami Kovil and another AIR 2019 (NOC) 175(MAD).

  7. Benami transaction – Burden lies on defendant to prove his claim – Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act 1988, S.3 :

Plaintiff and defendant purchased parts of suit property from its co-owners, husband and wife respectively – Plea of defendant that as property was originally purchased by parents of wife as stridhan, husband is only trustee as per Dowry Prohibition Act, therefore, transaction between plaintiff and husband is prohibited under S.3 of Benami Transactions Act. No evidence by defendant to prove that property was purchased by parents of wife. Burden lies on defendant to prove his claim of benami transaction and not no plaintiff to disprove same – Plaintiff entitled to partition and separate possession.

Syriapushpam v. Sulochana. AIR 2019 Madras 143.

  1. S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Incentives by way of excise duty refund and sales tax – Encourage setting up of new industrial unit in area which was devastated by earthquake – Capital receipts not exigible to tax

    Relying on the decision of Special Bench in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. (2004) 88 ITD 273 (SB) (Mum) (Trib), and the decision of co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of assessee’s group concern, Welspun Steel Ltd. (ITA No. 7630/M/211 dated 18th December, 2015), Tribunal held that incentives by way of excise duty refund and sales tax incentives given to assessee to encourage setting up of new industrial unit in area which was devastated by earthquake were capital receipts not exigible to tax. (AYs. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12)

    Welspun India Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2019) 69 ITR 617 (Mum)(Trib.)

  2. S. 4 : Charge of income- tax – Capital or revenue – Compensation received as a termination of business activity is held to be capital receipt [S.28(i)]

    Dismissing the appeal of the revenue, the Tribunal held that compensation received as a termination of business activity is held to be capital receipt. (AY. 2011-12)

    DCIT v. Rishabh Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. (2019) 176 ITD 150 (Raipur) (Trib.)

  3. S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Association of persons – Mutuality – Assessee has not claimed the benefit of mutuality – AO can- not suo motu assessed the part of income as mutuality [S.2 (31)(v)]

    The Tribunal held that the assessee AOP had carried on its activities on commercial basis without making any distinction between members or non-members and had never claimed any benefit under mutuality. Accordingly the AO was unjustified in treating assessee as mutual entity suo motu and treating the part of receipt as mutuality. (AY. 2008-09 to 2015-16)

    Film Nagar Cultural Center v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 712 (Hyd) (Trib.)

  4. S. 10(37) : Capital gains – Agricultural land – Acquired by Government – Enhanced compensation including interest received would be eligible for exemption [S 45, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, S.28]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that, where the Agricultural land is acquired by Government, enhanced compensation including interest received by the assessee is exempt from the tax. Accordingly TDS amount that was deducted on account of enhanced compensation was to be refunded. (AY. 2011-12)

    Baldev Singh v. ITO (2019) 176 ITD 1 (Delhi) (Trib.)

  5. S.12AA : Registration – Trust or institution – Power of the CIT is to register or refuse to register the Trust but cannot qualify the Trust as ‘general public utility trust’ – Tribunal directed the trust to be registered under section 12AA of the Act without any qualification [S. 2(15), 11, 12, 13]

    The CIT(E) has passed an order under section 12AA of the Act directing the registration of the trust as ‘general public utility trust’. It was argued that CIT(E) was supposed to register the trust or refuse to register the trust but there was no necessity to qualify it as ‘general public utility trust’. The taxpayer argued that the exemption under sections 11, 12 and 13 would be available only after the AO was satisfied with the genuineness of the activities carried out. The AO would every year examine whether the activities of assessee fell within the ambit of section 2(15) or not. Thereby it was submitted that order of CIT(E) should be modified and trust should be registered without any qualification. The Tribunal held that provisions of section 12AA of the Act provided that if the CIT(E) is satisfied with the object of the trust and genuineness of the activities, an order is needed to be passed in writing accepting or rejecting the trust. Thus the power of the CIT is to register or refuse to register the Trust but cannot qualify the Trust as ‘general public utility trust’. The Tribunal held that it is the AO who has to examine every year the activities of the Trust whether they fall within the clauses of charitable activities. Thereby the Tribunal directed the trust to be registered under section 12AA of the Act without any qualification. Thus the appeal of taxpayer was allowed.

    Tata Community Initiatives Trust v. CIT(E) (2019) 69 ITR 96 (SN) (Delhi) (Trib.)

  6. S. 12AA : Registration – Trust or institution – CIT(A) cannot question registration granted by CIT (E) [S. 251]

    Assessee was a Resident Welfare Association enjoying registration u/s. 12AA of the Act. The assessee being a trust registered under Section 12AA of the Act has claimed the entire income receipt as exempt u/s. 11 of the Act. The AO and CIT(A) has held that assessee has wrongly claimed registration u/s. 12AA of the Act and taxed the entire income receipt of the appellant. The Tribunal held that the CIT(E) is authorized to decide the allowability of registration u/s. 12AA of the Act and the CIT(A) has no authority to question the authority of CIT(E.) for granting registration u/s. 12AA of the Act.

    Srishti Resident Welfare Association v. ACIT (2019) 69 ITR 9 (SN)(Delhi)(Trib.)

  7. S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – Stock-in-trade – Dividend received incidentally – No disallowance can be made [R.8D]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that even though dominant purpose of acquiring shares is not relevant for purpose of invoking provisions under section 14A, yet shares held as stock-in-trade stand on a different pedestal in relation to shares that were acquired with an intention to acquire and retain controlling interest in investee company. Accordingly where assessee purchased shares as stock-in-trade for purpose of trading, mere fact that assessee incidentally received dividend on those shares as declared by investee company, no disallowance can be made. Ratio in Maxopp Investment Ltd v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC). (AY.2008-09)

    Nice Bombay Transport (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (OSD) (2019) 175 ITD 684 (Delhi) (Trib.)

  8. S. 14A : Disallowance of expenditure – Exempt income – No exempt income during assessment year – No disallowance can be made [R.8D]

    Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that there was no exempt income earned by assessee during assessment year hence no disallowances can be made. (AY. 2014-15).

    ACIT v. Janak Global Resources (P.) Ltd. (2019) 175 ITD 365 (Chd.) (Trib.)

  9. S. 36(1)(vii) : Bad debt – Deposits written off for premises taken on lease for business purposes was allowable as a deduction [S.36(2)]

    On appeal by the Department, the Tribunal observed that the premises for which the security deposits were given were used for business purposes and the Ld. AO, in the alternative, had opined the said expenditure to be capital in nature which demonstrated that, the genuineness of the same was not under doubt by the AO. Accordingly, it was held that as the expenditure did not bring into existence any new asset or benefit of enduring nature and expenses being incurred during the course of business, it was revenue in nature and allowable as a deduction to the assessee. (AY. 2011-12)

    ACIT v. Sodexo Food Solutions India P. Ltd. (2019) 69 ITR 119 (Mum.)( Trib.)

  10. S. 40(b)(v) : Amounts not deductible – Partner – Remuneration – Book profit – Despite quantum not specified in partnership deed remuneration paid to partners is held to be allowable

    AO held that since quantum of remuneration had not been stated in partnership deed, which was mandatory condition remuneration paid to partner was disallowed by the AO which was confirmed by the CIT (A). On appeal the Tribunal held that S. 40(b)(v) provides is that in case payment of remuneration made to any working partner is in accordance with terms of partnership deed and does not exceed aggregate amount as laid down in subsequent portion of section, deduction is permissible. On fact partnership deed specifically provided that salary/remuneration was to be computed as per S. 40(b)(v) of the Act. Accordingly harmoniously interpreting provisions of S. 40(b)(v) as well as clauses of partnership deed, claim of remuneration paid to partners was to be allowable. (AY. 2014-15).

    Unitec Marketing Services. v. ACIT (2019) 175 ITD 90 (Mum) (Trib.)

  11. S. 41(1) : Profits chargeable to tax – Remission or cessation of trading liability – Business of bottling-cum-manufacturing of soft drink – Advances/deposits towards security against bottles & cases – Written off – Addition cannot be made as remission or cessation of liability [S. 32]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that amount received as advance or deposit was written off cannot be assessed as remission or cessation of liability. (AY. 2007-08)

    Poona Bottling Company (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 175 ITD 634 (Pune) (Trib.)

  12. S.44AD: Presumptive taxation – gross receipts – Assessee partner in firm receiving remuneration and interest – Interest and salary not business income – Assessee not eligible for presumptive taxation [S.28(v), 40(b)]

    The Tribunal held that while 28(v) taxes the interest & salary received from a partnership firm as business income to the extent the same is allowable as deduction u/s. 40(b) to the firm, this ‘per se’ would not translate such salary & interest to ‘gross receipts’/ ‘turnover’ (for the purpose of section 44AD) to the business of being partners in firm. In other words, it cannot be construed as gross receipts or turnover of business independently carried on by a partner. Dismissing the appeal of the assessee, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Ld. AO disapproving of application of section 44AD of the Act to the salary/interest income of the assessee. (AY. 2012-13)

    A. Anand Kumar v. ACIT (2019) 69 ITR 82 (SN) (Chennai) (Trib.)

  13. S. 45 : Capital gains – Non refundable entry fee – Right which is not enforceable by law, cannot be regarded as a capital asset – Actionable claim right cannot be assessed as capital gains – In order to attract the provisions of capital gains it is axiomatic that there has to be an income derived by the assessee on transfer of a capital asset [S.2(47)]

    The AO treated the actionable claim right as capital asset and taxed the same upon exercise of right in March 31, 2014, being the date when set-off was allowed by DoT. CIT(A) upheld the order of the AO. On appeal the Tribunal held that set off of non-refundable entry fee paid by group company UW to DoT in 2008, against the fresh spectrum fee payable by assessee towards allocation of telecom licenses cannot be regarded as ‘transfer’ under S. 2(47) of the Act. Further Tribunal rejected Revenue’s stand that consequent to the set off, capital asset acquired by assessee was extinguished and thus there was a ‘transfer’ under S. 2(47) of the Act of a short term capital asset (being held for a period less than 36 months). Tribunal held that ‘right’ which is not enforceable by law, cannot be regarded as a ‘capital asset’, thus holds that assessee had not acquired any capital asset from UW under the Actionable Claim agreement since UW did not hold such asset at any point of time. Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee. (AY. 2014-15)

    Telenor (India) Communications Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2019)197 TTJ 1 / 173 DTR 65 (Delhi) (Trib.)

  14. S. 45: Capital gains – cash credits – Bogus accommodation entries – Penny stock – Sale of shares – Purchase by account payee cheque – Transaction was credited in DMAT account – Opportunity of cross examination was not given – Sale transaction cannot be treated as bogus merely on the basis of suspicious or surmises – Addition was deleted – Estimation of commission was also deleted [S. 10 (38), 68, 69C, 132(4)]

    On the basis of information from Investigation Wing the AO added amount of long-term capital gain as cash credits and also estimated commission. CIT(A) affirmed the order of the AO. On appeal by the assessee, allowing the claim of the assessee the Tribunal held that the shares were purchased by account payee cheque, transaction was credited in DMAT account, opportunity of cross-examination was not given. Accordingly the sale transaction cannot be treated as bogus merely on the basis of suspicious or surmises. Estimation of commission was also deleted. (AYs. 2013-14, 2015 -16)

    Meghraj Singh Shekhawat. v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 693 (Jaipur) (Trib.)

  15. S. 45 : Capital gains – sub-tenancy right-capital asset – Gains on surrender is liable to capital gains tax and not income from other sources [S. 14, 55(2), 56]

    Assessee received certain sum as consideration for transferring his sub-tenancy rights. AO assessed the same as income from other sources. CIT (A) held that the amount is assessable as capital gains. On appeal by revenue, dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that like tenancy right, a sub-tenancy right is also a capital asset and liable to be chargeable as capital gains and not as income from other sources. (AY. 2014-15)

    ACIT v. Dr. Jayesh Keshrichand Shah. (2019) 175 ITD 751 (Mum.) (Trib.)

  16. S. 45 : Capital gains – Retirement – Amount received as share value of assets of firm on his retirement are not liable to be taxed either as capital gains nor as business income [S. 2(14), 2(47), 28(v)]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that amount received as share value of assets of firm on his retirement are not liable to be taxed either as capital gains nor as business income. (AY. 2012-13)

    James P. D’Silva. v. DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 533 (Mum.) (Trib.)

  17. S.45 : Capital gains – Leasehold rights – Assessable as capital gains – Cannot be claimed as exempt on the ground that it was in respect of agricultural land – Market value on allotment of land [S.48, 50C]

    Assessee had received leasehold right in a plot of land by way of an additional compensation allotted by State Government in pursuance of compulsory acquisition of agricultural land long ago in year 1965, belonging to assessee’s late father. Assessee had sold said leasehold rights for a consideration of certain amount and, accordingly, computed long term capital gains on said transfer. During course of assessment proceedings, assessee had taken an alternative plea that since original compensation was exempt from tax because of nature of land acquired being agricultural land then additional compensation received in subsequent year would also be exempt from tax. AO rejected assessee’s plea and computed capital gains on transfer of leasehold rights in property.

    Tribunal held that It was a right of assessee in a land belonging to his father against which assessee was allotted leasehold right in a plot and said right could not be considered as agricultural land transferred during year therefore, consideration received on account of transfer of such leasehold right was assessable to tax under head ‘capital gain’. (AY. 2007-08)

    Pyaribai K. Jain v. Add. CIT (2019) 175 ITD 177 (Mum) (Trib.)

  18. S. 45 : Capital gains – Long term capital gains – Lease – Entire consideration was paid when site was originally allotted in 2001 – Date of holding to be computed from the date of allotment and not from the date of absolute conveyance was made and entitle to deduction u/ s. 54F of the Act. [S. 2(42A, 2(47), 54, 54F]

    Assessee acquired a property from a building society under a lease-cum-sale agreement dated 22-3-2001. Entire consideration was paid when site was originally allotted in 2001. Absolute conveyance was made on 31-8-2014. Assessee sold the site and building on 3-12-2014 and claimed the sale as long term capital gains. AO treated the transaction as short term considering the date of conveyance i.e., 31-8-2014. On appeal the Tribunal held that date of holding to be computed from the date of allotment and not from the date of absolute conveyance was made on 31-8-2014. Followed CIT v. Dr. Shakuntala ITA No. 117 of 2006, dt. 19-9-2007 (Karn.) (HC) and CIT v. A Suresh Rao (2014) 223 Taxman 228 (Karn.)(HC). (AY. 2015-16)

    Bhatkal Ramarao Prakash. v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 144 (Bang) (Trib.)

  19. S. 45(2) : Capital gains – Conversion of a capital asset in to stock-in-trade – Date of conversion of capital asset into stock-in-trade has to be determined either on basis of entry passed in books of account of assessee or intention of assessee to exploit capital asset as stock-in-trade for its business purpose [S.45]

    Assessee applied for permission from local authority for plan sanction in year 1994. Local authority gave permission for construction of project in year 1998. Thereupon, assessee entered into development agreement with ‘B’ developers – Since construction of project was completed in assessment year 2008-09, capital gains arising therefrom was offered to tax in said year. Assessing Officer took a view that date on which assessee had filed his application to local authority was to be taken as date of conversion of capital asset into stock-in-trade. Tribunal held that for purpose of section 45(2), date of conversion of capital asset into stock- in-trade has to be determined either on basis of entry passed in books of account of assessee or intention of assessee to exploit capital asset as stock-in-trade for its business purpose. Since assessee had filed an application before local authority in year 1994 seeking permission for development of land, Assessing Officer was right in coming to conclusion that conversion of capital asset into stock-in-trade said to have been taken place in said year itself. So far as year of taxability of capital gain was concerned, since project was completed in all respects in assessment year 2008-09 and thereupon revenue from said project had been recognised, capital gain was payable in assessment year 2008-09. (AYs. 2001-02 to 2008-09)

    Puran Ratilal Mehta v. ACIT (2019) 175 ITD 190 (Mum.) (Trib.)

  20. S. 45(4) : Capital gains – Distribution of capital asset – Retiring partner – The revaluation of asset being land held by the partnership firm which results into enhancement of value of asset and this enhanced amount credited in capital account of partners and when a retiring partner takes amount in his capital account including enhanced value of asset, it does not give rise to capital gains [S. 2(14) 45]

 There was difference of opinion amongst the members and the reference was made to third member. The two questions referred for consideration is as under:

”1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of case, where on revaluation of asset being land held by the partnership firm which resulted into enhancement of value of asset and this enhanced amount credited in capital account of partners and when a retiring partner takes amount in his capital account including enhanced value of asset, it gives rise to Capital Gain under section 45(4) r.w. Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act.”

2. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is there any transfer of capital asset on dissolution of firm or “other wise” with in the meaning of Section 45(4) r.w. Section 2(14), in case the money equivalent is paid by partnership firm to the retiring partner and whether this money equivalent to enhances portion of the asset revalued constitutes capital asset for the purpose of Section 45(4) r.w. Section 2(14) of the Income-tax Act.”

Third member held that, the revaluation of asset being land held by the partnership firm which results into enhancement of value of asset and this enhanced amount credited in capital account of partners and when a retiring partner takes amount in his capital account including enhanced value of asset, it does not give rise to capital gains. Both the questions are answered in favour of the assessee. (ITA Nos. 3526 & 3527 MUM/2012, dt. 10-1-2019) (AYs. 2006-07 to 2007-08)

D. S. Corporation v. ITO (TM) (Mum) (Trib.) www.itatonline.org

  1. S. 47 (iii) : Capital gains – Transaction not regarded as transfer – Gift – Transfer of shares made as gift without consideration are not taxable under provisions of capital gains – Income chargeable under capital gains tax can not be assessed as income from other sources [S.45]

    Where the company is permitted by its Memorandum/Articles of Association to make a gift, transfer of shares by way of gift are valid, permissible and genuine and there is no requirement of a gift deed. Such gifts are exempt as per S. 47(iii) of the Act. Followed Prakriya Pharmacem v. ITO (2016) 238 Taxman 185 (Guj) (HC). Income chargeable under capital gains tax can not be assessed as income from other sources. (AY. 2012-13)

    Jayneer infrapower & Multiventures (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 176 ITD 15 (Mum) (Trib.)

  2. S. 50 : Capital gains – Depreciable assets – Block of assets – Brought forward business loss and long term capital loss can be set off against short term capital gain computed under section 50 on sale of factory building being depreciable asset [S.72, 74 ]

    Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that brought forward business loss and brought forward long term capital loss can be set off against short term capital gains arising as per section 50 on sale of factory building being a depreciable asset. Followed CIT v. Manali Investments [2013] /219 Taxman 113 (Mag.) (Bom) (HC). (AY. 2011-12)

    ITO v. Smart Sensors & Transducers Ltd. (2019) 176 ITD 104 (Mum.) (Trib.)

  3. S. 50B : Capital gains – Slump sale – As per sale deed, possession of only land and building was handed over and there was no transfer of furniture, fixtures and other equipments – Transaction cannot be regarded as slump sale [S. 45, 50C ]

    In return of income, the assessee-company claimed slump sale of asset of the company at ₹ 2.25 crore. However, as per the stamp valuation authority, value was adopted at ₹ 4.18 crore. The Assessing Officer adopted the value under section 50C and made addition to assessee’s income. Which was confirmed by the CIT(A). Affirming the decision of lower authorities the Tribunal held that the sale deed did not say anything about furniture and fixtures and other gadgets and also as per the deed only vacant possession of building and had been handed over by assessee and no other articles machinery etc. Accordingly the sale cannot be considered as slump sale. (AY. 2010-11)

    Manish Films (P.) Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 121 (Indore) (Trib.)

  4. S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – Stamp valuation – AO is obliged to compute the capital gains by taking the valuation arrived at by the DVO in place of the actual consideration received by the assessee – The assessee is entitled to challenge the correctness of the DVO’s valuation before the CIT(A) and the Tribunal – The DVO has to be given an opportunity of hearing [S.45]

    S. 50C is a deeming provision and the AO is obliged to compute the capital gains by taking the valuation arrived at by the DVO in place of the actual consideration received by the assessee, the assessee is entitled to challenge the correctness of the DVO’s valuation before the CIT(A) and the Tribunal. The DVO has to be given an opportunity of hearing. (ITA No. 2107/ Ahd/17, dt. 1-4-2019). (AY. 2013-14)

    Lovy Ranka v. DCIT (Ahd) (Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  5. S. 50C : Capital gains – Full value of consideration – stamp valuation – The adoption of stamp valuation as the sale consideration is not justified in absence of any evidence that the sale consideration was more than the value shown in the agreement – The AO has not brought on record that the property under sale not under various encumbrances and the assessee was having the absolute marketable title of the said property – Addition is held to be not valid [S.45]

    Tribunal held that the adoption of stamp valuation as the sale consideration is not justified in absence of any evidence that the sale consideration was more than the value shown in the agreement. The AO has not brought on record that the property under sale was not under various encumbrances and the assessee was having the absolute marketable title of the said property. Addition is held to be not valid. (ITA No. 2243/Mum/2015, dt. 8-3-2019) (AY. 2011-12)

    Sir Mohd. Yusuf Trust v. ACIT (Mum)(Trib.), www.itatonlie.org

  6. S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house – Belated construction or possession would not be a ground to deny claim of exemption – Two separate flats purchased by assessee had two separate entrances, treated as one residential house – Entitled to exemption [S.45]

    Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that belated construction or possession would not be a ground to deny claim of exemption. Two separate flats purchased by assessee had two separate entrances, treated as one residential house. Entitled to exemption. (AY. 2013-14)

    ITO v. Saroj Rani Gupta (Smt.) (2019) 176 ITD 109 (Kol.) (Trib.)

  7. S.54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house – Construction activities of the new house started before the date of sale of original asset – Beneficial provision and should be liberally interpreted – Entitle to exemption [S. 45]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee, Tribunal held that an assessee who has purchased a house property is entitled to exemption u/s. 54F despite the fact that construction activities of the new house has started before the date of sale of the original asset. Beneficial provision and should be liberally interpreted. (Followed CIT v. Bharti Mishra (2014) 265 CTR 374 (Delhi) (HC) & CIT v. Kuldeep Singh (2014) 270 CTR 561 (Delhi)(HC) followed) (ITA No. 2630/Del/2015, dt. 30-4-2019)(AY. 2011-12)

    Kapil Kumar Agarwal v. DCIT (Delhi)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

  8. S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house – Capital Gains Scheme Account – Bank account was opened only for the purpose of depositing compensation received in his hand and the amount was utilised for purchase of plot of land and partial construction thereon – Entitle to exemption [S.45]

    Assessee received certain compensation on compulsory acquisition of his land by RIICO. In return of income, assessee offered said receipts to tax as long term capital gains and claimed exemption under section 54F on account of sale consideration deposited in Capital Gain Account Scheme 1988. AO held that the said account was not a Capital Gain Scheme Account and, therefore, denied exemption under section 54F of the Act. On appeal the Tribunal held that the entire compensation stood deposited in savings bank account maintained with HDFC bank which was opened specifically for purpose of depositing compensation received by assessee and withdrawals had been limited to extent of purchase of plot of land and partial construction. Therefore, assessee’s claim for deduction under section 54F could not have been denied on ground that amount of compensation received had not been deposited in Capital Gains Account. Further, fact that said bank account of assessee was attached by Department, there was no way assessee could have met deadline for constructing new house, being three years from date of transfer of original asset. Accordingly claim of deduction was allowed. (AY. 2009-10)

    Goverdhan Singh Shekhawat. v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 272 (Jaipur) (Trib.)

  9. S. 54F : Capital gains – Investment in a residential house – Investment in single house but bifurcated with two door numbers for ground and first floor – New house purchased in the joint name of wife and son entitled to deduction – Property need not be purchased by assessee in his own name for claiming exemption [S. 2 (47), 45]

    Assessee sold a house site in previous year and invested sale proceeds in another property and claimed exemption under section 54F. AO disallowed the claim on the ground that as per description of property purchased by assessee it consisted of two doors and he was of view that assessee purchased two house properties, hence could not be allowed deduction under section 54F. On appeal Tribunal held that entire property constituted single house but was bifurcated with two door numbers for ground and first floor with common entrance in ground floor only to earmark share of beneficiaries. Accordingly entitle to deduction. Tribunal also held that for claiming deduction of capital gains under section 54F, new residential house need not be purchased by assessee in his own name. Assessee purchased new house in joint names of himself, his wife and son, he would be entitled to benefit of deduction under section 54F. (AY. 2015-16)

    Bhatkal Ramarao Prakash. v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 144 (Bang) (Trib.)

  10. S. 56 : Income from other sources – Fair Market Value – DCF method – Closely held company – The fact that the company is loss-making does not mean that shares cannot be allotted at premium. The DCF method is a recognised method though it is not an exact science & can never be done with arithmetic precision. The fact that future projections of various factors made by applying hindsight view cannot be matched with actual performance does not mean that the DCF method is not correct [S. 56(2)(viib), Rule 11UA.]

    The fact that the company is loss-making does not mean that shares cannot be allotted at premium. The DCF method is a recognised method though it is not an exact science & can never be done with arithmetic precision. The fact that future projections of various factors made by applying hindsight view cannot be matched with actual performance does not mean that the DCF method is not correct. (ITA Nos. 6453 & 6454/Del/2018, dt. 15-3-2019) (AY. 2013-14 and 2014-15)

    India Today Online Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (Delhi)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

  11. S. 56 : Income from other sources – Share premium – For purpose of sub-rule (2) of Rule 11UA, an auditor cannot be accountant of assessee-company [S.44AB, 56(2) (viib), 288(2)]

    For purpose of sub-rule (2) of rule 11UA, an auditor cannot be accountant of assessee- company, therefore, where person who valued shares of assessee-company was none other than person who signed audit report under section 44AB. Assessing Officer was justified in ignoring valuation report submitted by assessee and determining fair market value on basis of NAV. Share of ₹ 10 was valued at ₹ 400 i.e. Premium of ₹ 390 was rejected. Tribunal also observed that share was valued at ₹ 100 per share as on 2-2-2012 and on 15-11-2013 at ₹ 400 per share. (AYs. 2014-15, 2015-16)

    Kottaram Agro Foods (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 175 ITD 159 (SMC) (Bang) (Trib.)

  12. S. 68: Cash credits – Share Capital – identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants by producing the PAN details, bank account statements, audited financial statements and Income Tax acknowledgments and the investors have shown the source of source & personally appeared before the AO in response to s. 131 summons – Addition cannot be made as cash credits [S. 131, 133(6)]

    AO made contribution to share capital of the assessee as cash credits, which was affirmed by the CIT(A). On appeal by the assessee the allowing the appeal the Tribunal held that the assessee has discharged its onus to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of the share applicants by producing the PAN details, bank account statements, audited financial statements and Income Tax acknowledgments and the investors have shown the source of source & personally appeared before the AO in response to s. 131 summons. The judgement in PCIT v. NRA Iron & Steel (2019) 103 taxmann.com 48 (SC) is distinguished on facts stating that in the said decision the AO had made extensive enquiries and from that he had found that some of the investor companies were non-existent which is not the case in the assessee.) (ITA. No. 1494/ Kol/2017, dt. 5-4-2019)(AY. 2012-13)

    Baba Bhootnath Trade & Commerce Ltd. v. ITO (Kol.)(Trib), www.itatonline.org

  13. S. 68: Cash credits – Bank statement cannot be considered as books maintained by assessee – Addition is held to be not valid.

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that,Bank statement cannot be considered as books maintained by assessee. According the addition as cash credit was deleted. Followed CIT v. Bhaicahnd H. Gandhi (1983) 143 ITR 67 (Bom) (HC), Mehul Vyas v. ITO (2017) 164 ITD 296 (Mum) (Trib). (AY 2008-09)

    Satish Kumar v ITO (2019) 198 TTJ 114/ 175 DTR 121 (Asr) (Trib)

  14. S.68: cash credits – Bank statement is not books of account Sale of shares – Addition on the basis of bank statement treating the statement as books of account is held to be not valid – Natural justice – Statement of third parties cannot be relied upon without giving an opportunity of cross examination. [S.2(12A, 44AA, 45, 69, 69A, 143(3)]

    AO assessed the long term capital gains on sale of shares as cash credit u/s 68 of the Act and alleged commission u/s 69C of the Act on the basis of bank statement issued by the Bank which was confirmed by the CIT(A). On appeal the Tribunal held that addition on the basis of bank statement treating the statement as books of account is held to be not valid. Tribunal also held that statement of third parties cannot be relied upon without giving an opportunity of cross examination. Accordingly addition was deleted. Referred. Sheraton Apparels v. ACIT (2002) 256 ITR 20 (Bom) (HC) (AY. 2015-16)

    Amitabh Bansal. v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 401 (Delhi) (Trib.)

  15. S. 68 : Cash credits – Bogus Share Capital – Merely presenting of documents & making payment through bank or appearance by director before the AO & admitting fact of share application made is in itself not sufficient to justify the genuineness of the transaction – It is against human probability that anyone will invest and pay share premium in a company without net worth or future prospectus – All applicants with common address are being controlled remotely by one person. These applicants are all paper companies not having sufficient worth and created for providing entries of share application money or share capital or loans by way of accommodation entries – Credit worthiness is not established – Addition is held to be justified.

    Allowing the appeal of the revenue the Tribunal held that merely presenting of documents & making payment through bank or appearance by director before the AO & admitting fact of share application made is in itself not sufficient to justify the genuineness of the transaction. It is against human probability that anyone will invest and pay share premium in a company without net worth or future prospectus. All applicants with common address are being controlled remotely by one person. These applicants are all paper companies not having sufficient worth and created for providing entries of share application money or share capital or loans by way of accommodation entries. Creditworthiness is not established. Addition is held to be justified. (Followed PCIT v. NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 410 ITR 379 (Delhi) (HC) & PCIT v. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. 2019) 103 Taxmann.com 48 (SC) followed). (ITA No. 4778/Del/2013, dt. 8-3-2019)(AY. 2006-07).

    ITO v. Synergy Finlease Pvt. Ltd. (Delhi)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  16. S. 80IB : Industrial undertakings – Ownership of property is not a condition for claiming deduction

    On appeal by the Department, the Tribunal relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Radha Developers (2012) 341 ITR 403 (Guj) (HC) held that ownership of land was not a prerequisite for claiming deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act and therefore, deduction was allowable. (AY. 2007-08, 2010-11)

    DCIT v. AG8 Ventures Ltd. (2019) 69 ITR 35 (SN) (Indore) (Trib.)

  17. S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects – Obtaining occupation certificate is not a mandatory requirement in order to ascertain whether building was completed or not for purpose of deduction under section 80-IB(10)

    Tribunal held that the occupation certificate is not a mandatory requirement in order to ascertain whether building was completed or not for purpose of deduction under section 80-IB(10). (AYs. 2001-02 to 2008-09)

    Puran Ratilal Mehta v. ACIT (2019) 175 ITD 190 (Mum.) (Trib)

  18. S. 80IC : Special category States – Manufacture – Wooden Sleepers and planks made into planks – Amounts to manufacture – Entitled to deduction [S. 2(29BA)]

    Tribunal held that original products used by the assessee were wooden planks, evafoam, thermocol, adhesive tape, pneumatic, stapler pins, and nails. The final product obtained in the process by the assessee was wooden crates which were a distinct and separate article different from all the products that went into the manufacture and was recognised as a distinct product by the Central Excise and value added tax classification which had assigned the product a specific code and serial number respectively in the Central Excise and value added tax Schedules. In terms of the Uttarakhand Value Added tax Act, 2005, wooden crates were recognized as a distinct product and item. Similarly the assessee had been registered as manufacturer with the District Industries Centre and registered as a factory under the Factories Act. The assessee had been granted exemption from excise duty which was only granted to manufacturing units. The term as defined by section 2(29BA) would include any activity that results in the creation of an article or object that was new and distinct from the raw material that went into its manufacture and having a different name, character, use and/ or integral structure. The wooden crates were completely distinct from the planks, nails, fevicol, foam etc. that were used to make them and they had a use of their own. The change brought in the wooden planks by hand by the labourers using small cutters would amount to manufacture of a product, the wooden crates, by the assessee. Further when four Departments of the Government had considered the assessee a manufacturing unit, another Department of the Government could not take a contrary view or a view inconsistent with the view taken by the other Departments of the Government. (AY. 2012-13)

    ITO v. Rudra Woodpack P. Ltd. (2019) 70 ITR 169 (Delhi) (Trib)

  19. S. 90 : Double taxation relief – Interest – Royalty – Levy of surcharge and 3% education cess on tax computed – Held to be not valid – DTAA – India – UAE [Art. 2(1), 11, 12 ]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that Article 2(1) of the India-UAE DTAA provides that the taxes covered shall include tax and surcharge thereon. Education cess is nothing but an additional surcharge & is also covered by the definition of taxes. The Tribunal held that the provisions of India-UAE Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement are pari materia with the provisions of India-Singapore DTAA, which was subject matter of consideration in DIC Asia Pacific Pte Ltd v. ADIT (2012) 18 ITR 358 (Kol) (Trib). Accordingly the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Tribunal also referred following cases in support, Capgemini SA v. Dy.CIT (IT)-2 (1) [13-7-2016] [2016] 72 taxmann.com 58 (Mum.) (Trib.)Dy. DIT v. J. P. Morgan Securities Asia (P.) Ltd[23-10-2013] [2014] 42 taxmann.com 33 (Mum.) (Trib.), Dy.DIT (IT)-1(1) v. BOC Group Ltd. [30-11-2015] [2015] 64 taxmann.com 386 (Kol)(Trib.), Everest Industries Ltd. v. JCIT [31-1- 2018], [2018] 90 taxmann.com 330 (Mum)(Trib.), Soregam SA v. Dy.DIT(IT) [30-11-2018] [2019] 101 taxmann.com 94 (Delhi) (Trib.), and Sunil V. Motiani v. ITO (IT)(1) [27-02-2013] [2013] 33 taxmann.com 252 (Mum) (Trib.). (ITA No. 2043/ Hyd/18, dt. 29.03.2019)(AY. 2012-13)

    R. A. K. Ceramics v. DCIT(2019) 176 DTR 345/ 199 TTJ 273 (Hyd.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  20. S. 92C Transfer pricing – It is mandatory for the AO to determine the arm’s length price (ALP) of the international transactions by following one of the prescribed methods – He is not entitled to follow any other method or to resort to estimation – The failure
    – to follow one of the prescribed methods makes the entire transfer pricing adjustment unsustainable in law – The legal infirmity cannot be cured by restoring the issue to the TPO – The TPO cannot be allowed another innings to rectify the mistake [S.254(1)]

    Tribunal held that, it is mandatory for the AO to determine the arm’s length price (ALP) of the international transactions by following one of the prescribed methods. He is not entitled to follow any other method or to resort to estimation. The failure to follow one of the prescribed methods makes the entire transfer pricing adjustment unsustainable in law. The legal infirmity cannot be cured by restoring the issue to the TPO. The TPO cannot be allowed another innings to rectify the mistake. (ITA No. 1182/MUM/2017, dt. 16-1-2019)(AY. 2012-13).

    CLSA India Private Ltd v. DCIT (Mum.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  21. S. 115A : Foreign companies – Tax – Royalty – In terms of technology license agreement entered into by assessee an Italy based company with its Indian AE effective from 1-4-2008, being covered by sub- clause (AA) of section 115A(1)(b), rate of tax on royalty received by assessee will be 10.50 per cent – DTAA – India-Italy [S.90(2), 195A]

    Tribunal held that rate of tax on Royalty on three wheelers received by assessee an Italy based company from its Indian AE, pursuant to technology licence agreement entered between assessee and its AE in India, effective from 1-4-2008, being covered by sub-clause (AA) of section 115A(1)(b), will be 10.50 per cent.

    Piaggio & C.S.P.A. v. DIT (2019) 175 ITD 304 (Pune) (Trib.)

  22. S.115JB: Book profit – Not following the Accounting Standard – AO Must modify the book profit as per Accounting Standards as per provisions of Companies Act

    Dismissing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that AO must modify book profit for computation of MAT in case company has not followed Accounting Standards as per provisions of Companies Act. (AY. 2013-14)

    Gati Ltd. v. ACIT (2019) 175 ITD 310 (Hyd.) (Trib.)

  23. S. 133A : Power of survey – Sworn statement – Addition cannot be made only on the basis of statement of managing director recorded u/s. 131 during survey, without any corroborative evidence. [S. 131, 132(4), 143(3), Evidence Act, 1878, S. 18]

    Dismissing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that addition cannot be made only on the basis of statement of managing director recorded u/s 131 during survey, without any corroborative evidence. Assessing Officer could not make additions to income of assessee-company only on basis of sworn statement of its managing director recorded under section 131 during course of survey without support of any corroborative evidence. Circular CBDT Circular in F. No. 286/98/2013-IT (Inv.II) dated 18-12-2014. (AY. 2014 -15)

    ITO v. Toms Enterprises (2019) 175 ITD 607 (Cochin) (Trib.)

  24. S. 153 : Assessment – Limitation – Order of assessment passed within time but dispatched after expiry of time limit, Assessment held to be barred by limitation [S. 153(2A)

    The Assessment Order was passed on December 30, 2011 (i.e. within the time limit of passing order), however, the same was dispatched on January 09, 2012 (i.e., after the time limit of passing order). The assessee contended that the order passed by the AO is barred by limitation as the same was dispatched after the time limit. The Ld. CIT(A) held that the order of assessment was within time. On an appeal to Tribunal, the Tribunal held that the date of dispatch of the order of assessment was to be construed as the date of the order of assessment and therefore, the order of assessment was held to be barred by limitation. (AYs. 2001-02 to 2003-04).

    Globe Transport Corporation v. ACIT (2019) 69 ITR 69 (SN) (Bang.)(Trib.)

  25. S. 194C : Deduction at source – Contractors – Payments to artists – Participation in reality show – Payments made do not fall with in the ambit of S. 194J as professional fees – [S. 194J, 201(1)] 

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that payments to various artists like singers, musicians etc who participated in reality shows hosted by it as guests or judges, tax was required to be deducted rightly deducted tax at source under S. 194C and provisions of S.194J is not applicable hence ley of interest is not valid. (AY. 2010-11)

    Malayalam Communications Ltd. v. ITO (2019) 175 ITD 433 (Cochin) (Trib.)

  26. S. 201: Deduction at source – Shortfall in deposit of TDS – Adjusted against the excess deposit in earlier years – No interest u/s. 201(1A) – Net result after adjustment is excess deposit of TDS by assessee [S. 201(IA), 245]

    Assessee made ad hoc payment of TDS on estimated basis. On finalisation of bills of the contractors and sub-contractors, the actual TDS liability was determined. Thus, there was shortfall in payment of TDS for some years and excess deposit for some years. The AO did not adjust the excess deposit against the shortfall and raised the demand including interest u/s. 201(1A) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the stand taken by revenue was contrary to the communication issued by the CPC (TDS) which stated that excess deposit of TDS can be adjusted against the shortfall. The Tribunal further relied on Section 245 of the Act and held that the assessee was entitled for adjustment of the excess deposit of TDS made in earlier year against the TDS payable for subsequent years and directed the AO to recompute the amount payable/refundable to the assessee.

    Steel Authority of India Ltd v. DCIT (TDS) (2019) 69 ITR 88 (SN) (Kol.)(Trib.)

  27. S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay – Date of tendering of cheque for payment of Government dues could be deemed to be date of payment of tax – Delay in remittance of said amount to Government account by Bank, no interest can be levied [S. 201(IA)]

    Tribunal held that for purpose of levy of interest under section 201(1A) for late deposit of TDS, date of tendering of cheque for payment of Government dues could be deemed to be date of payment of tax and where bank causes delay in remittance of said amount to Government account, no interest can be levied under section 201(1A) from assessee. Followed CIT v. K. Kalpana Saraswathi v. P. S. S. Somasundram Chettiar 1980 AIR 512 (SC) CBDT Circular No. 261 [F. No. 385/61/79-IT (B)], dated 8-8-1979, date of tendering of cheque for payment of Government dues would be deemed to be the date of payment of such taxes. The aforesaid CBDT circular was applicable to all Government dues, and made no distinction whether the payment was by way of TDS, advance tax, self- assessment tax etc. (AY. 2008-09)

    Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 176 ITD 124 (Mum.) (Trib.)

  28. S. 201 : Deduction at source – Failure to deduct or pay – limitation – Non-residents – Additional grounds – Royalty – Fee for technical services – In cases of payments made to non-residents, an order passed after one year from the end of the financial year in which the proceedings were initiated is void ab initio and liable to be quashed [S. 9(1)(vi), 9(1)(vii), 201(1) 201(3) 201(4), 254(1)]

    Appellate Tribunal admitted additional grounds on limitation. Referred Special Bench Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd v. Dy. CIT (2009) 122 TTJ 577/(2010) 122 ITD 216 (SB)(Mum) (Trib) affirmed in DIT(IT) v. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (2014) 365 ITR 560 (Bom) (HC). The AO passed the order dt. 6-2-2014 where as the order should have been passed on or before 31-03 2013 i.e. with in one year from the end of the financial year in which proceedings u/s. 201 are initiated. Tribunal held that since, the order is beyond the period of limitation the same is void ab initio and subsequent proceedings arising there form are vitiated. The departmental representative argued that the time limit specified in S. 201(3) & 201(4) for passing orders does not apply to cases where payments are made to non-residents. Allowing the appeal and additional grounds the Tribunal held that in cases of payments made to non-residents also an order passed after one year from the end of the financial year in which the proceedings were initiated is void ab initio and liable to be quashed. As the order passed by the AO u/s. 201(1) and 201(IA) is held to be void-ab initio, the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are vitiated and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed. (ITA Nos. 1669, 1670 & 1671/PUN/2014, dt. 5-4-2019) (AYs. 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11)

    Atlas Copco (India) Ltd v. DCIT (Pune)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  29. S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution and is obliged to dispose of appeal on merits by passing a speaking order [S.250]

    Tribunal held that when an appeal is filed, Commissioner (Appeals) is duty bound to dispose of appeal through a speaking order on merits on all points which arose for determination in appellate proceedings, including on all grounds of appeal. Accordingly CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution and is obliged to dispose of appeal on merits. Matter remanded. Followed CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2016) 240 taxman 133 (Bom)(HC) (AY. 2011-12)

    Swati Pawa (Ms.) v DCIT (2019) 175 ITD 622 (Delhi) (Trib.)

  30. S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal – Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Penalty – Though the High Court observed that Tribunal’s decision of reducing the penalty as a “way to bypass the minimum limit” and the Tribunal was in error in granting the relief, the same does not constitute a “mistake apparent from the record” so as to enable the Tribunal to revisit its decision [S.271(1)(c)]

    Dismissing the miscellaneous application of the Revenue the Tribunal held that though the High Court faulted the Tribunal’s decision of reducing the penalty as a “way to bypass the minimum limit” and the Tribunal was in error in granting the relief, the same does not constitute a “mistake apparent from the record” so as to enable the Tribunal to revisit its decision. (MA No. 166/Ahd/18 Arising out of ITA No.: 210/ Ahd/15, dt. 3-4-2019)(AY. 2010-11)

    ITO v. Devendra J. Kothari(2019) 176 DTR 289/ 199 TTJ 1 (Ahd.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  31. S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal – Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Strictures – The insinuation of the Dept that ITAT passes order in a state of oblivion displays a totally irresponsible and cavalier approach on the cusp of contempt and deserving exemplary cost to purge the same. Referring in a deriding manner that the ITAT started with the grounds of appeal, displays the naiveté of revenue authority purporting to be critical examiner of ITAT verdict, which is uncalled for – I express deep anguish at this approach of the department and hope that revenue will disband this cavalier and naïve approach while insinuating about the functioning of the ITAT without verifying their record [S. 147]

    The Tribunal held that the insinuation of the Dept that ITAT passes order in a state of oblivion displays a totally irresponsible and cavalier approach on the cusp of contempt and deserving exemplary cost to purge the same. Referring in a deriding manner that the ITAT started with the grounds of appeal, displays the naiveté of revenue authority purporting to be critical examiner of ITAT verdict, which is uncalled for. I express deep anguish at this approach of the department and hope that revenue will disband this cavalier and naïve approach while insinuating about the functioning of the ITAT without verifying their record. (M.A. Nos. 605 & 606/Mum/2018, dt. 22-2-2019) (AY. 2003-04 & 2004-05)

    ITO v. Rayoman Carriers Pvt. Ltd.(Mum.)(Trib.), www.itatonline.org

  32. S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal – Rectification of mistake apparent from the record – Employees of statutory corporations cannot be regarded as employees of State or Central Government – Failure to deduct tax at source under bona fide belief – Held not liable to pay penalty – AO filed miscellaneous application – Held miscellaneous application is not maintainable – Tribunal cannot recall its previous order in an attempt to rewrite the same [S.10(10AA) 192, 201(1), 201(IA)]

    On appeal filed before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that the provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) were not attracted because the non deduction of tax at source by KPTCL was under the bona fide belief that it was not obliged to deduct tax at source on payments in excess of ₹ 3 lakh towards unutilised leave period as it believed that its employees were employees of State Government. The Tribunal held that the obligation of the assessee was only to make a bona fide estimate of the salary. In the facts and circumstance of the instant case, the assessee had made such an estimate. The assessee’s obligation under section 192 was, therefore, properly discharged and hence proceedings under section 201(1) and 201(1A) were quashed. Revenue filed miscellaneous petition against the impugned order of the Tribunal quashing the orders under sections 201(1) and 201(1A). The Tribunal in its order referred to several decisions wherein it has been held that estimate of income under the salary, if it is bona fide, then the payer cannot be treated as an ‘assessee-in-default’. Therefore, there is no merit in allegations in the miscellaneous petition. Besides the above, there is also an allegation that the revenue was prevented from assisting the Bench by differentiating the cases relied by the assessee on the contention of the assessee that it was a state. As already said, the Tribunal has already accepted the contention of the revenue that the assessee is not a State. The allegations that the revenue was prevented from arguing is, therefore, not correct for the reason the argument was accepted by the Tribunal. (AY. 2013-14)

    ITO (OSD) (TDS) v. Karnataka Power Transmission Corpn. Ltd. (2019) 175 ITD 130 (Bang.) (Trib.)

  33. S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Reassessment – Invalid reassessment order cannot be revised – Revision u/s. 263 cannot be made if reassessment u/s. 147 was invalid, as reassessment was made without issue of notice u/s. 143(2) [S.143(2), 147]

    Original return of Income was filed on 20-10-2007 at NIL income. The notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, was issued on 25-3-2014 after recording the reasons and taking prior approval from the competent authorities. The assessee in response to the statutory notice vide letter dated 10-4-2014 submitting therein that the original return filed may please be treated as return filed in response to the notice under section 148 of the I.T. Act and also requested to provide reasons recorded, which were duly provided to it. The assessee also filed its objections which were disposed off. The AO issued statutory notice which were complied by the assessee and filed details as called for. The AO after discussing the case with the assessee, accepted the returned income and completed the reassessment order under section 147/143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, dated 30-6-2014. The Ld. Pr. CIT also noted that as there is no statutory notice under section 143(2) prescribed in the Act and only non-statutory notice is prescribed, the purpose of which is to intimate the assessee that the case has been selected for scrutiny and the notices issued on dated 11-6-2014 and 19-6-2014 clearly proves that the case of the assessee has been selected for scrutiny, such show cause notices are nothing but notice under section 143(2). of the I.T. Act. It is also noted by the Ld. Pr. CIT that even though no formal notice under section 143(2) was issued by the AO, in the letters dated 11-6-2014 and 19-6-2014 it was specifically mentioned that in the absence of the requisite details the assessment would be completed under section 144 of the I.T. Act. The AO has not examined this issue in the light of seized material. Therefore, re-assessment order was found to be erroneous in so far as prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue because AO failed to look into the seized material. The Order was set aside and restored to the file of AO with a direction to examine the seized material and confront the same to the assessee and pass the order in accordance with law. On appeal the Tribunal held that as notice under section 143(2) was not issued, the reassessment order is invalid, bad in law and non-est and an invalid reassessment order cannot be revised under section 263 of the Act. (AYs. 2007-08, 2009-10)

    Supersonic Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 175 DTR 30/ 69 ITR 585 / 197 TTJ 889 (Delhi) (Trib.)

    Superior Buildwell P. Ltd v. PCIT (2019) 175 DTR 30/ 69 ITR 585 / 197 TTJ 889 (Delhi)(Trib)

  34. S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Reassessment – Merger – Since the second round of reassessment proceedings were on the same set of facts as the first round, the same were dropped by the AO and thus the first reassessment order stood merged with the second – Thus, the said order cannot be revised under Section 263 of the Act since only the valid reassessment order can be revised [S.143(1), 147, 148 ]

    Assessee filed return of income and was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently the case was reopened under Section 147 on the allegation of accommodation entry taken. The AO after due enquiry accepted the returned income vide reassessment order. The assessee’s case was again reopened under Section 147 based on the same reasons for reopening as issued during first reassessment proceedings. Subsequently, the AO issued order dropping the said reassessment proceedings. The Principal CIT initiated revision proceedings under Section 263. The Tribunal held that the since the second round of reassessment proceedings were on the same set of facts as the first round, the same were dropped by the AO and thus the first reassessment order stood merged with the second. Thus, the said order cannot be revised under Section 263 of the Act since only the valid reassessment order can be revised. (AY. 2009-10)

    Sri Balaji Forgings (P) Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 175 DTR 57 / 197 TTJ 915 (Delhi.)(Trib.)

  35. S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – unsold flats held as stock in trade – Notional value – In view of contrary decisions of High Court, issue as to whether notional income on unsold flats held by assessee–builder as stock-in-trade in its books of account should be assessed as income from house property is a debatable issue, and hence order of Assessing Officer for not bringing unsold flats to tax at notional letting value under head ‘Income from Other Sources’ which was one of possible views – Revision is not valid [S.22, 23 28(i)]

    Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that In view of contrary decisions of High Court, issue as to whether notional income on unsold flat held by assessee-builder as stock-in- trade in its books of account should be assessed as income from house property is a debatable issue, and hence order of Assessing Officer for not bringing unsold flats to tax at notional letting value under head ‘Income from Other Sources’ which was one of possible views- Revision is not valid. CIT v. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing co. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Delhi) (HC)Neha Builders (P.) Ltd. (2007) 164 Taxman 342 (Guj) (HC) (AY. 2013-14)

    S.D. Corporation (P.) Ltd. v. PCIT (2019) 175 ITD 164 (Mum) (Trib.)

  36. S. 271AAB : Penalty – Search initiated on or after 1st July, 2012 – Levy of penalty is not mandatory – Merely on the basis of surrender the levy of penalty is not justified. As regards cash found in the Course of search which was not disclosed in the books of account, levy of penalty was confirmed

    Levy of penalty under S. 271AAB is not based on addition made and investigation/enquiry conducted during the course of assessment proceedings, rather it is based on search conducted on the assessee. Even if it is assumed that primary charge of undisclosed income has to be read along with ancillary conditions, where the AO has not stated the specified charge at the time of initiation of penalty proceedings, such uncertain charge at the stage of initiation of penalty proceedings can be made good with a clear cut charge in the penalty order. Merely on the basis of surrender the levy of penalty is not justified. As regards cash found in the course of search which was not disclosed in the books of account, levy of penalty was confirmed. (AY. 2014-15)

    Rambhajo’s v ACIT (2019) 198 TTJ 142/ 175 DTR 161 (Jaipur) (Trib)

  37. S. 271B : Penalty – Failure to get accounts audited – Accommodation entries – Gross amount received to be considered for computing monetary limits of ₹ 40 lakh and not the commission earned by him – levy of penalty is held to be justified [S. 44AB]

Dismissing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that assessee, engaged in providing accommodation entries to entry seekers on commission basis, gross amount received had to be taken into consideration for computing monetary limit of ₹ 40 lakhs as specified under section 44AB and not commission income earned by him. Accordingly the levy of penalty is held to be justified. (AY. 2002-03, 2006-07, 2007-08)

Mukesh Choksi v. ACIT (OSD) (2019) 175 ITD 394 (Mum) (Trib.)