CIT v. Amit Jain

351 ITR 74High Court2013#1975 most cited

What is CIT v. Amit Jain authority for?

Where an assessee offers additional income during a survey action under section 133A and declares it in the return, and no other source of income is established, a penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment of income may not be leviable.

58

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT vs Amit Jain · 351 ITR 74 · section 271(1)(c) · section 133A · survey action · additional income · concealment of income · penalty levy · furnishing inaccurate particulars

Sections most often in play

Section 12AASection 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 271(1)(c)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

penalty under section 271(1)(c)furnishing inaccurate particularspenalty u/s 271(1)(c)concealment of incomesection 2(24)section 12aalevy of penaltysection 271(1)section 271section 271(1)(c)section 12asection 12

Judgments citing CIT v. Amit Jain

The ITO, Ward-2(3)(4), Surat vs. M/S. Shree Developers, Surat

In the result, all the Seven Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2337/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…on the following decisions in support of contentions i.e. CIT vs. Unique Precured Retraders [2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 (De)l, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. 13. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional incom…

The ITO, Ward-1, Bardoli vs. M/S. Giriraj Developers, Surat

In the result, all the Seven Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2335/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…on the following decisions in support of contentions i.e. CIT vs. Unique Precured Retraders [2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 (De)l, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. 13. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional incom…

The DCIT, Central Circle-4, Surat vs. Sai Vihar Corporation, Surat

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2329/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Aishwarya Corporation & Others in ITA No.’: 2084, 2329, 2339 & 2340 of 2016 for A.Y.: 2013-14 Page 8 of 12 Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on 13. record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional income…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Surat vs. M/S. Aastha Enterprise, Surat

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2089/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Aastha Developers & Others / ITA.No’s.2086 to 2089/Ahd/2016/AY: 2011-12 & 13-14 Page 8 of 12 Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on 14. record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional income…

The ITO, Ward-2(3)(1), Surat vs. M/S. Aastha Eco Homes, Surat

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2088/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Aastha Developers & Others / ITA.No’s.2086 to 2089/Ahd/2016/AY: 2011-12 & 13-14 Page 8 of 12 Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on 14. record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional income…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(3), Surat vs. M/S. Aastha Corporation, Surat

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2087/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Aastha Developers & Others / ITA.No’s.2086 to 2089/Ahd/2016/AY: 2011-12 & 13-14 Page 8 of 12 Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on 14. record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional income…

The ITO, Ward-2(3)(1), Surat vs. M/S. Aastha Developers, Surat

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2086/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण वष" /A Y:

Section 133ASection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Aastha Developers & Others / ITA.No’s.2086 to 2089/Ahd/2016/AY: 2011-12 & 13-14 Page 8 of 12 Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on 14. record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional income…

The ITO, Ward-1, Bardoli vs. M/S. Aishwarya Corporation, Surat

In the result, all the Four Appeals of various assessee’s as listed

ITA 2084/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Aishwarya Corporation & Others in ITA No.’: 2084, 2329, 2339 & 2340 of 2016 for A.Y.: 2013-14 Page 8 of 12 Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused the material available on 13. record and gone through the above case laws. There is no dispute about the fact that there was a survey action u/s.133A, and the assessee offered additional income…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Surat vs. M/S. Imperial Developers, Surat

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1992/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Shri O.P.Meenas. आ.अ.सं./I.T.A अपीलाथ" Appellant Vs ""यथ"/Respondent No . No. & िनधा"रण . वष" /A Y: 1 1992/Ahd/2016 Deputy Commissioner Vs Imperial Developers, Of Income Tax, . ‘Blossom’ Near Vesu Canal A.Y. 2013-14 Central Opp.Dps School, Circle-3, Surat – 395 Vesu, Surat. 001. [Pan: Aadfi 5694 R] िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Mehul Shah - Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Srinivas T.Bidari – Sr.Dr

Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

…on the following decisions in support of contentions i.e. CIT vs. Unique Precured Retraders [2008] 13 DTR (Raj-215), CIT vs SAS Pharmaceuticals [2011] 335 ITR 259 (Del), M/s.Sadbhava Builders vs ITO 1418/Ahd/2008, Ahmedabad Tribunal, CIT Vs. Amit Jain [2013] 351 ITR 74 Del, CIT vs Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd., [2010] 322 158 ITR (SC), CIT vs. Mhaskar General Hospital [Tax Appeal No.1474 of (2009)] (Guj) (HC), CIT vs. Hiralal Doshi – 383 ITR 0019 [BOM] (HC) and CIT vs. Aretic Investment (P) Ltd (2010) 78 CCH 197 (Del) (HC) and other as per their comes law paper book. We have heard the parties and perused th…

Sh. Jai Prakash Singhal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2646/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2006-07 Sh. Jai Prakash Singhal, Vs. Acit, 83, Sunder Nagar, New Circle-20(1), New Delhi Delhi Pan :Aagpp8743D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Somil Aggarwal & Sh. Deepesh Garg, Adv. Respondent By Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…was levied by the Assessing Officer, however, the Hon’ble High Court held that claim made in the return was bonafide and deleted the penalty. The Ld. counsel also referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Amit Jain (2013) 351 ITR 74 (Delhi) and submitted that merely because the Assessing Officer treated the income under some other head, same cannot be characterised as particulars reported in the return as inaccurate particulars or suppression of facts . 6 5. On the contrary, the Ld. DR relied on the finding of the lower authorities and submitted that the finding of the Ld. C…

Shri Vishnu Kumar Bhargava, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 694/JPR/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Mar 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: None (Written submissions)For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT)
Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 69

…ngeeta Leasing 343 ITR 428 (Delhi) • CIT vs. Sadhu Singh & Sons 344 ITR 316 (P &H) • CIT vs. Lakhani Footwear Ltd. 347 ITR 478 (P &H) • Mehsons Export Vs. ITO 347 ITR 639 (All) • Price Water House Coopers pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 348 ITR 306 (SC) • CIT vs. Amit Jain 351 ITR 74 (Delhi) • CIT vs. Amtek Auto Ltd. 352 ITR 394 (P &H) 3 Vishnu Kumar Bhargava vs. ITO • CIT vs. P. rojes 356 ITR 703 (Mad) • Naresh Chandra Agrawal vs. CIT 357 ITR 514 (All) • CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 359 ITR 565 (Karn) • CIT vs. Krishi Tyer Retreading & Rubber Ind. 360 ITR 580 (Raj.) • CIT vs. Whiteline chemicals 360 ITR 385 (G…

Oberoi Buildings and Investments Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-5, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1938/KOL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Feb 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…essing Officer was of the opinion that the income fells under some other head cannot be reason enough to treat the particulars reported in the return as "inaccurate particulars". Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of CIT –vs.- Amit Jain (2013) 351 ITR 74, wherein the above issue come up before the Delhi High Court. The Delhi High Court’s ruling is based on the Supreme Court ruling in CIT –vs.- Reliance Petro Products Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158. Even otherwise, it is submitted that the appellant has filed appeal before the High Court against the order of the abovementioned ITAT order on the basis…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Acee Enterprises, New Delhi

ITA 6519/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.P.Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6516/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6517/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6518/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITA No. 6519/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2008-09 DCIT, ACEE Enterprises, Circle 1(2), Punjabi Bhavan, 4th floor, vs New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi-110002 (PAN: AAACA0857G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Date of Hearing : 01.11.2017 Date of Pronounce…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Acee Enterprises, New Delhi

ITA 6518/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.P.Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6516/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6517/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6518/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITA No. 6519/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2008-09 DCIT, ACEE Enterprises, Circle 1(2), Punjabi Bhavan, 4th floor, vs New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi-110002 (PAN: AAACA0857G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Date of Hearing : 01.11.2017 Date of Pronounce…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Acee Enterprises, New Delhi

ITA 6517/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.P.Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6516/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6517/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6518/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITA No. 6519/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2008-09 DCIT, ACEE Enterprises, Circle 1(2), Punjabi Bhavan, 4th floor, vs New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi-110002 (PAN: AAACA0857G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Date of Hearing : 01.11.2017 Date of Pronounce…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Acee Enterprises, New Delhi

ITA 6516/DEL/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri B.P.Jain & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv
Section 143Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P.JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6516/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6517/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2005-06 ITA No. 6518/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2007-08 ITA No. 6519/Del /2014 Asstt. Year: 2008-09 DCIT, ACEE Enterprises, Circle 1(2), Punjabi Bhavan, 4th floor, vs New Delhi. 10, Rouse Avenue, New Delhi-110002 (PAN: AAACA0857G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Satendra Pal, Sr. DR Respondent by : Shri M.P. Rastogi, Adv. Date of Hearing : 01.11.2017 Date of Pronounce…

ITO 23(3)(1), Navi Mumbai vs. Anjana Sinha, Navi Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4351/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2016AY 2007-08
Section 143(3)Section 19ASection 271(1)(c)

…o trading of shares as business income. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) was imposed. Since, the transaction was duly declared and the shares was held in stock in trade, levy of penalty was held to be unjustified. Identical ratio was laid down in CIT vs Amit Jain (2013) 351 ITR 74 (Del.) ; 153 DTR 175 (Del.) ; 258 CTR 88 (Del.). The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs Bennet Coleman & Company ltd. (supra), identically decided the issue in favour of the assessee. Identical ratio was laid down in CIT vs Vamchampigons & Agros Produce (2006) 284 ITR 408 (Del.) and ACIT vs Sudarshan Fiscal Services Pvt. Ltd. (2009) 28 CC…

Nationwide Pharmassist Distribution Pvt. Ltd ( Now Merged With Bigdeal Mercantile P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. ITO WD 7(1)(1)

ITA 5648/MUM/2008[1998-1999]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2015AY 1998-1999

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Saktijit Deyआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.5648 & 49/Mum/2008,& 5650/Mum/08, िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-1998-99,2000-01 & 2002-03 Nationwide Pharmassist Income Tax Officer Ward 7(1)(1) Distribution Private Limited Mumbai. (Now Merged With Bigdeal Mercantile Pvt. Ltd.) Vs Nicholas Piramal Tower, Ganpatrao Kadam Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013. Pan: Aaacn 3346 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती ओर से/Assessee By : Shri J.D. Mistry & Shri Neeraj Seth राज" की ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Samir Tekriwal-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2015 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 14-10-2015 आयकर अिधिनयम,1961 1961 की धारा 254 254(1)के अ"ग"त आदेश 1961 1961 254 254 Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) खंडपीठ के अनुसार Per Bench- Challenging The Order Dated 06.06.2008 Of Cit(A)-Vii,Mumbai,The Assessee Has Filed Appeals For The Above Mentioned Three Assessment Years.

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry & Shri Neeraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 57

…order for the AY 01-02 was passed on 30.1.2004.He referred to pg-21 of the paper book and stated that reasons for re-opening of the assessment were not supplied to the assessee.He relied upon the cases of Bennet Coleman & Co. (33 Taxmann.com 227), Amit Jain( 33 Taxmann.com 178) and Procter and Gamble Hygiene Heath Care Ltd. (Income tax Appeal (L)No.946 of 2012 dt.12.3.2013).Departmental Representative(DR)supported the order of the FAA and relied upon the cases of Zoom Communication and PSP Industries.He contended that it was not a case of change of head of income,that the income has increased 5648-49 &50/08Nati…