DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 7 1 , MUMBAI V. ROYAL INDIA CORPORATION LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 4744/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by the Revenue against M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited concerning the validity of assessments made under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act for several assessment years. The core issue was whether the assessments were based on incriminating material related to the specified assessment years. The Tribunal examined the satisfaction note and the material/documents seized during the search and found no direct correlation with the assessment years under consideration. The Tribunal also referenced the decision in the case of Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. ITO, which emphasized that incriminating material must be identified with respect to the specific assessment years before initiating proceedings under Section 153C.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 40351 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: M/s Sinhgad Technical Education Society, Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. ITO, Index Securities & Research Pvt. Ltd v. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANYOGITA NAGPAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRAWAN KUMAR JHA
• Keywords: Set aside; Reassessment proceedings; Document seized; Documents seized
• Section: 148; 143(3); 56; 132; 153A; 131; 153C; 133A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2014-15) ITA No.4745/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2015-16) ITA No.4742/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2019-20) ITA No.4743/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2018-19) & ITA No.4744/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year :2017-18) DCIT Central Circle 71, Mumbai Vs. Royal India Corporation Limited 34, 2nd Floor Plot No.45/47, Shankti Bhavan Dhirubhai Parekh Marg Ladwadi, Kalbadevi Maharashtra-400 002 PAN/GIR No.AABCN3770A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Shrawan Kumar Jha Revenue by Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal Date of Hearing 20/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 29/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 2 PER BENCH: The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the department against consolidated order passed by the ld CIT(A)-49, Mumbai for the A.Yrs.2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.153C. 2. In all the appeals Revenue has taken following grounds:- “1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law while holding that of notice u/s 153C of the Act without appreciating that while recording the satisfaction for issue of notice u/s 153C of the Act, the test for incriminating material has to be only in nature of prima facie belief on some material having live nexus and not in the nature of absolute evidence established after detailed investigation of facts or law. 2 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in applying the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Sinhgad Technical Education Society, which was distinguishable on the facts of the present case as the same pertained to prior period to 01.04.2005 whereas after 01.04.2005 notice u/s 153C of the Act can be issued when AO is satisfied that seized material has a bearing on the assessment of income of other person. 3 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in applying the provisions of Rule 112F of the Income Tax Rules, As the Rule 112F is not applicable to the facts of the case, as there is no indication to show that the cash so seized are in any manner connected with the ongoing election in an assembly or Parliamentary constituency. 4. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous in law and on facts of the case and is liable to be set aside and the order of the AO be restored.\" ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 3 3. The brief facts are an intimation was received on 16.10.2019 by the Control Room set up during Maharashtra State Assembly election-2019, from Lokmanya Tilak Marg (L.T Marg) Police station, Mumbai which was communicated to the Nodal Officer i.e. Jt. Director of Income Tax (Inv.), Unit-7, Mumbai regarding seizure of cash of Rs 60 Lakh from Shri Sagar Ramesh Ajagaonkar and Rs. 40 Lakh from Shri Ramesh Ashok Jain by the Police Authorities of the L.T. Marg Police Station. Seized cash of Rs. 1 crore was requisitioned and in course of the same, statements of Shri Sagar Ramesh Ajagaonkar and Shri Ramesh Ashok Jain was recorded u/s 131 of the Act in which they stated that the said cash belongs to M/s Royal India Corporation Ltd. 4. Subsequently, a survey action u/s 133A of the Act was carried out at the premises of M/s Royal India Corporation Ltd on 18/10/2019. Accordingly, notice u/s 153C of the Act has been issued by the Assessing Officer on 28/10/2021. In response to the notice the assessee filed his return of income on 08/12/2021. In response to notices u/s.153C assessee has filed the return of income. 5. Here in this case the main issue involved is that the additions have been made by the ld. AO u/s.153C are beyond the scope of Section 153C as same is not based on any incriminating material and also in absence of any material or information pertaining to the assessee relating to these assessment years, no assessment u/s.153C could have been made. The ld. AO based on the requisition u/s.153A in case of ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 4 Shri Sagar Ramesh Ajagaonkar and Shri Ramesh Ashok Jain had issued a notice u/s.153C on the ground that cash seized belongs to assessee and accordingly, he has recorded the satisfaction. However, in the assessment order he has proceeded to make the addition on altogether different grounds, like on account of unexplained loan transactions disclosed in the balance sheet, addition on account of excessive claim of employee benefit expenses, addition on account of excessive claim of expenses etc. None of these additions were based on satisfaction note or incriminating material. 6. Ld. CIT(A) has quashed the order u/s.153C has held as under:- “18. It may be noted here that in the case of Saksham Commodities Ltd. v. ITO (supra.), the AO had referred to certain incriminating material found pertaining to the F. Ys. 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 (relevant to A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012- 13) in the satisfaction note. The assessee contended that invoking of Section 153C of the Act for A.Y 2015-16, for which no incriminating material was found, was arbitrary and legally unsustainable. The Hon'ble High Court held that the incriminating material has to be identified with respect to the assessment year to which it relates or may be likely to impact before the initiation of proceedings under Section 153C of the Act. It was further held that a material, document or asset recovered in the course of a search or on the basis of a requisition made would justify abatement of only those pending assessments or reopening of such concluded assessments to which alone it relates or is likely to have a bearing on the estimation of income and that the mere existence of a power to assess or reassess the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year corresponding to the year of search or the \"relevant assessment year\" would not justify a sweeping or indiscriminate invocation of Section 153C ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 5 19. In the present case, as stated above, the e requisitioned asset and the incriminating material found during proceedings u/s 132A of the Act (being cash seized from Shri Sagar Ramesh Ajagaonkar and Shri Ramesh Ashok Jain on 16/10/2019 and the statements of various persons recorded u/s 131 of the Act as discussed above), pertained to the FY 2019-20 relevant to A.Y 2020-21. From the satisfaction note recorded by the AO on 25/10/2021, it is apparent that he had issued the notices u/s 153C of the Act for the years under consideration, assuming that once requisitioned assets and/or documents are received and the same are found to be relating to the assessee, notices u/s. 153C are required to be issued for all the assessment years in the same manner in which notices are issued u/s. 153A of the Act consequent to search carried out u/s. 132 of the Act. As observed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the above judgement, the Assessing Officer in the case of Saksham Commodities Ltd. had also proceeded on the same premise Accordingly, the said decision is squarely applicable to the appellant's case. 20. It can be seen from the Assessment orders for the A.Y 2014-15 to A.Y 2019-20 the additions / disallowance made by the A.O are not related to the cash seizure made. All these additions/disallowances are not linked to any incriminating material found during the search/requisition made u/s 132/132A of the I.T Act, which clearly demonstrates that, assets seized/requisitioned in this case has no bearing on the determination of total income for all such Assessment Years. 21. In view of the above discussion, I hold that while recording the satisfaction note, the AO had failed to correlate that there were any assets requisitioned u/s. 132A of the Act and/or any incriminating material found during the course of proceedings u/s. 132A of the Act pertaining to the appellant has any bearing on determination of total income of the assessment years under consideration. Consequently, and in view of the decisions discussed herein above, I hold that the AO had no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings u/s. 153C of the Act in the appellant's case for the years under consideration. 21. Before me the appellant has also submitted that as per Rule 112F of the Income-Tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as \"the ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 6 Rules\") the AO was not required to issue notices u/s: 153C of the Act in its case for the assessment years under consideration as the c Maharashtra. cash was seized during the Assembly polis 2019 of 21.2 I have considered the facts of the case in the present it case the requisition u/s. 132A of the Act was made consequent to receipt of intimation by the Control Room set up by the Income Tax Department after declaration of the Maharashtra Assembly Election-2019, regarding seizure of cash by authorities of the LT Marg Police Station, Mumbai…………………………………………………………………… 21.2.2 It can be seen that as per the Rule 112F, if a person is found to be in possession of any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable articles or things, etc. as a result of a search u/s 132(1) of the Act or a requisition made u/s. 132A of the Act, and where such search is conducted or such requisition is made in the territorial area of an Assembly or Parliamentary constituency in respect of which a notification has been issued under section 30 read with section 56 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (43 of 1951), the Assessing Officer shall not be required to issue notices u/s 153C of the Act for assessment or reassessment of the total income for six assessment years immediately preceding the search is conducted or requisition is made assessment year in which the 21.3 The notification for Maharashtra Assembly election 2019 was issued on 27.09.2019 and the date of poll was 21 10.2019. The cash was seized 16.10 2019. Thus, the appellants case clearly falls under the provisions of Rule 112F Accordingly, I agree with the contention of the appellant that as per Rule 112F of the Rules also, the AO could not have issued the notices u/s, 153C of the Act for the assessment years under consideration. 22. In view of the discussion in the foregoing paragraphs, I hold that the notices issued u/s. 153C of the Act by the AO in the case of the appellant company for all the assessment years under consideration (A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019- 20) and, consequently, also all the impugned assessment orders are invalid and bad in law. Accordingly, the impugned ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 7 assessment orders passed by the AO u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Act for A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20 are hereby quashed. All the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant challenging the validity of the notices issued by the AO u/s. 153C of the Act in all these five appeals are, accordingly, ALLOWED. 23. Since the impugned assessment orders in all these five appeals have been quashed by me holding the same to be invalid and bad in law, the grounds of appeal taken by the appellant contesting the additions, made therein by the AO, on legality and merits have become infructuous BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR-WISE DECISIONS: 24. In view of the discussion in the foregoing paragraphs, the brief synopsis of the assessment year-wise decisions is as tabulated hereunder: Sr. No. Appeal Number Asst. Year Synopsis of the AY-wise decisions 1 CIT(A) 49, Mumbai/10479/2013- 14 2014-15 In the result, the present appeal is ALLOWED 2 CIT(A)-49, Mumbai/10589/2014- 15 2015-16 In the result, the present appeal is ALLOWED 3 CIT(A) 49, Mumbai/10773/2016- 17 2017-18 In the result, the present appeal is ALLOWED 4 CIT(A) 49, Mumbai/10556/2017- 18 2018-19 In the result, the present appeal is ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 8 ALLOWED. 5 CIT(A) 49, Mumbai/10367/2018- 19 2019-20 In the result, the present appeal is ALLOWED. 7. We have heard both the parties and also perused the relevant finding given in the impugned order. Here in this case notice u/s.153C has been issued on the basis of requisition of cash from Shri Shri Sagar Ramesh Ajagaonkar and Shri Ramesh Ashok Jain who have stated that seized cash of Rs. 1 Crore does not belong to them and it belongs to the assessee i.e. M/s. Royal India Corporation. It has been brought on record that in the assessment order for the A.Y.2020-21 in the case of the assessee i.e. Royal India Corporation Ltd., assessment has been made wherein this addition of Rs.1 Crore on account of unexplained cash seized has been added. Thus, the material which was found i.e. in the form of cash from the two employees of the assessee company has already been added and assessed to tax in the A.Y.2020-21 vide order dated 31/03/2023. Now without there any incriminating material or document pertaining to A.Yrs. 2014-15 to 2019-20, notice u/s.153C has been issued and all the additions / disallowance made by the ld. AO are nowhere related to the cash seized nor linked to any incriminating material found during the search / requisition made u/s.132A. Thus, the assets seized / requisition has no bearing on the determination of the total income for all such assessment years. ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 9 The ld. CIT(A) has categorically held that ld. AO has failed to co- relate that they were any undisclosed asset found or any incriminating material found during the course of proceedings u/s.132A pertaining to the assessee for the relevant assessment years having any bearing on the determination of the total income of the assessment years under consideration and therefore, he has no jurisdiction to initiate the proceedings u/s.153C of the Act in assessee’s case for the years under consideration. 8. For the sake of ready reference the relevant provisions of Section 153C reads as under:- 153C. (1)Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if, that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made and for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub-section (1) of section 153A : ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 10 Provided that in case of such other person, the reference to the date of initiation of the search under section 132 or making of requisition under section 132A in the second proviso to sub-section (1) of] section 153A shall be construed as reference to the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person : Provided further that the Central Government may by rules made by it and published in the Official Gazette, specify the class or classes of cases in respect of such other person, in which the Assessing Officer shall not be required to issue notice for assessing or reassessing the total income for six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted or requisition is made and for the relevant assessment year or years as referred to in sub-section (1) of section 153A except in cases where any assessment or reassessment has abated. (2) Where books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned as referred to in sub-section (1) has or have been received by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person after the due date for furnishing the return of income for the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search is conducted under section 132 or requisition is made under section 132A and in respect of such assessment year— (a) no return of income has been furnished by such other person and no notice under sub-section (1) of section 142 has been issued to him, or (b) a return of income has been furnished by such other person but no notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has been served and limitation of serving the notice under sub-section (2) of section 143 has expired, or (c) assessment or reassessment, if any, has been made, before the date of receiving the books of account or documents or assets seized or requisitioned by the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person, such Assessing Officer shall issue the notice and assess or reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A. ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 11 (3) Nothing contained in this section shall apply in relation to a search initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets requisitioned under section 132A on or after the 1st day of April, 2021. 9. On a careful perusal of the provisions, we find that, there is a vast difference in the application of provisions of the section 153C of the Act prior to 01/06/2015 and thereafter. Substantial amendment was made in the said section in two phases: i) W.e.f. 01/06/2015- when no simultaneous amendment was made in the section 153A of the Act; and ii) W.e.f. 01/04/2017- when the amendment was made parallel to the amendment u/s 153A of the Act. Ergo, a) The section 153C was amended w.e.f. 01/06/2015 when the following additional amendments were made and this led to construction of the said section as below: \"Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person……….” ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 12 b) Thereafter, the amendments were made in the said section w.e.f. 01/04/2017 alongwith section 153A and the section shaped and which remained in the statute till 31/03/2021 mentioned above. c) The amendments brought in section 153C was only to protect the revenue and not to resort to rigours of section 148 and whenever in cases of search in case of a person, any material or information pertaining to such other person is found AO can initiate 153C and can make addition or assessment for the relevant assessment year or years. 10. Thus, after the amendment therein w.e.f. 01/06/2015, we find that, the concept of belonging was just restricted to the valuables found in any form u/s 153C(1)(a) of the Act, but a new sub clause (b) has been inserted as above, where the requirement in physical form of books of account, documents, etc. of a person not searched to have been seized from the premises of the person searched was dispensed with and the word ‘belonging’ was removed by substituting the same with pertains or pertain to besides making an addition of the words there in for any information contained therein pertains or relates to a person not searched. Thus, the scope of application of the said section has been widened which was explained in the para 36 to the Notes to Clauses of the Finance Bill 2015 as below: Clause 36 of the Bill seeks to amend section 153C of the Income-tax Act relating to assessment of income of any other person. ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 13 The existing provisions contained in section 153C provide that in the course of an assessment proceeding, in the case of a person in whose case search action under section 132 or action under section 132A have been conducted, and whether the Assessing Officer is satisfied that the assets or books of account or documents seized belong to another person, then, the assets or books of account or documents seized shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against such other person, if he is satisfied that the books of accounts or documents or assets seized have a bearing on determination on the total income of such other person. It is proposed to amend sub-section (1) of the said section so as to provide that where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that, (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, a person other than the person referred to in section 153A, then, the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned, shall be handed over to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction over such other person and that Assessing Officer shall proceed against each such other person and issue notice and assess or reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A, if that Assessing Officer is satisfied that the books of account or documents or assets, seized or requisitioned, have a bearing on the determination of the total income of such other person for the relevant assessment year or years referred to in sub- section (1) of section 153A. This amendment will take effect from 1st June, 2015. 11. Now as per the provision of Section 153C, what is required to be seen that if the ld. AO (of the non-search assessee) is satisfied that the information so received has a bearing on the determination of total income of the said person for the relevant year or years which means that satisfaction to the effect of ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 14 escapement of such income may be for one year or more after verification of the material received. The reason being in some cases it may be that the person searched may not be recording the relevant transaction in his books of account leading to incrimination but the non-searched person might have properly disclosed the said transaction in his books of account, where it can no more remain incriminating in his hands. In such case, no reassessment proceedings can be initiated under the provisions of the section 153C of the Act of the non-searched person. Thus, Section 153C clearly envisages to issue notice only for the assessment year or years for which any incriminating information relating to the non-search person was found to the satisfaction of the ld. AO of the non-search person that is the reason why the legislature in its wisdom has specifically mentioned separately year and years therein clearly restricting its application only to the assessment period for which the incriminating information was found and not for the period of six years, and secondly, there can be more than one reassessment proceedings for the same assessment year by taking recourse to the provisions of the section 153C of the Act as the action may follow on finding incriminating information for the same period but from different persons searched and at different locations or different times. In such a situation, every time when such information is found in a new search, a fresh proceeding u/s 153C of the Act will ensue irrespective of the earlier action(s). There is no limit to multiple reassessments in ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 15 such cases as is in the case of reassessment proceedings u/s 148 of the Act,(3). 12. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Sinhgad Technical Education Society 2017-TIOL-309-SC-IT (para 18) has also elaborated the above law as below: 18) The ITAT permitted this additional ground by giving a reason that it was a jurisdictional issue taken up on the basis of facts already on the record and, therefore, could be raised. In this behalf, it was noted by the ITAT that as per the provisions of Section 153C of the Act, incriminating material which was seized had to pertain to the Assessment Years in question and it is an undisputed fact that the documents which were seized did not establish any co-relation, document-wise, with these four Assessment Years. Since this requirement under Section 153C of the Act is essential for assessment under that provision, it becomes a jurisdictional fact. We find this reasoning to be logical and valid, having regard to the provisions of Section 153C of the Act. Para 9 of the order of the ITAT reveals that the ITAT had scanned through the Satisfaction Note and the material which was disclosed therein was culled out and it showed that the same belongs to Assessment Year 2004-05 or thereafter. After taking note of the material in para 9 of the order, the position that emerges there from is discussed in para 10. It was specifically recorded that the counsel for the Department could not point out to the contrary. It is for this reason the High Court has also given its imprimatur to the aforesaid approach of the Tribunal. 13. Thereafter, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Index Securities & Research Pvt. Ltd2017-TIOL-1813-HC-DEL-IT(para 31) has held as below. 31. As regards the second jurisdictional requirement viz., that the seized documents must be incriminating and must relate to the AYs whose assessments are sought to be reopened, the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 16 Income Tax-III, Pune v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society (supra) settles the issue and holds this to be an essential requirement. The decisions of this Court in CIT-7 v. RRJ Securities (2016) 380 ITR 612 (Del) and ARN Infrastructure India Limited v. ACIT [2017] 394 ITR 569 (Del) also hold that in order to justify the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153C of the Act, the documents seized must be incriminating and must relate to each of the AYs whose assessments are sought to be reopened. Since the satisfaction note forms the basis for initiating the proceedings under Section 153C of the Act, it is futile for Mr. Manchanda to contend that this requirement need not be met for initiation of the proceedings but only during the subsequent assessment. 14. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is in accordance with the provisions of Section 153C and it is justified in holding that once there is no incriminating document or information or material pertaining to the aforesaid assessment years, action u/s.153C could not have been taken and in any case none of the additions which have been made are emanating from the satisfaction note or any incriminating documents pertaining to the assessee as already stated above whatever material or information was found which was incriminating, same has already been added and taxed in the assessment order passed in the A.Y.2020-21. Accordingly, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. 15. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on 29th January, 2025. Sd/- (GIRISH AGRAWAL) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 29/01/2025 ITA No.4747/Mum/2024 M/s. Royal India Corporation Limited 17 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// "