NARESH HIRAN, MUMBAI V. ITO 30(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1235/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3574 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-02-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: NITESH GANDHI
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment; Bogus purchase; Search and seizure; Accommodation entries; Onus to prove; Retraction; Reassessment proceedings; Set aside; Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 143(1); 131; 68; 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) NARESH HIRAN, C-103, VASTU PARK, EVERSHINE NAGAR, MALAD(W), MUMBAI 400 064. PAN:ABJPH 8838H ...... APPELLANT VS. ITO 30(2)(4), C-13. ROOM NO.609, PRATYAKSH KAR BHAVAN, BKC, BANDRA(E), MUMBAI -400051 ..... RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI NITESH GANDHI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.JAIN DATE OF HEARING : 16/09/2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 /10/2019 ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST ORD ER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS)-41( IN SHORT T HE CIT(A)), MUMBAI DATED 20/12/2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS AS EMANATING FROM RECORDS IN THI S CASE ARE: THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE IMP UGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR ON 30/03/2013 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,71,576 /-. THE RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS PROCESSED UNDER SECTION 143(1) OF THE INCOME TAX 2 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) ACT, 1961 ( IN SHORT THE ACT). ON THE BASIS OF T HE SEARCH AND SEIZURE ACTION UNDER SECTION 132 OF THE ACT CARRIED OUT IN THE CASE OF SHRI BHANWARLAL JAIN AND GROUP CONCERNS ON 03/10/2013, I NFORMATION WAS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE ASSESSEE T HAT THE ASSESSEE IS ONE OF THE BENEFICIARIES OF BOGUS CONCERNS OPERATED AND CONTROLLED BY SHRI BHANWARLAL JAIN AND SHRI RAJESH JAIN. THE AFORESAI D PERSONS HAD FLOATED VARIOUS COMPANIES/BENAMI CONCERNS AND WERE ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES IN THE FORM OF BOGUS UNSECURE D LOANS, BOGUS PURCHASES AND BOGUS CAPITAL GAINS, ETC. IT WAS ALL EGED THAT DURING THE PERIOD RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL , THE ASSESSEE HAD SECURED ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES ON ACCOUNT OF UNSEC URED LOANS FROM FOLLOWING ENTITIES OF BHANWARLAL JAIN GROUP:- NAME OF THE ENTITY AMOUNT (RS.) M/S. ROSE IMPEX 25,00,000 M/S. NAVKAR DIAMOND 50,00,000 M/S. SURYA DIAM 14,00,000 TOTAL 89,00,000 3. ON THE BASIS OF AFORESAID INFORMATION ASSESSMENT FOR 2012-13 WAS REOPENED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ADDITION OF R S.64,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT BOGUS UNSECURED LOANS FROM M/S. NAVKAR DIAM OND AND M/S.SURYA DIAM. AGGRIEVED AGAINST THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATE D 04/03/2016 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 147 OF THE ACT, THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) CHALLENGING RE-OPENING OF ASSE SSMENT AND ADDITION ON MERITS. THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE FINDINGS OF ASSESSIN G OFFICER AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION HOLDING THAT THE ALLEGED UNSECURED LOA NS ARE NOT GENUINE AND IT IS A CASE OF ACCOMMODATION ENTRY IN LIEU OF UNA CCOUNTED CASH. NOW, 3 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNA L ASSAILING THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.64,00,000/ - ON MERITS AND CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT . 4. SHRI NISHIT GANDHI, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE CHALLENGING REOPENING SUBMITTED THAT IT IS BAD IN LAW AS THE R EASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING ARE BORROWED AND IT IS NOT BASED ON THE SATISFACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER . THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER POINTED THAT SIMILAR REASONS FOR REOPENING ASSESSMENT WERE RECORDED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THE MATT ER TRAVELLED UPTO THE TRIBUNAL IN AN APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.12 36/MUM/2017. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 20/04/2018, ALLOWED THE A PPEAL OF ASSESSEE ON MERITS. SINCE, THE REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING ASSESSMENT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ARE ON SIMILAR LINES, THE ADDITION IS LIABLE TO BE DELETED IN THE LIGHT OF TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ITA NO.12 36/MUM/17 DATED 20/04/2018(SUPRA). 4.1 THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSES SEE RAISED MULTIPLE CONTENTIONS ASSAILING THE ADDITION. HE CONTENDED TH AT THE BASIS OF ENTIRE ADDITION IS STATEMENT OF SHRI BHANWARLAL JAIN R ECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) AND UNDER SECTION 131 OF THE ACT AFTER SEARC H AND SEIZURE ACTION. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE DOCU MENTARY EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE/CONFIRMED THE A DDITION. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE FAILED TO TAKE NOTE OF THE F ACT THAT SHRI. BHANWARLAL JAIN HAS RETRACTED FROM HIS STATEMENT AND HAS FILED RETRACTION AFFIDAVIT DATED 15/05/2014. THUS, NO RELIANCE CAN BE PLACED F OR MAKING ADDITION ON 4 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) STATEMENT OF SHRI. BHANWARLAL JAIN RECORDED UNDER SECTIONS 132(4) & 131 OF THE ACT. 4.2 THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESS EE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE AS SESSEE FURNISHED CONFIRMATION FROM THE LENDERS, COPY OF BANK STATEME NTS EVIDENCING RECEIPT AND REPAYMENT OF LOANS, COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGE MENT OF INCOME TAX RETURNS OF THE LENDERS AND COPIES OF AUDITED ACCOUN TS OF THE LENDERS. THE ABOVE DOCUMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE AU THORITIES BELOW. THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED HIS ONUS OF PROVING GE NUINENESS OF LOAN TRANSACTIONS. THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE REMAIN UNREBUTTED. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER POINTED THAT UNSECURED LOAN TAKEN BY ASSESS EE FROM M/S. NAVKAR DIAMONDS, RS.50,00,000/- WAS REPAID IN THE SUBSEQUE NT ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE REFERRED TO THE BANK STATEMENT AT PAGE 31 OF THE PAPER BOOK TO SHOW THAT LOAN WAS REPAID THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL ON 23/03/2013. 4.3 THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSES SEE SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ARE IDENTICAL TO FACTS IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE ON ACC OUNT OF NON-GENUINE UNSECURED LOANS ARE LIABLE TO BE DELETED FOR PARI TY OF REASONS RECORDED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11(SUPRA ). 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI. S.K.JAIN REPRESENTING THE DEPARTMENT VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. THE LD. D EPARTMENTAL 5 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT REASSESSMENT PROCEEDI NGS WERE INITIATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AFTER RECORDING REASONS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN REASONS FOR REOPENING HAS GIVEN SOURCE OF INFORMAT ION FOR INITIATING REASSESSMENT, THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY ASSE SSING OFFICER AFTER ANALYZING THE INFORMATION WITH DUE APPLICATION OF I NDEPENDENT MIND. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT SHRI BHANWARLAL JAIN IN HIS STATEMENT RECORDED DURING SEARCH ADMITTED THAT HE I S ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. THE ASSESSEE IS O NE OF THE BENEFICIARIES OF SUCH BOGUS TRANSACTIONS. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY REPRESENTA TIVES OF RIVAL SIDES AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BE LOW. THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL HAS CHALLENGED ADDITION OF RS.64,00,000/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED NON-GENUINE UNSECURED LOANS FR OM M/S. NAVKAR DIAMOND AND M/S. SURYA DIAM. THE ADDITION IN THE HA NDS OF ASSESSEE HAS BEEN MADE PRIMARILY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF SH RI BHANWARLAL JAIN RECORDED UNDER SECTION 132(4) & 131 OF THE ACT. 7. REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 12-13, WERE INITIATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND T HAT ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS FROM THE FOLLOWING ENTITIES OF BHANWARLAL JAIN GROUP: (I) M/S. ROSE IMPEX - RS. 25,00,000/ - (II) M/S.NAVKAR DIAMOND - RS. 50,00,000/- (III) M/S.SURYA DIAM - RS. 14,00,000/- 6 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) DURING REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFI CER FOUND THAT UNSECURED LOAN OF RS.25,00,000/- FROM ROSE IMPEX WERE PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. SINCE THE AFORESAID AMO UNT WAS ADDED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, NO ADDITION WAS MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL. THUS, THE ADDITION WAS MADE ONLY IN RESPECT OF ALLEGED UNSECURED LOANS FROM M/S. NAVKAR DIAMONDS & M/S. SU RYA DIAM. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNI SHED COPY OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2010-11 IN ITA NO.1236/MUM/2017 DATED 20/04/2018(SUPRA), WHEREIN A DDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN FROM M/S. ROSE IMPEX WA S DELETED BY THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH. THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE FINDIN GS OF THE TRIBUNAL ON THE ISSUE READS AS UNDER:- 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, AND PERUS ED THE RECORD. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE IMPUGNED ADDITION U/S. 68 OF THE A CT ON THE GROUND THAT LOAN OF RS. 25 LAKHS TAKEN FROM ROSE IMPEX WAS BOGUS SIN CE ROSE IMPLEX BELONGED TO MR. BHANWARLAL JAIN GROUP AND MR. BHANWARLAL JAIN H AS ACCEPTED THAT HIS GROUP WAS PROVIDING ONLY ACCOMMODATION ENTRIES. ON THE CO NTRARY, WE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED ALL DOCUMENTS NECESSARY TO DISCHARGE BURDEN OF PROVE PLACED UPON IT U/S. 68 OF THE ACT. IT IS WELL SETTLED PROPOSITION OF LAW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO PROVE THREE MAIN INGREDIENTS IN ORDER TO DISCHARGE BURDEN OF PROOF PLACED UPON HIM U/S. 68 OF THE ACT I.E., T HE ASSESSEE HAS TO PROVE THE IDENTITY OF CREDITOR, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDI TOR AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED CONFIRMATION OBTAINED FROM ROSE IMPEX, WHICH CONTAINED PAN AND A DDRESS OF THE CREDITOR. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNISHED COPIES OF RETURN OF INCOME FILED BY THE CREDITOR. THESE DOCUMENTS PROVE THE IDENTITY OF CREDITOR. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNISHED BANK ACCOUNT OF ROSE IMPEX AND ALSO ITS OWN BANK A CCOUNT IN ORDER TO SHOW THAT THE LOAN TRANSACTION HAS BEEN CARRIED OUT THRO UGH BANKING CHANNEL. THOUGH, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS OBSERVED THAT THERE WAS HUGE TRANSFER OF FUND BEFORE GIVING LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE, PERUSAL OF THE BANK ACCOUNT OF ROSE IMPEX WOULD SHOW THAT THE FUNDS HAVE BEEN TRANSFERRED WER E THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS ONLY AND NOT BY WAY OF DEPOSITING CASH. TH E ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FURNISHED BANK STATEMENT TO SHOW THAT THE ABOVE SAI D LOANS HAVE BEEN REPAID ON 25.3.2013. SINCE TRANSACTIONS OF TAKING LOAN AND REPAYMENT OF LOAN HAVE TAKEN PLACE THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL, IN OUR VIEW, T HE GENUINENESS OF 7 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) TRANSACTION ALSO STANDS PROVED. THE ASSESSEE HAS FU RNISHED FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF ROSE IMPEX. PERUSAL OF THE BALANCE SHEET WOULD S HOW THAT THE LOAN OF RS. 25 LAKHS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE IS DULY REFLECTED IN TH E BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER, IT CAN BE NOTICED THAT ROSE IMPE X HAS TAKEN LOANS FROM VARIOUS PERSONS, WHICH FORMED SOURCE FOR GIVING LOA N TO THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THE ROSE IMPEX WAS NOT HAVING FUNDS FOR GIVING LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE, MEANING THEREBY, CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITOR ALSO STANDS PROVED. HENCE, THERE IS MERIT IN THE CONTENTION OF THE LEAR NED AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED PRIMARY ONUS PLACED UPON IT U/S. 68 OF T HE ACT. THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT HAS HELD IN THE CASE OF SACHITAL COMMUNI CATIONS (2014) 227 TAXMAN 219, THAT IF IDENTITY OF CREDITOR AND CAPACITY OF T HE CREDITOR IS PROVED AND THE TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL, THEN NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOAN. IDENTIC AL VIEW WAS EXPRESSED BY HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PATEL RAM NIKLAL HIRJI (2004) 222 TAXAMN 15. 8. WE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT E XAMINE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND DID NOT SHOW THAT THE SAID DOCUMENTS ARE NOT RELIABLE. INSTEAD THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TOTALLY PLACED RELIANCE ON THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY MR. BHANWARLAL JAIN, WHICH IS CL AIMED TO HAVE BEEN RETRACTED. SINCE THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE U/S. 68 OF THE ACT AND SINCE WE HAVE NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DISCHARGED BURDE N OF PROOF PLACED UPON ITS SHOULDERS U/S. 68 OF THE ACT, WE ARE OF THE VIEW TH AT THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION BY SIMPLY PLAC ING RELIANCE ON THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY MR. BHANWARLAL JAIN. THE VARIOUS DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN FACT, MILITATE AGAINST THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY SH RI BHANWARLAL JAIN. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE L EARNED CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION OF RS. 25 LAKHS AND ALSO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST OF RS. 22,192/ 8. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSE E HAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT UNSECURED LOAN FROM M/S. NAVKAR DIAMOND WAS REPAID BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR I.E. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. IN SUPPORT OF HIS CONTENTION LD. AUTHORIZ ED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS REFERRED TO BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE AT PAGES 28 TO 31 OF THE PAPER BOOK. A PERUSAL OF THE SAME REV EAL THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REPAID RS.50,00,000/- TO M/S. NAVKAR DIAMONDS O N 25/03/2013 THROUGH RTGS TRANSACTION. APART FROM ABOVE, WE OBSERVE THAT M/S. 8 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) NAVKAR DIAMOND IN ITS BOOKS FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 /03/2012 HAS SHOWN LOAN ADVANCED TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD LOANS AND ADVANCES RS.50,00,000/-. THE SAID FIRM HAS ALSO FILED CONF IRMATION SUPPORTING ASESSEES CLAIM OF UNSECURED LOANS. THE AUTHORITIE S BELOW HAVE SIMPLY BRUSHED ASIDE THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED BY THE ASSES SEE, WHICH INTER-ALIA, INCLUDES CONFIRMATION FROM THE LENDING PARTIES, COP Y OF BANK STATEMENT OF THE ASSESSEE, COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RETURN OF INCOME OF LENDERS, ETC. FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS. THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE MADE ADDITION MERELY ON THE BASIS OF STATEMENT OF BHANWARILAL JAIN WITHOUT THERE BEING ANY CORROBORA TIVE EVIDENCE. EVEN THE SAID STATEMENT WAS RETRACTED BY BHANWARLAL JAIN . IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF UNSECURED LOANS FR OM M/S. NAVKAR DIAMOND IS UNSUSTAINABLE. 9. AS REGARDS UNSECURED LOANS FROM M/S. SURYA DIAM IS CONCERNED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONFIRMATION FROM THE LENDER, THE SAME IS AT PAGE-20 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED COP Y OF AUDITED ACCOUNTS OF THE SAID FIRM AT PAGES 22 TO 26 OF THE PAPER BOOK. THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARS IN THE BOOKS OF M/S. SURYA DIAM IN SCHEDULE-D OF BALACE SHEET AS ON 31/03/2012 UNDER THE HEAD LOANS AND ADVANCES. WE OBSERVE THAT UNSECURED LOANS FROM M/S. SURYA DIAM IS ON THE SAME FOOTING AS LOAN FROM M/S. ROSE IMPEX, THE TRIBUNAL HAS DELETED THE ADDITION VIDE ORDER DATED 20/04/2018 (SUPRA). THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE FINDING OF TRIBUNAL HAS ALREADY BEEN REPRODUCED ABO VE. ON ACCOUNT OF PARITY OF TRANSACTIONS, THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE C O-ORDINATE BENCH WOULD MUTANDIS MUTATIS APPLY IN THE PRESENT SET OF TRANSACTIONS AS WELL. T HE 9 ITA NO.1235/MUM/2017(A.Y. 2012-13) GROUND NO.1 OF APPEAL STANDS ALLOWED AND THE FIND INGS OF CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE ARE SET-ASIDE. 10. SINCE WE HAVE DELETED THE ADDITIONS ON MERITS, THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.2, CHALLENGING REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT H AS BECOME ACADEMIC. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS NOT TAKEN UP FOR ADJUDICATIO N. 11. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO.3 TO 5 ARE GENERAL I N NATURE AND, HENCE, REQUIRES NO ADJUDICATION. 12. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D IN THE TERMS AFORESAID. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THURSDAY THE 31 ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019. SD/- SD/- (RAJESH KUMAR) (VIKAS AWASTHY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 31/10/2019 VM , SR. PS(O/S) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT , 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI