SILVERLINE INVEESTMET COMPANY LTD, MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(3)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1453/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9807 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: J
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 08-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T S KHALSA
• Assessee Lawyers: NITESH DOSHI
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Unexplained expenditure; Business income; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 69C; 143(3); 142(1); 40(a)(ia); 133(6); 143(1); 250; 143(2); 13; 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 (A.Y: 2014-15) SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. LTD., 112 MITTAL TOWER, C WING, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400021. VS. ITO 2(3)(2) RM NO. 581A, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400020 PAN/GIR NO. : ACCS0039E APPELLANT .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI NITESH DOSHI, AR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T.S KHALSA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 19 .0 5 .2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 07 .0 6 .2021 / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: THE APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORD ER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 6 MUM BAI, PASSED U/S. 143(3) AND 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1 961. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FALLOWING GROUNDS OF A PPEAL: 1(I). THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLD ING THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF I T ACT, OF RS. 12,01,648/. 1(II) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUND, THE LE ARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION U/ S 68 OF I T ACT, OF RS.12,01,648/- WHICH (FIGURE) WAS ARRIVED A T BY THE LEARNED AO MERELY ON THE BASIS OF ERRONEOUS ARITHME TICAL ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 2 - FIGURE WORK. 1(III)THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDI NG THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF I T ACT, OF RS. 12,01,648/- WITH OUT TOUCHING THE BASIC ISSUES INVOLVED VIZ, THE PARTICULAR CONCE RNS IN WHOSE NAMES THE CASH CREDITS STOOD, AMOUNT OF CASH CREDIT INVOLVED IN EACH CASE AND CAPACITY OF EACH CONCERN TO ADVANC E MONEY ETC WHICH ARE CONSPICUOUSLY ABSENT IN THE ASSESSMEN T ORDER APPEALED AGAINST. 1(IV). THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLD ING THE CASH CREDITS APPEARING IN CASE OF SEVEN LOAN CREDIT ORS OUT OF WHOM PARTICULARLY FOUR LOAN CREDITORS, ADMITTEDLY, CONTINUED TO EXIST SO FROM PRECEDING YEARS, AND THE ASSESSMENTS FOR THOSE YEARS WERE COMPLETED IN THE APPELLANT'S CASE U/S 14 3(3) OF THE ACT. 1(V) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDIN G THE ADDITION U/S 68 OF I T ACT, OF RS.12,01,648/- ALTHO UGH THE ASSESSMENT ORDER APPEALED AGAINST DID NOT CONTAIN P ARTY- WISE DISCUSSION SPECIFICALLY AS TO NOTICES U/S 133(6) SE NT/SERVED ON THE PARTIES AND COMPLIANCE IF ANY, RECEIVED THERETO . 1(VI). WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS, THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE ADDITION U/ S 68 OF I T ACT, OF RS.12,01,648/- WITHOUT ANY COMMENTS ON THE CLOSELY CONNECTED ISSUE OF INTEREST-EXPENSES DEBITED TO P & L A/C AND PERTAINING TO THAT VERY CASH CREDIT AMOUNT, WHICH W AS ALLOWED BY THE LEARNED AO, AS CLAIMED. 2(I). THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDI NG DISALLOWANCE OF REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE O F RS.18,34,622/- MADE BY THE LEARNED AO. 2(II) THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDI NG DISALLOWANCE OF REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE O F RS.18,34,622/- WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE DETAILS OF T HE EXPENDITURE WITH SUPPORTING AS CALLED FOR AND SUBMI TTED BY THE APPELLANT. 2(III). THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOL DING DISALLOWANCE OF 'REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE' EXPENDITU RE OF ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 3 - RS.18,34,622/- DEBITED IN THE P & L ACCOUNT UNDER T HE HEAD, 'OPERATING EXPENSES' TOWARDS SCHOOL FUNCTIONING, MA TERIALS AND OTHER EXPENSES WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT T HIS RELATED TO ONLY AND ONLY RUNNING NURSERY AND PRIMARY SCHOOL S AT KOLKATA, RECEIPTS WHEREFROM ARE SHOWN SEPARATELY AN D OFFERED FOR TAXATION AS BUSINESS INCOME. 2(IV). THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLD ING DISALLOWANCE OF REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE O F RS.18,34,6221- BY HOLDING IT AS RELATABLE TO RENTAL RECEIPTS FOR WHICH A DEDUCTION U/S 24 OF THE ACT IS ALLOWED SEPA RATELY IN COMPUTING INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ALTER, AMEND AND/O R DELETE ANY GROUND OF APPEAL OR ADD A NEW GROUND OF APPEAL DURING HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF RUNNING NURSE RY AND PRIMARY SCHOOLS AT KOLKATA, WIND POWER MILL GENERATION BUSINESS AND DERIVES RENTAL INCOME FROM LET OUT PROPERTY. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y 2014-15 ON 28.11.2014 WITH A TOTAL INCO ME OF RS.27,57,280/- THE RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCESSED U /S 143(1) OF THE ACT. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE CASE WAS SELE CTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICE U/S 143(2) AND 142(1) OF THE AC T WAS ISSUED. IN COMPLIANCE, THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FURNISHED THE DETAIL S. THE A.O ON PERUSAL OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOUN D THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.21,58,449/- AND VERIFIED THE OPENING BALANCE AND CLOSING BALANCE AS ON 31.03.2014 AND CONFIRMATIONS WERE ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 4 - CALLED FOR IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOANS. THE ASSE SSEE BY LETTER DATED 11.08.2016 SUBMITTED GROUP SUMMARY OF UNSECURED LOANS AND ADVANCES RECEIVED. THE A.O F OUND THAT THERE IS A INCREASE OF AMOUNT OF RS. 12,01,648 /- IN UNSECURED LOANS IN THE SAID FINANCIAL YEAR. TO VERI FY THE GENUINENESS OF UNSECURED LOANS, NOTICE U/S 133(6) O F THE ACT WERE ISSUED AND MOST OF THE NOTICES WERE RETURN BACK UN SERVED. ON VERIFICATION, THE PARTIES DOES NOT HA VE CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION S WAS DOUBTED. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED THE COMPLETE DETAILS OF UNSECURED LOANS. THE IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION S OF THE PARTIES REMAIN UNEXPLAINED. (I) THE A.O CONSIDE RING THE DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT IN THE OPENING AND CLOSING BALANCE HAS APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 68 OF TH E ACT AND MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 12,01,648/-(II).SIMILAR LY THE A.O MADE ADDITION U/S 40(A)(2)(B) IN RESPECT OF NON RECONCILIATION IN DIFFERENCE IN EXPENSES TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED EXPENDITURE U/S 69C OF THE ACT RS. 18,50,908/-.(III) THE A.O FOUND AS PER THE TAX AUD IT REPORT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID INTEREST TO ITS DIREC TORS WITH OUT TDS AND CLAIMED INTEREST ON UNSECURED LOANS IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND THE A.O. APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT DISALLOWED RS. 10,58,541/.- (IV) THE A.O. ON VERIFICATION OF PROF IT AND ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 5 - LOSS ACCOUNT FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED TH E REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE AND THE A.O. HAS CALLED FOR THE SEGMENT WISE PROFIT AND LOSS PERTAINING TO REVENUE GENERATED FROM SALE OF ELECTRICITY, RECEIPTS FROM S CHOOL AND DERIVES HOUSE PROPERTY AND INTEREST INCOME. S INCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED THE DETAILS AND CLAIMED THE ENTIRE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES EXPENSES. THE A.O FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAS CLAIMED 30% STATUTORY DEDUCTION U/S24 OF THE ACT IN THE INCOME FROM HOU SE PROPERTY AND HENCE MADE AN ADDITION OF RS. 18,34,62 2/- AS NON ALLOWABLE EXPENSES AND ASSESSED THE TOTAL IN COME OF RS. 87,03,000/- AND PASSED ORDER U/S 143(3) OF T HE ACT DATED 02.11.2016. 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED A N APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A).THE CIT(A) CONSIDERED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE, FINDINGS OF THE A.O AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. WHEREAS, IN RESPECT OF TWO DISPUTED ISSUES I.E.U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND REPAIRS A ND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES, THE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION AND WHERE AS IN THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEA L, THE CIT(A) HAS GRANTED RELIEF AND PARTLY ALLOWED THE AS SESSEE APPEAL. AGGRIEVED BY THE CIT(A) ORDER, THE ASSESSE E HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 6 - 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE IN RESPECT OF UNSECURED LOANS AS THE A.O HAS ONLY MADE ADDITION OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OPENING BALANCE AND CLOSING BALANCE OF UNSECURED LOANS AT THE YEAR END WITHOUT IDENTIFYING ANY PARTICULAR LOAN TRANSCATIO N. THE LD.AR RELIED ON THE PAPER BOOK AND SUBSTANTIATED HI S ARGUMENTS RELYING ON THE AUDITED REPORT AND THE INFORMATION IN THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND PRAYED FOR ALLOWING THE CLAIM. SIMILARLY IN RESPECT OF CLAIM OF REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSE, THE A.O. OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION UN DER PROVISIONS OF SEC.24 OF THE ACT. THE LD.AR EMPHASIZ ED THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVES RENTAL INCOME FROM SCH OOL BUT HAS INCURRED SPECIFIC MAINTENANCE EXPENSES AND IT D OES NOT QUALIFY FOR THE CLAIM U/S 24 OF THE ACT. THE LD . AR REFERRED TO THE ACCOUNT STATEMENT AND NATURE OF REP AIRS AND MAINTENANCE AND EXPLAINED THAT THESE ARE THE FA CTUAL NEEDS TO BE MANDATORILY INCURRED FOR MAINTAINENCE O F BUILDING. FURTHER IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSEMENT YEA RS, THE REVENUE HAS ACCEPTED THE CLAIM AND ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION AND PRAYED FOR ALLOWING THE ASSESSEE APPE AL. CONTRA, THE LD.DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) . 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE FIRST DISPUTED ISSUE IS WIT H REGARD ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 7 - TO ADDITION OF UNSECURED LOANS. WE FIND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.68 OF THE ACT WILL COME INTO EFFE CT WHERE THERE IS A CREDIT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THE A.O HAS CONSIDERED THE OPENING AND CLOSING BALANCE OF THE UNSECURED LOANS AND TREATED THE DIFFERENCE AS A UNEXPLAINED CREDITS U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THOUGH THE A .O ISSUED HAS NOTICE U/SEC133(6) OF THE ACT, WERE THE PART INFORMATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND SOME NOTICES ARE RETURNED BACK UNSERVED. THE A.O CANNOT MAKE ADHOC ADDITION OF UNSECURED LOANS WITHOUT SPECIFYING THE PARTICULAR UNSECURED LOAN. THE LD.AR REFERRED TO TH E PAPER BOOK PAGE 34, WHERE THE ASSESSEE IN COMPLIANC E TO NOTICE U/S 142(1) OF THE ACT HAS SUBMITTED THE VARI OUS DETAILS INCLUDING THE CONFIRMATION OF UNSECURED LOA NS AT SNO 7 WHICH CANNOT BE DISPUTED. FURTHER, AT PAGE 36 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WE FIND THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A GROUP SUMMARY OF UNSECURED LOANS. THE A.O WITHOUT IDENTIFYING ANY PARTICULAR UNSECURED LOAN OF MUMBA I OR KOLKATA IN THE GROUP SUMMARY HAS MADE ADDITION OF DIFFERENCE IN OPENING AND CLOSING BALANCE OF UNSECU RED LOANS. WE FIND THAT THE METHODOLOGY ADOPTED BY THE A.O CANNOT BE ACCEPTED, WE ON PERUSAL OF THE GROUP SUMM ARY FOUND THAT IN THE OPENING BALANCE THERE ARE 7 UNSEC URED LOAN CREDITORS OF MUMBAI AND 6 UNSECURED LOAN CRED ITORS OF KOLKATA AND SOME OF THE LOAN CREDITORS HAVE BEEN ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 8 - SQUARED OFF DURING THE YEAR. WHEREAS, IN FEW CASES, ADDITIONAL LOANS HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED AND THE SAME IS REFLECTED AS THE CLOSING BALANCES IN THE LEDGER ACC OUNT OF THE GROUP SUMMARY PROVIDED. THE A.O COULD HAVE MAD E ENQUIRY IN RESPECT OF ANY PARTICULAR UNSECURED LOAN CREDITOR AND SOME OF THE LOAN CREDITORS HAVE BEEN R EPAID WHICH WAS ACCEPTED. CONSIDERING THE OVERALL FACTS A ND EVIDENCES, WE FIND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR ARE REALISTIC AND DULY SUPPORTED BY THE MATERIAL AND TH E CONFIRMATIONS ON RECORD. 6. WE ARE OF THE SUBSTANTIVE OPINION THAT THE A.O C ANNOT MAKE THE ADDITION OF UNSECURED LOANS U/S68 OF THE A CT CONSIDERING ONLY THE OPENING AND CLOSING BALANCE OF THE UNSECURED LOANS IN GROUP SUMMARY. THE UNSECURED LOA NS MAY INCREASE OR DECREASE AND ACCRUED INTEREST IS CR EDITED AND THE ACTUAL INTEREST PAYMENT BY THE ASSESSEE. FU RTHER EACH UNSECURED LOAN ACCOUNT HAS TO BE INDEPENDENTLY DEALT AND IF THE LOAN ACCOUNT DOES NOT SATISFY THE THREE INGREDIENTS OF IDENTITY, CREDITWORTHINESS AND GENUI NENESS OF THE TRANSACTION, THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.68 OF THE ACT ARE APPLICABLE. BUT IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THE A.O HAS ONLY CONSIDERED THE OPENING AND CLOSING BALANCE OF THE UNSECURED CREDIT ORS WITHOUT REFERRING TO ANY PARTICULAR LOAN CREDITOR. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) O N THIS ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 9 - GROUND OF APPEAL AS DISCUSSED IN THE ABOVE PARAGRAP HS AND DIRECT THE A.O TO DELETE THE ADDITION. 7. ON THE SECOND DISPUTED ISSUE WITH RESPECT TO RE PAIRS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENSES OF RS. 18,34,622/- CLAIMED IN PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THESE ARE THE REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE INCURRE D BY THE ASSESSEE TO MAINTAIN THE BUILDING IN GOOD CONDI TION AND IS AN ALLOWABLE CLAIM. THE LD.AR DEMONSTRATED P AGE 13 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WHICH DISCLOSES THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS RUNNING A SCHOOL AND OFFERED THE RECEIPTS FROM SC HOOLS AT SNO.18 AND WAS ACCEPTED. FURTHER THE OPERATING EXPENSES IN RESPECT OF SCHOOL AND OTHER EXPENSES AR E REFERRED AT PAGE 14 SCHEDULE 20 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THE REPAIRS AND MAINTENANC E CHARGES. FURTHER ON PERUSAL, WE FOUND IN FINANCIAL YEAR 2012-13 ALSO THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE AND WAS ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE. THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DIS CLOSED THE SCHOOL RECEIPTS SEPARATELY AND THEREFORE THE CL AIM CANNOT BE DENIED. THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING DIFFERENT PROPERTIES AND THE SCHOOL PROPERTY IS ONE OF THEM. THE LD.AR REFERRED TO THE NATURE OF REPAIRS AND MAINTE NANCE CHARGES-SCHOOL AT PAGE 19 OF THE PAPER BOOK BEING P ART OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF F.Y.2013-14 WHICH ARE VARIABL E EXPENSES PERTAINING TO REPAIR CHARGES, FIRE FIGHTIN G AMC, ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 10 - CARPENTRY CHARGES, SEWAGES AND PAINTING WORKS AND C IVIL WORKS AND RENOVATION EXPENSES ETC AND SIMILAR EXPEN SES WERE CLAIMED IN EARLIER YEARS. 8. WE ON PERUSAL OF THESE FACTS FIND THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS CLEARLY MAINTAINING THE CLAIMS OF EXPENDITURE IN TH E BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS WHICH ARE AUDITED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT AND TAX AUDIT U/SEC44AB OF THE ACT. T HE A.O HAS ACCEPTED THE FACT OF INCURRING OF THESE EXP ENSES AND NOT DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF NATURE OF EXPENDITURE. THE A.OS ONLY CONTENTION WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS RUNNING THE SCHOOL AND THE RENTAL INCOM E IS RECEIVED AND THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED 30% OF NET RE NT AS STATUTORY DEDUCTION U/S 24 OF THE ACT AND THEREFOR E ANY OTHER EXPENSES INCURRED IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCT ION. BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE TYPE/ NATURE OF EXPENDITU RE EXPLAINED ABOVE DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR DEDUCTION U /S 24 OF THE ACT AND THEY ARE NECESSARILY INCURRED FOR MAINTAINING THE SCHOOL BUILDING IN USABLE AND GOOD CONDITION FOR THE SAFETY, HEALTH AND PROTECTION OF SCHOOL CHILDREN. WE ARE OF THE SUBSTANTIVE OPINION THAT TH E CLAIM OF EXPENSES CANNOT BE DENIED. FURTHER THE LD.AR HAS EXPLAINED THAT THERE ARE 3 PROPERTIES AND ARE LET O UT AND REFERRED IN THE INCOME TAX RETURN FILED ONLINE WITH THE INCOME TAX WEBSITE AND THERE IS NO CONNECTIVITY IN THE PROPERTIES AND THE SCHOOL BUILDING IS A INDEPENDENT . THE ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 11 - LD.AR SUBMITS THAT NO SUCH DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS BY THE REVENUE. WE CONSIDERING THE OVERALL FACTS, CIRCUMSTANCES, PROVI SIONS OF THE LAW, FINDINGS AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR ARE OF THE OPINION THAT ASSESSEE HAS VARIOUS BUSINESS ACTI VITIES INCLUDING THE RUNNING OF THE SCHOOLS AND THE A.O HA S NOT DOUBTED THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENSES. ACCORDINGL Y, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS GROUND OF APPEAL AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDI TION AND ALLOW THE GROUND OF APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESS EE. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07.06.2021 SD/- SD/- ( S RIFAUR RAHMAN ) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED 07.06.2021 KRK, PS ITA NO. 1453/MUM/2018 M/S. SILVERLINE INVESTMENT CO. PVT LTD.,, MUMBAI - 12 - / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE CIT(A) 4. ( ) / CONCERNED CIT 5. !!' , $ % , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. () * + / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, ! //TRUE COPY// 1. ( ASST. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBA I