Dy.Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle-8, V. M/s Hindustan Builders, Nagpur

ITA 182/NAG/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1910 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 09-10-2012
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2009
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR MILIND BHUSARI
• Assessee Lawyers: M MANI
• Section: 143(3); 68

Judgement Text

, - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR , BENCH , ( E - COURT), MUMBAI , BEFORE SHRI R.K.GUPTA , J M & SHRI D.KARUNA KAR RAO , A M ITA NO. 182 / N AG / 20 09 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 5 - 20 0 6 ) DCIT,CIRCLE - 8, NAGPUR (MAHARASHTRA) . VS. M/S HINDUSTAN BUILDERS, 181, GOTMARE COMPLEX, DHARMPETH, NAGPUR (MAHARASHTRA) PAN/GIR NO. : A A AFH 4959 H ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) /REVENUE BY : DR. MILI ND B H USARI /A SSESSEE BY : SHRI M.MANI DATE OF HEARING : 10 TH DEC ., 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 2 ND JAN . ,201 3 O R D E R P ER SHRI R.K.G UPTA, JM : TH E DEPARTMENT HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE ITAT NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 1 - 5 - 2009 OF LEANED CIT(A) - II , NAGPUR (MAHARASHTRA) RELA TING TO T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5 - 0 6 , WHICH HAS BEEN HEARD THROUGH E - COURT, MUMBAI. 2 . THE FIRST ISSUE IS AGAINST DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 63,41,000/ - MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT. ITA NO. 182 /20 09 2 3 . THE ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 2 8 - 12 - 200 7 . CERTAIN ADDITIONS UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) AND UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT WERE MADE BY THE AO . DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, ON VERIFICATION OF PARTNERS CAPITAL ACCOUNT, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS REC EIVED A SUM OF RS. 63, 41,000/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CONTRIBUTION BY THE PARTNER DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT WAS SEEN THAT SHRI SUNIL PATIL , ONE OF THE PA R TNER, HAS I NTRODUCED A FRESH CAPITAL OF RS. 51,13,797 / - . THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE EVID ENCE IN SUPPORT OF SUCH CAPITAL INTRODUCED. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE PARTNER ENTERED INTO A SALE AGREEMENT WITH M/S TIRUPATI DEVELOPERS FROM WHOM A SUM OF RS. 31,01,000/ - WAS RECEIVED AS ADVANCE AND THEY WERE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. THEREAFTER A SUM OF RS. 25,00,000/ - WAS RECEIVED THROUGH DD FROM M/S TIRUPATI DEVELOPERS AND FROM THAT AMOUNT A SUM OF RS. 51,13,797/ - WAS CREDITED IN THE FIRMS ACCOUNT IN THE CASE OF SUNIL PATIL, HOWEVER, THE AO WAS NOT SATISFIED. IN HIS VIEW, THE CREDITWORTHINESS WAS NOT PROVED, THEREFORE, THIS AMOUNT WAS ADDED UNDER SECTION 68. SIMILARLY, IN THE CASE OF ANOTHER PARTNER SHRI VIJAY NIMBALKAR , RS. 9,00,000/ - WAS INTRODUCED IN THE FIRM ON 19 - 6 - 2004 AND ANOTHER AMOUNT OF RS. 9,00,000/ - WAS INTRODUCED ON 14 - 8 - 2004 TO SUPPORT ITS CLAIM. FOR GENUINENESS OF THE ABOVE AMOUNT, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED EXPLANATION THAT SAME WAS OUT OF SALE PROCEED FROM HOUSE PROPERTY SOLD TO SHRI V.DINGRA, COPY OF THE SALE DEED WAS ALSO FURNISHED, HOWEVER, THE AO WAS NOT SATISFIED, THEREFORE, THIS AMOUNT ITA NO. 182 /20 09 3 WAS ALSO TREATED AS UNEXPLAINED. ANOTHER AMOUNT OF RS. 3,00,000/ - WAS INTRODUCED IN THE NAME OF MR. ARUN CHOUDHARY, WHO INTRODUCED A SUM OF RS. 1,00,000/ - ON 3 - 11 - 2004 AND RS. 2,00,000/ - ON 4 - 11 - 2004. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE SUMS OF SUCH AMOUNT IN THE HAN DS OF SHRI ARUN CHOUDHARY WAS OF SALE PROCEEDS ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF HOUSE PROPERTY. THE AO ALSO DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, HE ADDED THE SAME. THE TOTAL ADDITION WAS SUSTAINED BY THE AO WAS OF RS. 63 , 41,000/ - . 4 . THE D ETAIL SUBMISSIONS WERE FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A), WHICH ARE RECORDED IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN PARA 15 TO 18. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON VARIOUS CASE LAWS ALSO. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT FIRST AGREEMENT BETWEEN SUNIL PATIL AND ASHOK PATIL AND OTHERS WAS ENTERED ON 18 - 12 - 2004 . THIS AGREEMENT WAS OF RS. 3 CRORE AND AMOUNT S OF RS. 25,00,000/ - AND RS. 31,00,000/ - WERE RECEIVED ON VARIOUS DATES THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES . SHRI SUNIL PATIL HAD RECEIVED RS. 31, 01 ,000/ - , WHICH WAS PAID BY HIM TO THE FIRM; ANOTHER AMOUNT OF RS. 9,40,000/ - AND RS. 2,00,000/ - WERE RECEIVED FROM SHRI PATIL, WHICH WERE TAKEN LOAN BY PARTNER SHRI SUNIL PATIL AGAIN THEY WERE INTRODUCED IN THE FIRM. COMPLETE DETAILS OF THE SALE AGREEMENT AND CONFIRMATION OF LOAN WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO. THEY WERE NOT FOUND INCORRECT. SIMILARLY, IN RESPECT OF CAPITAL INTEREST OF RS. 18,00,000/ - IN THE ACCOUNT OF MR. VIJAY NIMBALKAR , ANOTHER PARTNER, AGAIN DETAIL OF SALE OF HOUSE WAS FILED. CAPITAL GAIN WAS PAID ON SALE OF HOUSE. COPY OF THE CAPITAL GAIN WAS ALSO FILED . THEREFORE, THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT THE CREDITWORTHINESS ITA NO. 182 /20 09 4 AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION. SIMILARLY, FULL DETAILS IN RESPECT OF CAPITAL INTRODUCED AT RS. 3,00,000/ - BY MR. A. CHOUDHAY WAS ALSO FILED. THEREFORE, THE ONUS LIES UPON THE ASSESSEE, HAS BEEN DULY DISCHARGED. THE RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON VARIOUS CASE LAWS INCLUDING THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. METACHEM INDUSTRIES, 245 ITR 148 (M.P.) , WHEREIN IT IS HELD THAT CAPITAL INTRODUCED BY THE PARTNER CANNOT BE CONSIDERED IN THE HAN DS OF THE FIRM. THEREAFTER LEARNED CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE ISSUE IN DETAIL AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION OF VARIOUS DECISION ON VARIOUS FACTS AND INCLUDING THE DECISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AS WELL AS OTHER HIGH COURTS, HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE FIRM H AS EXPLAINED THE SOURCE ON INTRODUCTION OF CAPITAL BY THE PARTNER. WHEN THE PARTNERS HAVE OWNED CREDIT ENTRY IN THE SHARE CAPITAL ACCOUNT OF THE FIRM, THEY ARE ASSESSED TO TAX. THEREFORE, ADDITION IN THE HANDS OF THE FIRM CANNOT BE MADE. THE SOURCE OF INTR ODUCTION OF CAPITAL WAS ALSO EXAMINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) AND FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED SUCCESSFULLY THE SOURCE OF CAPITAL INTRODUCTION BY THE PARTNER. NOW, THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED APPEAL HERE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5 . LEARNED DR ON BEHALF O F THE DEPARTMENT, WHO APPEARED THROUGH THE E - COURT, HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6 . ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE , WHO ALSO APPEARED THROUGH THE E - COURT , HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) . ITA NO. 182 /20 09 5 7 . AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT(A) AND SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FOUND NO INFIRMITY IN THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) , WHO HAS EXAMINED THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CAPITAL INTRODUCED BY THE P ARTNERS. VARIOUS DECISION PRONOUNCED BY THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AS WELL AS OTHER HIGH COURTS WERE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ASCERTAINED THE FACTUAL ASPECT THAT PARTNER OF THE FIRM ENTERED INTO VARIOUS AGREEMENT WITH THIRD PARTI ES ON ACCOUNT OF SELLING OF LAND AND HOUSES, COPY OF SALE AGREEMENT AS WELL AS AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM THE PARTIES WERE FILED BEFORE THE AO. THEY WERE NOT FOUND INCORRECT. EVEN IN ONE CASE, THE PARTNER HAS SHOWN CAPITAL GAIN ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF HOUSE PROPER TY. COPY OF THE RETURN WAS ALSO FILED. THIS IS NOT A CASE AS TO WHETHER NEITHER THE PARTNERS ARE COMING FORWARD NOR ANY CONFIRMATION IS COMING FROM PARTIES, PARTNERS ARE DULY ASSESSED TO TAX. PARTIES WITH WHOM PARTIES ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT ARE IDENTIFIABL E. PAYMENTS HAS BEEN RECEIVED EITHER THROUGH CHEQUES OR THROUGH DD, WHICH WERE CREDITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF PARTNERS, THEN THEY WERE INTRODUCED IN THE FIRM AS CAPITAL. GENUINENESS AND IDENTITY AS WELL AS CREDITWORTHINESS IS PROVED, THEREFORE, WE FEEL NO HESI TATION IN HOLDING THAT LEARNED CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITION, WHO HAS DELETED ADDITION AFTER ASCERTAINING AND VERIFYING OF SALE AGREEMENT ETC. ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. ITA NO. 182 /20 09 6 8 . REMAINING ISSUE IS AGAINST DE LETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 18,37,500/ - PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ON ACCOUNT OF PROCESSING CHARGES AND RS . 8,92,805/ - PAID AGAINST DOCUMENTATION CHARGES. 9 . DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING, THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID RS. 18 ,37,500/ - AGAINST PROCESSING FEES AND RS.8,92,805/ - AGAINST DOCUMENTATION CHARGES TO M/S PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REQUIRED FROM THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHETHER ON THESE PAYMENTS, TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED OR NOT. IT WAS REPLIED THAT PAYMENT OF P ROCESSING CHARGES MADE TO PNB IS BEYOND THE PROVISION OF SECTION 194J. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT PROVISION OF SECTION 194J IS APPLICABLE ONLY IF THE PAYMENT IS MADE ON ACCOUNT OF FEES FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES OR ROYALTY. ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS HELD THAT BY NO STRE TCH OF IMAGINATION, IT CAN BE SAID THAT PROVISION OF SECTION 194J IS APPLICABLE ON PROCESSING CHARGES PAID TO BANK. SIMILAR EXPLANATION WAS GIVEN IN RESPECT TO DOCUMENTATION CHARGES PAID TO PNB, HOWEVER, THE AO WAS NOT SATISFIED. ACCORDINGLY, HE ATTRACTED THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) AND MADE ADDITION OF RS. 27,30,305/ - . IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE PROCESSING FEES AND DOCUMENTATION CHARGES WERE PAID TO THE BANK ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN FACILITIES. VARIOUS DETAILS IN RESPECT OF LOAN OBTAINED FROM BANK AND VERIF ICATION FROM BANK WAS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) . ACCORDINGLY, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN ATTRACTING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) AND MAKING ADDITION UNDER SECTION 194J, ARE NOT APPLICABLE UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ITA NO. 182 /20 09 7 LEARNED CIT(A) EXAMINED THE ISSUE IN REGARD TO PROVISION OF SECTION 194J AND FOUND THAT ON ACCOUNT OF PROCESSING FEES AND DOCUMENTATION CHARGES PAID TO THE BANK , PROVISION OF S ECTION 194J IS NOT APPLICABLE. THEREFORE, THE ADDITION MADE WAS DELETED. 10 . LEARNED DR PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 11 . AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF THE AO AND THE CIT(A) , WE FOUND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A ) . LEARNED CIT(A) HAS EXAMINED THE PROVISION S OF SECTION 194J AND FOUND THAT THEY ARE NOT APPLICABLE ON PROCESSING FEES AND DOCUMENTATION CHARGES PAID TO BANK TO AVAIL LOAN FACILITIES. THE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS RECORDED IN PARA 8.0 TO 8.1 , WHIC H ARE AS UNDER : - 8.0 I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ID. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE AND THE MATERIAL/DOCUMENTS FILED BY HIM ON RECORD. I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS AND FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE AD IN HIS ASSESSMENT ORDER AS WELL AS HIS COMMENTS IN T HE REMAND REPORT. THE AD HAS HIMSELF ACCEPTED THAT WHAT IS PAID TO THE BANK IS ON ACCOUNT OF PROCESSING CHARGES FOR LOAN AND DOCUMENTATION CHARGES FOR THE SANCTION OF A LOAN OF RS.14.50 CRORES BY PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO WRITTEN A LETTER DT.3D JANUARY, 2009 TO THE BRANCH MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, KINGS WAY, NAGPUR FOR BANKS CONFIRMATION THAT THE DEBIT OF RS.18,37,500/ - ON 15.02.2005 IS TOWARDS PROCESSING CHARGES. THE AD TAKING SHELTER OF SECTION 1943 OF THE ACT DISALLOWED THE AMOUNT OF RS.18,37,500/ - ON ACCOUNT OF PROCESSING FEE AND RS.8,92,805/ - ON ACCOUNT OF DOCUMENTATION CHARGES TOTALING TO RS. 27,30,305/ - . SECTION 1943 OF THE ACT WAS INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT, 1995 W.E.F 1.7.1995 TO PROVIDE FOR TDS IN CASE OF PAYMENTS OF FEE FO R PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNICAL SERVICES. SECTION 1943 OF THE ACT, READS AS UNDER: 194J - FEES FOR PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNICAL SERVICES: (1) ANY PERSON NOT BEING AN INDIVIDUAL OR A HINDU UNDIVIDED FAMILY, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING TO A RESIDENT ANY SUM BY WAY OF - ITA NO. 182 /20 09 8 (A) FEE FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, OR (B) FEE FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES. THE TERMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AND TECHNICAL SERVICE HAS BEEN DEFINED IN THE EXPLANATION TO SECTION 194J OF THE ACT WHICH IS AS UNDER EXPLANATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS S ECTION : - (A) PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEANS SERVICES RENDERED BY A PERSON IN THE COURSE OF CARRYING ON LEGAL, MEDICAL, ENGINEERING OR ARCHITECTURAL PROFESSION OR THE PROFESSION OF ACCOUNTANCY OR TECHNICAL CONSULTANCY OR INTERIOR DECORATION OR ADVERTISING OR SUCH OTHER PROFESSION AS IS NOTIFIED BY THE BOARD FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 4OAA OR OF THIS SECTION; (B) FEES FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES SHALL HAVE THE SAME MEANING AS IN EXPLANATION 2 TO CLAUSE (VII) OF SUB - SECTION (1) OF SECTION 9. BESIDES, AS PER E XPLANATION - 2 TO CLAUSE (VII) OF SUB - SECTION (1) OF DEFINES TECHNICAL SERVICES AS UNDER EXPLANATION 2 : FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS CLAUSE, FEES FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES MEANS ANY CONSIDERATION (INCLUDING ANY LUMP SUM CONSIDERATION) FOR THE RENDERING OF ANY MA NAGERIAL, TECHNICAL OR CONSULTANCY SERVICES (INCLUDING THE PROVISION OF SERVICES OF TECHNICAL OR OTHER PERSONNEL) BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE CONSIDERATION FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION, ASSEMBLY, MINING OR LIKE PROJECT UNDERTAKEN BY THE RECIPIENT OR CONSIDERATION WHICH W OULD BE INCOME OF THE RECIPIENT CHARGEABLE UNDER THE HEAD SAIARIES. THUS, FROM THE ABOVE DEFINITION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND TECHNICAL SERVICES AS ENUMERATED THAT U/S. 194) AND SECTION 9(1) OF THE ACT, IT WILL BE REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT THE P ROCESSING CHARGES, DOCUMENTATION CHARGES PAID TO THE BANK FOR PROCESSING THE LOAN DOCUMENTS CAN NEVER BE TREATED AS PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNICAL SERVICES RENDERED BY THE BANK. BESIDES, THE AMOUNT OF RS.8,92,805/ - PAID TO THE BANK TOWARDS THE DOCUMENTATION CHA RGES ARE NOTHING BUT REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES INCURRED BY THE BANK ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT FOR CARRYING OUT THE DOCUMENTATION WORK FOR SANCTION OF THE LOAN OF RS.14.50 CRORES. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE POSITION OF LAW, ITIS REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT THE PROCESSING FEES AND DOCUMENTATION CHARGES PAID TO THE BANK FOR PROCESSING THE LOAN DOCUMENTS CANNOT COME INTO THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 194) OF THE ACT. 8.1. EVEN ON THE PLAIN READING OF SECTION 194) OF THE ACT, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE PROCESSING FEES AND DOC UMENTATION CHARGES DID NOT COME WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT AND AO HAS WRONGLY INVOKED THIS SECTION FOR MAKING THE ADDITION OF THE AMOUNT OF RS.27,30,305/ - PAID TO PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK AGAINST PROCESSING AND DOCUMENTATION CHARGES. THERE IS N O BASIS FOR THE AO IN COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES OR TECHNICAL SERVICES WHICH BANKS RENDER AT THE TIME OF DISBURSING THE LOAN FALL WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 194J OF THE ACT. THE AMOUNT DEBITED BY THE BANK IS ONLY FOR PROCESS ING AND DOCUMENTATION WHICH CAN, ITA NO. 182 /20 09 9 BY NO STRETCH OF IMAGINATION, BE CONSIDERED AS PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL SERVICES. THESE CHARGES ARE IN CONNECTION WITH THE WORK DONE BY THE BANK I.E. PROCESSING AND DOCUMENTATION OF LOANS GIVEN BY THE BANK TO THE ASSESSEE . 12 . THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ARE AFTER CONSIDERATION AND APPRECIATION OF FACTS AS WELL AS PROVISION OF LAW, WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE AS THE FINDINGS ARE VERY CLEAR AND AS PER THE PROVISION OF LAW. THEREFORE, WE SEE NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THIS ASPECT ALSO. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED ON THIS ISSUE ALSO. 13 . RESULTANTLY , APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS DISMISSED . ORDE R PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 2 ND DAY OF JAN . 201 3 . 201 3 SD/ - SD/ - ( ) ( D.KARUNAKAR RAO ) ( ) ( R.K.GUPTA ) / AC COUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 02 / 01 / 201 3 . /PKM , PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE CIT(A) , MUMBAI / NAGPUR . 4. / CIT 5. / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI / NAGPUR . 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT, MUMBAI