M/S. FABWEAR GARMENTS, MUMBAI V. ACIT CIR 18(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2036/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 203619914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 7 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 25-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASGHAR ZAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJIV M SHAH
• Keywords: Depreciation; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H , BENCH MUMBAI , BEFORE : SHRI R.C.SHARMA , A M & SHRI SANJAY GARG, J M ITA NO. 2036 / MUM/20 11 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR :2007 - 0 8 ) M/S FABWEAR GARMENTS, 307, 3 RD FLOOR, TRADE WORLD, B - WING, KAMLA CITY, S.B.MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI - 400 013 VS. ACIT, CIRCLE - 18(2) , MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. : A AAF F 1768 Q ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) AND ITA NO. 2039 / MUM/20 11 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR :200 6 - 0 7 ) M/S FABWEAR GARMENTS, 307, 3 RD FLOOR, TRADE WORLD, B - WING, KAMLA CITY, S.B.MARG, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI - 400 013 VS. ACIT, CIRCLE - 18(2), MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. : A AAFF 1768 Q ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SANJIV M. SHAH /REVENUE BY : SHRI ASGHAR ZAIN DATE OF HEARING : 25 TH SEPT , 201 4 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 ST OCT , 201 4 O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA ( A .M.) : TH ESE ARE THE APPEALS FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A ) , MUMBAI FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 AND 2007 - 08, IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S. 143 ( 3 ) OF TH E I.T. OF THE I.T.ACT. 2 . RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PERUSED. FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN MANUFACTURING AND EXPORT OF TRADING ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 2 GOODS. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT, THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS A MANUFACTURING UNIT AT DAMAN AND MUMBAI. IN RESPECT OF DAMAN UNIT ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT HE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S.80 - IB OF THE ACT ON THE ENTIRE PROFIT. HE CLAIMED THAT ALL THE CONDITIONS STIPULATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ACT ARE FULFILLED BY THEM. DURING THE YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.80IB AT RS. 57,45,522/ - . ON EXAMINATION OF P&L ACCOUNT OF DAMAN UNIT IT WAS OBSERVED BY AO THAT ASSESSEE HAS ALSO CLAIMED 80 - IB O N EXPORT INCENTIVES AT RS.15,89,436/ - AND OTHER INCOME RS.166914/ - . AS PER THE PROVISION S DEDUCTION U/S.80IB IS ALLOWABLE TO THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY ONLY . THE AO ALSO OBSERVED F ROM THE P&L ACCOUNT OF BOTH THE UNITS THAT THE NET PROFIT PERCENTAGE OF DA M AN UNIT IS MUCH HIGHER IN COMPARISON TO MUMBAI U N IT. IN THIS REGARD EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CALLED FOR. THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DT. 24.12.08 SUBMITTED THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES ARE REQUIRED TO BE ALLOCATED ACCORDING TO THE TURNOVER OF THE' UNIT AN D HE HAS ALLOCATED COMMON EXPENSES TO THE EXTENT OF .RS.4910601/ - AND THE SHARE OF DA M AN UNIT AT RS.1314492 / - DEBITED TO THE P&L A/C. THE SUBMISSION S OF ASSESSEE REGARDING LOWER GP AND N P OF MUMBAI UNIT AND ALLOCATION OF EXPENSES BETWEEN BOTH THE UNITS ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER; 1. 'WE HAVE MANUFACTURING UNIT AT MUMBAI AS WELL AS AT DAMAN. SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN KEPT TO DETERMINE THE PROFITS OF THE RESPECTIVE UNIT. AU THE INCOMES! EXPENSES HAVE BEEN CREDITED! DEBITED ON ACTUAL BASIS IN THE RES PECTIVE UNITS. 1. 1 THE PROFITABILITY AT DAMAN UNIT IS HIGHER AS COMPARED TO MUMBAI UNIT DUE TO THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 2.1 THE GARMENTS PRODUCED AT MUMBAI ARE DIFFERENT IN QUALITY THAN PRODUCED AT DAMAN. AT MUMBAI WE HAVE BEEN EXECUTING THE ORDER WHICH REQUIRES WASHING, EMBROIDERY AND OTHER PROCESSING AND ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 3 FINISHING RESULTS INTO ADDITIONAL COST OF PRODUCTION WHICH ULTIMATELY REDUCES THE PROFIT MARGINS. HOWEVER, AT DAMAN, WE HAD CONCENTRATED ON MANUFACTURING THOSE QUALITIES, WHICH GENERALLY DOES NOT REQU IRE ANY ADDITIONAL WASHING, FINISHING ETC. THEREFORE, PROFIT MARGINS ARE COMPARATIVELY HIGHER AT DAMAN. THE DETAILS OF ADDITIONAL EXPENDITURE INCURRED AT MUMBAI UNIT FOR MANUFACTURING QUALITIES DIFFERENT FROM DAMAN UNIT ARE AS FOLLOWS: ` WASHING JOB CHA RGES 5875611 EMBROIDERY JOB CHARGES 1193271 PRINTING & PROCESSING JOB CHARGES 299470 7368352 3.1 THE CONSUMPTION OF RAW MATERIAL AND ACCESSORIES WERE ON THE HIGHER SIDE AT MUMBAI IN COMPARISON WITH DAMAN UNIT DUE TO FOLLOWING FACTORS: I. AT MUMBAI, THE MAJORITY OF MANUFACTURING ACTIVITIES WERE CARRIED OUT BY THE OUTSIDE JOB WORKERS! CONTRACTORS. EVEN ON OUR OWN MACHINERIES, WE HAD EMPLOYED CONTRACT LABOUR. WE WERE ISSUING FABRICS TO THESE CONTRACTORS/FOB WORKERS ON THE BASIS OF AVERAGE CALCU LATION OF FABRICS REQUIREMENT FOR SHIRTS AND TROUSERS. THIS CALCULATION IS ALWAYS ON SLIGHTLY HIGHER SIDE. HENCE, THE CONSUMPTION OF FABRICS WAS COMPARATIVELY MORE. AT DAMAN, WE HAD DIRECT CONTROL ON OUR OWN CUTTING DEPARTMENT AND HAVING ALL MODEM TECHNOLO GY FOR OPTIMUM USE OF FABRICS. THE CUTTING IS DONE EXACTLY AS PER THE SIZES OF SHIRTS AND TROUSERS, WHICH HAS REDUCED CONSUMPTION. II . READYMADE GARMENTS REQUIRE ACCESSORIES SUCH AS THREAD, BUTTONS, CANVAS, CLIPS ETC. AT MUMBAI TO THE JOB CONTRACTORS, WE WERE ISSUING THESE ACCESSORIES APPROXIMATELY 5% IN EXCESS OF REQUIREMENT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE DEFECTS, DAMAGES ETC. NORMALLY, THE EXCESS ISSUED ACCESSORIES WERE NOT RETURNED BACK BY THE JOB CONTRACTORS. AT DAMAN, WE ARE HAVING DIRECT CONTROL OVER ISSUE AND CONSUMPTION OF ACCESSORIES WHICH HAS HELPED US IN REDUCING THE OVERALL CONSUMPTION AND IN CONTROLLING THE COST. III. AT MUMBAI, WE HAVE TO PAY OCTROI ON INPUTS SUCH AS RAW MATERIALS, ACCESSORIES ETC. THIS HAS INCREASED COST OF PURCHASE BY 3%. AT DAMAN, THERE IS NO OCTROI. FURTHER, THE SUPPLY OF ACCESSORIES WAS IN THE CLOSURE VICINITY. HENCE, THE FREIGHT CHARGES ON THOSE ITEMS WERE ON LOWER SIDE. IV AT DAMAN, WE HAVE CONCENTRATED ON THE ORDER HAVING HIGHER VOLUMES AND CHEAPER RAW MATERIALS. 4.1 AT DAMAN ELECTRICITY AND LABOUR IS CHEAPER. MOREOVER, THE LABOURS ARE WORKING FOR 12 HOURS. IN MUMBAI LABOUR ARE VERY COSTLY AND THEY WORK FOR 8 HOURS. THIS HAS ALSO MADE IMPACT ON THE PROFITABILITY. ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 4 4.2 THE FOLLOWING WORKING WILL CLEARLY ESTABLISH T HE ABOVE FACTS : - MUMBAI DAMAN TOTAL 1. PRODUCTION(IN NO. OF PIECES) 239517 943.52 333869 % 71.74 28.26 100 2. PAYMENT AND PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES RS. 1958180 730063 2688243 JOB WORK CHARGES - - STITCHING RS. 12776260 34221 12810481 - IRONING RS. 2650729 -- 2650729 POWER & FUEL RS. -- 102834 102834 DEPRECIATION RS. 70451 201243 271694 TOTAL RS. 17455620 1068361 18523981 THE ABOVE WORKING CLEARLY SHOWS THAT AGAINST 28.26% SHARE OF DAMAN UNIT IN TOTAL PRODUCTION, ITS SHARE OF EXPENSES IN STAFF/ WAGES COST + STITCHING JOB WORK CHARGES + POWER & FUEL + DEPRECIATION IS 5. 57% WHICH IS REASONABLY LOWER AS COMPARED TO 71.74% OF PRODUCTION AT MUMBAI WITH SIMILAR EXPENSES HIGHER AT 94.23% RESULTING IN LO WER PROFITABILITY AT MUMBAI.' 3 . THE AO ALSO OBSERVED THAT QUANTITATIVE PRODUCTION IS IN THE RATIO OF 28.26: 71.74 BETWEEN DAMAN AND MUMBAI UNIT WHEREAS RATIO OF TOTAL TURNOVER WAS 27.45: 72.55. ON OTHER HAND CLOSE VERIFICATION OF P&L ACCOUNT OF MUMBAI U NIT AND DAMAN UNIT REVEAL ED THAT THE EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD COMMISSION ON EXPORT, ADVERTISEMENT & SALES PROMOTION EXPENSES, LOCAL TRAVELING EXPENSES, PACKING MATERIAL AND IRONING CHARGES (UNDER THE HEAD JOB WORK) ARE NEITHER DISTRIBUTED ACCORDING TO THE T URNOVER NOR ACCORDING TO THE QUANTITATIVE PRODUCTION BETWEEN BOTH THE UNITS. 4 . THE AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT THAT DAMAN UNIT HAD DEBITED VERY MEAGER AMOUNT UNDER THE ABOVE FIVE HEADS IN COMPARISON TO MUMBAI UNIT. THE AO ALSO OBSERVED THAT AFTER ALLOCATION OF THE EXPENDITURE IN ACCORDANCE TO THE TURNOVER THE DIFFERENCE IS WORKED OUT AT RS.19 , 39 , 131/- ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 5 (2318105 - 378974) AND THE SAME IS REDUCED FROM THE PROFIT OF THE DAMAN UNIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80 - IB . THE DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE U/S .80 - IB IS COMPUTED AS BELOW : - PROFIT FROM DAMAN UNIT 5745522 ADD : FREIGHT CHARGES AT DAMAN UNIT AS ADDED BACK IN TOTAL INCOME 851786 LESS: 6597308 I) EXPORT INCENTIVES AND OTHER INCOME 1756350 II) EXPENSES AS ALLOCATED 1939131 3695481 ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR DEDUCTION 100% 2901827 5 . BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO AND ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 6 . IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED AR THAT ASSESSEE HAS KEPT SEPARATE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS FOR DAMAN AND MUMBAI UNIT. EACH AND EVERY EXPENSES INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION OF EXPORTS, ADVERTISEMENT & SALES PROMOTION, TRAVELLING EXPENSES, PACKING MATERIAL EXPENSES AND JOB IRONING CHARGES WERE METICULOUSLY DEBITED WITH RESPECT TO THE SALES VOUCHERS AN D SALES INVOICES. FOR THIS PURPOSE, OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO THE DETAILS FILED BEFORE THE AO AND STATEMENT CONTAINING DETAILS OF COMMON EXPENSES ALLOCATED BY THE ASSESSEE TO ITS MUMBAI AND DAMAN UNIT BASED ON TURNOVER OF EACH UNIT. LEARNED AR FURTHER S UBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS ALLOCATED COMMISSION OF EXPORTS SALES ON ACTUAL INVOICES BASIS AND UNIT WISE COMMISSION PAID. LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT COMMISSION ON EXPORT WAS GIVEN AGAINST PARTICULAR SALES INVOICES AND CALCULATED AT AGREED RATE AND PAID ACCOR DINGLY, THEREFORE, BY NO STRETCH OF IMAGINATION COMMISSION ON EXPORT SALES, CANNOT BE ALLOCATED BASED ON RATIO OF TURNOVER. HE INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE SIMILAR ADDITION MADE IN ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 6 THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 06, WHICH WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(A) AND REVENUE WAS NOT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 7 . WITH REGARD TO THE ADVERTISEMENT AND SALES PROMOTION, LEARNED AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED EXCESS EXPENSES OF MUMBAI AND DAMAN UNIT SEPARATELY, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO JUSTIFICATION OF ALLOCATING THE SAME ON THE BASIS OF TURNOVER. 8 . ON THE OTHER HAND, LEARNED DR CONTENDED THAT ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN MORE EXPENSES AT MUMBAI UNIT AND LOWER EXPENSES AT DAMAN UNIT, SO AS TO SHOW HIGHER PROFITABILITY OF DAMAN UNIT, INCOME WHICH WAS EXEMPT FROM TAX. 9. LEARNED AR ALSO PLACED ON RECORD THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN SUPPORT OF ITS CONTENTION REGARDING INCURRING ALL THESE EXPENSES. AS PER LEARNED AR THESE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS GO TO THE ROOT OF THE ISSUE, HOWEVER, THE CIT(A) HAS NEITHER CONSIDERED THESE DOCUMENTS NOR CALLED FOR ANY REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO, THEREFORE, NATURAL JUSTICE WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BEFORE TAKING VIEW AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. 10. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS, CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FOUND FROM THE RECORD THAT DISPUTE IN APPEAL IS REGARDING ALLOCATION OF EXPENSES OF RS. 84,44,829/ - BETWEEN MUMBAI AND DAMAN UNIT OF THE ASSESSEE , WHICH WAS DISTURBED BY THE AO AND ALLOCATION WAS MADE ON THE BASIS OF TURNOVER. THE AO HAS DISCUSSED THE ISSUE AT PAGE 3 TO 5 OF HIS ORDER, WHEREIN HE POINTED OUT THAT N ET PROFIT PERCENTAGE OF DAMAN UNIT IS MUCH HIGHER IN COMPARISON TO MUMBAI UNIT. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT DAMAN UNIT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 80IB, THE AO POINTED OUT THAT TO SHOW HI GHER PROFIT IN DAMAN UNIT, THE ASSESSEE HAS ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 7 BOOKED LOWER EXPENSES IN DAMAN UNIT AND SAME WERE SHIFTED TO MUMBAI UNIT. ACCORDINGLY, COMMISSION EXPENSES OF RS. 20,60,200/ - WAS DISTRIBUTED BETWEEN MUMBAI AND DAMAN UNIT ON THE BASIS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE TURNOVER . THE AO ALSO DISTURBED ALLOCATION OF EXPENDITURE ON ACCOUNT OF ADVERTISEMENT AND SALES PROMOTION, TRAVELLING EXPENSES, PACKING MATERIAL EXPENSES AND JOB WORK EXPENSES. BY SUCH REALLOCATION, THE AO HAS REDUCED BENEFIT CLAIMED U/S. 80IB IN RESPECT OF DAMAN U NIT BY AMOUNT OF RS. 19,39,131/ - . WE FOUND THAT CERTAIN EXPENSES WERE SPECIFICALLY INCURRED FOR A PARTICULAR UNIT AND NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED ON ACTUAL BASIS BASED ON THE SEPARATE BOOKS AND ACCOUNTS OF CONCERNED UNIT MAINTAINED BY ASSESSEE. WE FOUND THAT COM MISSION EXPENSES HAVE BEEN BOOKED BY ASSESSEE ON ACTUAL INVOICE BASIS IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE UNIT, THEREFORE, WITHOUT POINTING OUT FAULT FOR SUCH TREATMENT, THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REALLOCATING THE SAME ON THE BASIS OF TURNOVER. IT IS TO BE POINTED OUT THAT THE EXPENSES DISTURBED BY THE AO ARE ALL INDIRECT EXPENSES, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO REASON TO DISPUTE THE SAME ON THE BASIS OF SALES. HAD IT BEEN DIRECT EXPENSES, THE AO COULD HAVE CORRECTLY DISTRIBUTED THE SAME ON THE BASIS OF TURNOVER. SINCE THE EXPENSES WERE INDIRECT IN NATURE, THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY FURNISHED REASONING FOR DISTRIBUTING THE SAME. VARIOUS ADDITION AL EVIDENCES WERE ALSO FURNISHED BEFORE THE CIT(A) WHICH GOES TO THE ROOT OF THE ASSESSEE, HOWEVER, WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE SAME AND WITH OUT CALLING FOR ANY REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO, THE CIT(A) HAS CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. WE FOUND THAT CERTAIN OTHER ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS WAS FILED BEFORE THE BENCH WITH REGARD TO JUSTIFICATION OF DEBITING THESE EXPENSES TO THE RESPECTIVE UNIT AT MUMB AI/DAMAN. ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 8 HOWEVER, ALL THESE EVIDENCES WHICH ARE FILED BEFORE THE CIT(A) AS WELL AS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL REQUIRES EXAMINATION ON THE PART OF THE AO SO AS TO REACH TO THE CORRECT CONCLUSION REGARDING DISTRIBUTION OF EXPENSES FOR ARRIVING AT ELIGIBLE PROFIT O F DAMAN UNIT U/S.80IB. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND FAIR - PLAY, WE RESTORE THIS GROUND BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO IN BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR DECIDING AFRESH AFTER GIVING DUE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 11. IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07, T HE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO TAKEN A GROUND WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 28,35,509/ - BEING FREIGHT ON EXPORT OF SALES U/S. 40(A)(IA). 12. IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE AR THAT THESE WERE PAYMENTS TO AGENT ON FOREIGN SHIPPING COMPANY ON WHICH NO TAX IS REQUIRED TO BE DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED TO THE BOARD CIRCULAR NO. 73, DATED 19 - 9 - 1995, ACCORDING TO WHICH NO TAX IS REQUIRED TO BE DEDUCTED FOR SUCH PAYMENT. 13. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS. IT APPEARS THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT TO AGENTS O F FOREIGN SHIPPING COMPANY WHERE PROVISIONS OF TDS IS NOT APPLICABLE AS PER CIRCUL AR NO. 73 DATED 19 - 9 - 1995. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS NOT EXAMINED THE PAYMENT WITH REFERENCE TO CIRCULAR NO. 7 3. W E FOUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED FULL DETAILS OF FREIGHT ON EXPORT SALES WITH NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF AGENTS. IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THIS GROUND TO THE FILE OF AO. THE AO IS REQUIRED TO VERIFY THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE RESPECTIVE AGENTS OF FOREIGN CARRIER/SHIPPER OR THEIR AGENTS WHO ARE COVERED BY CIRCULAR NO. 73 , DATED 19 - 9 - 1995 AND DECIDE THE MATTER AFRESH . WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO. 2036 & 2039 / 11 9 14. IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, GROUNDS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF CLAIM MADE U/S.80IB WAS AGITATED WHICH WAS DISTURBED DUE TO REALLOCATION OF EXPENSES. THIS GROUND IS SIMILAR TO THE GROUND DISCUSSED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07 HEREINABOVE. HENCE, FOLLOWING THE SAME REASONING, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE ALSO TO THE FILE OF AO FOR DECIDING AFRESH. 15. GROUND NO.3 RAISED IN THE APPEAL FILED FOR A.Y.2007 - 08 APPEARS TO HAVE NOT BEEN DECIDED BY CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE RESTORE THIS GROUND TO THE FILE OF CIT(A) FOR DECIDING THE SAME. 16. IN THE RESULT, BOTH APPEA LS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED IN PART IN TERMS INDICATED HEREINABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 31/10 / 201 4 . 31/10 / 2014 SD/ - SD/ - ( ) ( SANJAY GARG ) ( ) ( R.C.SHARMA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBA I ; DATED 31/10 /2014 /PKM , PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT, MUMBAI 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE CIT(A) , MUMBAI. 4. / CIT 5. / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//