STENLY SECURITIES LTD, Kolkata V. DCIT,Cir.-5, Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 2301/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2614 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAYANTA KHANRA
• Assessee Lawyers: A K JAIN DIRECTOR OF COMPANY
• Keywords: Business expenditure; Transactions in derivatives; Futures and options
• Section: 43

Judgement Text

1 ITA NO. 2301/KOL/2019 STENLY SECURITIES LTD, AY- 20 09-10 , B(SMC) , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B(SMC) BENCH : KOLKATA ( ) . . , ) [BEFORE SHRI A. T. VARKEY, JM] ITA NO.2301/KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10 STENLY SECURITIES LTD. (PAN: AADCS6016J) VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA. APPELLANT RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING 20.01.2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18.03.2020 FOR THE APPELLANT SHRI A. K. JAIN,( DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY) FOR THE RESPONDENT SHRI JAYANTA KHANRA, JCIT, SR. D R ORDER THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A)-2, KOLKATA DATED 29-08-2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST TH E ACTION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DISALLOWING LOSS OF RS.4,30,709/- ON F&O DERIVATIVE S. 3. AT THE OUTSET, SHRI A. K. JAIN, DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY DREW OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT THE LIS BEFORE US IS SQUARELY COVERED IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. IT IS NOTED THAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE AY 2008-09 IN ITA NO. 1718/KOL/2017 THIS TRIBUNAL C BENCH, KOLKATA VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 06 .09.2019 ON SIMILAR ISSUE HAS GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 5. GROUND NO. 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF LOSS OF RS. 19,39,257/- INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF FORWARD AND OPTION DERIVATIVE CONTRACT. 6. BRIEF FACTS QUA THE ISSUE ARE THAT DURING THE AS SESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED LOSS IN DERIVATIVE TRADING. THE ASSESSING O FFICER OBSERVED THATIN THE DERIVATIVE TRADING THE GENERAL PRACTICE IS THAT PROFIT OR LOSS BOOKED ON M ARKED TO MARKET BASIS, WHICH IS PROFIT OR LOSS BOOKS ON THE BASIS OF MARKET RATE OF A PARTICULAR S AUDA. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE ALSO BOOKED PROFIT OR LOSS ON MARKED TO MARKET BASIS FOR THE SAUDA WHICH HAS REMAINED UNEXPIRED/OUTSTANDING AT THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR, AS ON 31.03.2008. SO EVEN TH OUGH ACTUAL LOSS/PROFIT HAS NOT BEEN REALIZED BY TH E ASSESSEE, ENTRY IN THE BOOKS HAS BEEN MADE. THE AO NOTED THAT 'MARKED TO MARKET' IS IN SUBSTANCE A METHODOLOGY OF ASSIGNING VALUE TO A POSITION HELD I N A FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT BASED ON ITS MARKET PRICE ON THE CLOSING DAY OF THE ACCOUNTING OR REPORTING R ECORD. ESSENTIALLY, 'MARKED TO MARKET' IS A 2 ITA NO. 2301/KOL/2019 STENLY SECURITIES LTD, AY- 20 09-10 CONCEPT UNDER WHICH FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS ARE VALUE D AT MARKET RATE SO AS TO REPORT THEIR ACTUAL VALUE ON THE REPORTING DATE. THIS IS REQUIRED FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF TRANSPARENT ACCOUNTING PRACTICES FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SHAREHOLDERS OF TH E COMPANY AND ITS OTHER STAKEHOLDERS. THE AO FURTHER NOTED THAT WHERE COMPANIES MAKE SUCH AN ADJ USTMENT THROUGH THEIR TRADING OR PROFIT/LOSS ACCOUNT, THEY BOOK A CORRESPONDING LOSS (I.E. THE D IFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PURCHASE PRICE AND THE VALUE AS ON THE VALUATION DATE) IN THEIR ACCOUNTS. THEREFORE, AO NOTED THAT THIS LOSS IS A NOTIONAL LO SS AS NO SALE/CONCLUSION/SETTLEMENT OF CONTRACT HAS TA KEN PLACE AND THE ASSET CONTINUES TO BE OWNED BY THE COMPANY. THE LOSS BOOKED IS A NOTIONAL LOSS AND IS CONTINGENT IN NATURE AND CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO BE SET OFF AGAINST THE TAXABLE INCOME. IN THE CASE OF THIS ASSESSEE, IT HAS DEBITED LOSS OF RS.19,39,257/- IN RELATION TO THE OUTSTANDING SAUDA ON FUTURES/OPTIONS CONTRACTS ON MARKED TO MARKET BASIS, THEREFORE THE LOSS BOOKED IS NOTIONA L AND NOT ACTUAL. EVEN IN THE CASE OF SHARE TRADING, PROFIT OR LOSS IS BOOKED ON ACTUAL BASIS A ND NOT ON NOTIONAL BASIS. CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS, THE LOSS OF RS.19,39,257/- DEBITED ON ACCOUN T OF OUTSTANDING FUTURES/OPTIONS CONTRACTS HAD BEEN DISALLOWED BY AO. 7. AGGRIEVED BY THE STAND SO TAKEN BY THE AO, THE A SSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A), WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY AO. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 8. WE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GONE THR OUGH THE SUBMISSION PUT FORTH ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE DOCUMENTS FURNISHED AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON, AND PERUSED THE FACT OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A) AN D OTHER MATERIALS BROUGHT ON RECORD. WE NOTE THAT ASSESSEE, BEING A SHARE TRADING COMPANY, HAD ENTERE D INTO FUTURES CONTRACTS FOR PURCHASE/SALE OF SHARES AND THE CONTRACTS REMAINED UNEXPIRED AS ON 3 1ST MARCH,2008. AS PER THE ACCOUNTING STANDARD 30 ISSUED BY THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED AC COUNTANTS OF INDIA, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ACCOUNTED FOR THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONTRACT P RICE OF THESE SHARES AND THE PREVAILING MARKET RATES AS ON 31.03.08 IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. THES E CONTRACTS WERE TO MATURE BEYOND THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR AND THEREFORE THE LD. AO TREATED SUC H LOSS AS NOTIONAL IN NATURE AND DISALLOWED THE SAME. THE TERM 'MARKED TO MARKET' LOSSES' (MTM) REF ERS TO LOSSES COMPUTED AS ON A PARTICULAR DATE WITH REFERENCE TO PREVAILING MARKET RATE IN RESPECT OF CONTRACTS THAT HAVE NOT YET MATURED. WE NOTE THATTHE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD ENTERED INTO A BINDING OBLIGATION BY CONTRACTING TO PURCHASE/SELL SHARES AT A FUTURE DATE AT A PREDETER MINED PRICE. MOREOVER, A LIABILITY IS SAID TO HAVE ACCRUED WHEN A PENDING OBLIGATION ON THE BALANCE SH EET DATE WAS DETERMINABLE WITH REASONABLE CERTAINTY. HENCE, THE LOSS OF RS. 19,39,257/- ON AC COUNT OF UNEXPIRED FUTURE CONTRACTS SHOULD BE ALLOWED BY THE LD. A.O. WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE C OMPANY FOLLOWS METHOD OF VALUATION OF STOCK IN TRADE AS 'LOWER OF COST OR MARKET PRICE'. THIS METH OD IS CONSISTENTLY FOLLOWED BY THE COMPANY. FUTURES AND OPTIONS IN THE SHARE TRADING BUSINESS A RE DERIVATIVES IN THE NATURE OF STOCK-IN-TRADE WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE VALUED AT THE METHOD OF VA LUATION ADOPTED BY THE COMPANY BY USING ACCOUNTING STANDARDS AND THEREFORE ACCORDINGLY LOSS ARISING FROM 'MARKED TO MARKET' VALUATION IS ALLOWABLE AS DEDUCTION. SUCH LOSS IS NOT CONSIDERED AS NOTIONAL AS PER ACCOUNTING STANDARD-30 (NOW, AS PER IND AS 109 WHICH IS APPLICABLE TO BIG COMPAN IES IN INDIA). 9. HOWEVER, WE NOTE THAT LD. DR HAS PRIMARILY REITE RATED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY NOTED IN OUR EARLIER PARA AND THE SAME IS NOT BEING REPEATED FOR THE SAKE OF BREVITY. WE NOTE THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF ITAT KOLKATA IN THE CASE OF NAGREEKA EXPORTS LTD. IN IT A NOS. 455 & 578/KOL/2013, FOR A.Y 2008-09, ORDER DATED 03/08/2016, WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS FOLL OWS: 4. GROUND NO.1.FOREX DERIVATIVES AMOUNTING TO RS.1 ,58,94,821/- TREATING THE SAME AS UNASCERTAINED LIABILITY AND NOTIONAL LOSS. AS PER N OTES TO ACCOUNTS NO. 14(B) (SCHEDULE O), THE COMPANY HAS CHARGED AN AMOUNT OF RS.1,58, 94,821/- TO THE PROFIT & LOSS A/C. IN RESPECT OF DERIVATIVE CONTRACTS OUTSTANDING AS ON 3 1ST MARCH, 2008. THE LD. AO DID THE ADDITION OF RS. 1,58,94,821/- HOLDING THAT MARK TO MARKET LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF FOREX DERIVATIVE IS A NOTIONAL LOSS, THE DATE OF SETTLEME NT OF THE FOREX DERIVATIVE FALLS BEYOND 3 ITA NO. 2301/KOL/2019 STENLY SECURITIES LTD, AY- 20 09-10 31/03/2008 AND THE CONTRACT WAS NOT MATURED AS ON 3 1/03/2008. THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETELY IGNORED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEF ORE HIM BY THE ASSESSEE AND DISALLOWED THE LOSS ALLEGING IT TO BE NOTIONAL LOSS ON UNEXPIRED CONTRACT. AGGRIEVED FROM THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE FI LED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) VI, KOLKATA, WHO HAS CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE LD. AS SESSING OFFICER. NOT BEING SATISFIED WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS I N FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. THE LD. A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER ACCOUNTING STANDARD-11 THE EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES THE C OMPANY IS UNDER MANDATE TO ACCOUNT GAIN OR LOSS OF FORWARD CONTRACT. ACCOUNTING STANDA RD - 30 FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS DEALS WITH VARIOUS DERIVATIVE PRODUCTS. NORMALLY, A COMPA NY WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE IMPORT AND EXPORT OF GOODS TAKES A FORWARD CONTRACT TO LOCK TH E PRICES AGAINST FLUCTUATION OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES. THE COMPANY MAY ALSO ENTER INTO AN OPTION OR CROSS CURRENCY SWAP TO PROTECT THE RISK OF FLUCTUATIONS IN THE INTEREST RA TE AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES IN RESPECT OF AN UNDERLYING ASSET, AND LIABILITY. IN THE INSTANT CASE THE COMPANY HAS ENTERED INTO THESE FOREX DERIVATIVE CONTRACTS TO HEDGE THE RISK OF INT EREST IN RESPECT OF RUPEE LOAN, THEREFORE THE UNDERLYING LIABILITY IN THE INSTANT CASE IS RUP EE LOAN. THE LD. AR FOR THE REVENUE HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF HON`BLE ITAT KOLKATA BENC H `B` IN ITA NO. 1241/KOL/2013 WHEREIN THE SIMILAR IDENTICAL ISSUES WERE ADJUDICAT ED, VIDE PARA 25 AND 26 OF THE SAID DECISION WHICH ARE REPRODUCED BELOW: 25. APPLYING THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS TO THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT THE CLAIMED LOSS UNDER CONSIDERATION O CCURRED TO THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF FIVE UNEXPIRED FOREX FORWARD CONTRACTS I .E A LOSS INCURRED ON ACCOUNT OF REVALUATION ON CONTRACT ON LAST DAY OF ACCOUNTING P ERIOD BEFORE DATE OF MATURITY OF FORWARD CONTRACT. THE LD. CIT-A OBSERVED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS BEEN FOLLOWING A CONSISTENT ACCOUNTING POLICY FOR DETERMINING LOSS U NDER AS-11 AND AS-30 AS REQUIRED UNDER COMPANIES ACT AND IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT THE ACCOUNTING STANDARDS WERE ISSUED BY THE ICAI WHICH HAS RECEIVED JUDICIAL RECOGNITION. ACCORDINGLY, THE ASSESSEE, THE GAIN OR LOSS ON REVALUATION OF THE OU TSTANDING CONTRACTS WAS BOOKED IN THE P.& L, A/C AS PER THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS OF RBI GUIDELINES. THE HON`BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDI A (P) LTD. (SUPRA) HAS OBSERVED AT P.265 PARA 17 THAT THE CENTRAL GOVERNME NT HAS MADE AS-11 MANDATORY. DURING THE COURSE OF FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS TH AT THE CIT-A NOTICED THAT THE AO ALLOWED THE LOSS OF RS. 85,70,425/- FOR 2010-11 WHI CH SUPPORTS TO SHOW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOLLOWING CONSISTENTLY ACCOUNTING STANDARDS AND THE LIABILITY HAS BEEN ACCRUED FOR A PENDING OBLIGATION FOR EVERY YEA R I.E. THE DIFFERENCE WAS ARISING FOR MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNTING PERIOD. 26. WE, ACCORDINGLY, HOLD THAT DISALLOWANCE MADE BY AO TREATING THE IMPUGNED AMOUNT OF RS. 54,23,955/- FOR A.Y. 2009-10 AS CONTI NGENT AND NOTIONAL LOSS IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND THAT THE LOSS INCURRED TO THE ASSESSE E ON ACCOUNT OF FIVE UNEXPIRED FOREX FORWARD CONTRACTS ON THE LAST DATE OF ACCOUNTING PE RIOD I.E. BEFORE THE DATE OF MATURITY OF THE FORWARD CONTRACT ISNOT CONTINGENT A ND IT IS A ACTUAL LOSS, IS ALLOWABLE. THUS, RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE SPECIAL BENCH SUPRA, THE GROUND NO2 RAISED BY THE APPELLANT REVENUE FAILS AN D THE ORDER OF CIT-A IS JUSTIFIED, CONSEQUENTLY GROUND NO-2 IS DISMISSED. 5.1 THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS VEHEMENTLY SUBM ITTED THAT THE ABOVE CITED DECISION OF HON`BLE ITAT ,KOLKATA IS IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE TREATMENT FOLLOWED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS IN LI NE WITH THE MATCHING CONCEPT OF EXPENDITURE AND LIABILITY SINCE AS AT THE CLOSE OF THE ACCOUNTING YEAR THERE WAS A LIABILITY 4 ITA NO. 2301/KOL/2019 STENLY SECURITIES LTD, AY- 20 09-10 WHICH CANNOT BE IGNORED OR ELSE THE FINANCIAL STATE MENTS WOULD NOT REFLECT A TRUE AND FAIR VIEW OF THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES AND CORRESPONDING PRO FIT FOR THE YEAR. IN ADDITION TO THIS, THE LD. AR HAS ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE FOLLOWING JUDGME NTS: 1. IN THE CASE OF - BANK OF BAHRAIN & KUWAIT (J 32 TTJ 505) (MUMBAI ITAT SB) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT LOSS ON ACCOUNT OF VALUATION OF FORWARD CONTRACTS ON THE LAST DAY OF ACCOUNTING PERIOD IS AN ALLOWABLE BUSINESS LOSS. 2. WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA (P) LTD. (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC). 5.2 THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT IN VIEW OF DETAILED SUBMISSIONS MADE AND CASE LAW CITED ABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE BUSINESS LOSS OF RS..1,58,94,821/- ON ACCOUNT OF MARK TO MARKET OF UNEXPIRED FOREX DERIVATIVES CONTRACTS IS ALLOWABLE AND PRAYED THAT ADDITION MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT MAY BE DELETED. 6. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE FOR THE REVENUE HAS PRIMARILY REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE LD. AO AND THE LD . CIT(A) AND CITED BEFORE US THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.3/2010 DATED 23RD MARCH, 2010, WHEREIN THE CBDT HAS INSTRUCTED TO THE DEPARTMENT THAT MARK TO MARKET LOSSES WHICH ARE IN THE NATURE OF SPECULATION SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED AS A BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. LD. DR STATED TH AT IT IS A NOTIONAL LOSS WHICH WILL BE ACTUALLY DEDUCTIBLE FROM THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE MATURITY OF THE CONTRACT. THE ISSUE UNDER CONSIDERATION IS IN RESPECT OF UNSETTLED CONT RACTS AND MOREOVER THERE IS NO ANY UNDERLYING ASSETS AND LIABILITY TO HEDGE THE RISK. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LOSS ARISING FROM MARK TO MARKET POSITION OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS IS DIFFERENT AND CANNOT BE CONSIDERED ALLOWABLE AS DEDUCTION AS SUCH LOSS HAS NOT ARISEN SO FAR IN THE NORMAL COURSE OF BUSINESS OPERATION OF THE ASSESSEE. THE EXCHANGE RATES ARE S TILL LIABLE TO FLUCTUATE OF THE MARKET IN FUTURE, THEREFORE, IT IS KIND OF A SPECULATIVE TRAN SACTION WHICH SETTLES OTHERWISE THAN BY THE ACTUAL DELIVERY WITHIN THE MEANING OF SUB-SECTION 5 OF SECTION 43 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. THE LD. DR ALSO RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENTS. 1). ACIT-VS- K. MOHAN & COMPANY PRIVATE LTD., BANG ALORE ITAT 126 ITD 59 2) D. KISHORE COMMERCIAL & COMPANY, MUMBAI ITAT, 2 SOT 769 3) S. VINOD KUMAR VS- ACIT, MUMBAI ITAT IN ITA NO .506/MUM/13 ALL THE JUDGMENTS CITED ABOVE SPEAK ABOUT THE SPECU LATIVE TRANSACTIONS WHICH DO NOT HAVE ANY UNDERLYING ASSETS AND LIABILITIES TO HEDGE AND THES E TRANSACTIONS SETTLE IN FUTURE WITHOUT ACTUAL DELIVERY OF GOODS. 7. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW THAT THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE, SINCE T HE PROPOSITION CANVASSED BY LD AR IS SUPPORTED BY HON`BLE ITAT-KOLKATA, CITED SUPRA. THE RE IS AN UNDERLYING LIABILITY ( LOAN) TO HEDGE THE RISK AND HENCE THE DERIVATIVE CONTRACT UN DER CONSIDERATION IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND NOT FOR THE PURPOSE TO SPECULATE THE T RANSACTION WITHOUT AND UNDERLYING ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. IN THE INSTANT CASE THERE IS AN UN DERLYING LIABILITY AND PURPOSE OF THIS DERIVATIVE CONTRACT IS TO MINIMISE THE BUSINESS RIS K BY WAY OF HEDGING THEREFORE IT IS NOT A SPECULATIVE TRANSACTION AS LD. DR HAS POINTED OUT ( SUPRA), HENCE WE DIRECT THE LD. CIT (A) TO DELETE THE ADDITION. 5 ITA NO. 2301/KOL/2019 STENLY SECURITIES LTD, AY- 20 09-10 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE CO-ORDIN ATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S NAGREEKA EXPORTS (SUPR A), WE ALLOW THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE COORDINA TE BENCH AS WELL AS TAKING NOTE OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT DECISION REPORTED IN WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA (P) LTD. (2009) 312 ITR 254 (SC), I ALLOW THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED B Y THE ASSESSEE AND DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE ADDITION. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18TH MARC H, 2020. SD/- (ABY. T. VARKEY) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED :18TH MARCH, 2020 JD.(SR.P.S.) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT STENLY SECURITIES LTD., 15-B, CLIVE ROW, GROUND FLOOR, KOLKATA-700 001. 2 RESPONDENT DCIT, CIRCLE-5, KOLKATA. 3. 4. 5. CIT(A)-2, KOLKATA (SENT THROUGH E-MAIL) CIT- , KOLKATA. DR, ITAT, KOLKATA. (SENT THROUGH E-MAIL) BY ORDER, / TRUE COPY, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR