M/s Toyotetsu India Auto Parts Private Limited , Bangalore V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 2603/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3030 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-06-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 29-03-2021
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 17-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KANNAN NARAYAN
• Assessee Lawyers: K R VASUDEVAN
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; Opportunity of being heard; International transaction; Set aside
• Section: 201

Judgement Text

IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013- 14 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LIMITED ONSITE SUPPLIER PARK, BUILDING NO.7, BIDADI INDUSTRIAL AREA, PLOT NO.1, BIDADI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT 562 109 PAN NO : AADCT0768L VS. ACIT CIRCLE-3(1)(1) BANGALORE APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.R. VASUDEVAN, A.R. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KANNAN NARAYAN, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 29.03.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.06.2021 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 12.7.2018 PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-7, BENGALURU AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 3-14. ALL THE GROUNDS URGED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATE TO TRA NSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT MADE IN RESPECT OF ROYALTY PAYME NTS. IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 2 OF 8 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE ARE STATED IN BRIEF . THE ASSESSEE MANUFACTURES PRESSED AND WIELDED COMPONENTS FOR TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR MOTOR PARTS. BASIC ALLY, TAX PAYER MANUFACTURES AUTO SHEET METAL PARTS THAT ARE MADE OF STEEL ALLOYS AND ARE USED AS METAL BODY IN FOUR WHEELERS. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED FOLLOWING INTERNATIONAL TRANSA CTIONS WITH ITS A.ES. TOYOTESTU INDIA AUTO PARTS P. LTD. PARTICULARS AMOUNT ROYALTY VIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CONTRACT 45,360,082 INSTRUCTOR FEE VIDE INSTRUCTOR CONTRACT 9,035,729 TRAINEE FEE VIDE TRAINEE CONTRACT NIL GUARANTEE COMMISSION 8,558,511 REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES 138,507 RIGHTS SHARES ISSUED IN THE RATIO OF 1.25:1.00 TO SHAREHOLDERS 940,500,000 TOTAL 1,003,592,829 WE ARE NOW CONCERNED WITH ROYALTY PAYMENT OF RS.4.5 3 CRORES. THE ASSESSEE HAD PAID ROYALTY @ 5% AS APPR OVED BY THE RBI AS PER FDI POLICY. SINCE THE PAYMENTS H AVE BEEN MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FDI POLICY, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME WAS AT ARMS LENGTH . ACCORDING TO THE LD. A.R., RBI APPROVED RATE WOULD CONSTITUTE A COMPARABLE RATE UNDER CUP METHOD. 3. THE TPO HOWEVER TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DONE ANY BENCH MARKING FOR ROYALTY PAYMENT. TH E TPO TOOK THE VIEW THAT PROFIT SPLIT METHOD (PSM) IS THE IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 3 OF 8 APPROPRIATE METHOD TO DETERMINE ARMS LENGTH PRICE O F ROYALTY PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. THE TPO OBSE RVED THAT THERE ARE 3 KINDS OF METHODS UNDER PSM, VIZ., CONTRIBUTORY PSM, COMPARABLE PSM AND RESIDUAL PROFI T SPLIT METHOD. HE INITIALLY PROPOSED TO SPLIT THE P ROFIT IN THE RATIO OF 80:20 BETWEEN ASSESSEE AND THE A.E. T HE TPO DETERMINED EBDIT RATIO OF THE ASSESSEE, WHICH WORKE D OUT TO 8.57%. AVERAGE EBDIT MARGIN OF COMPARABLE COMPANIES WORKED OUT TO 4.87%. THE DIFFERENCE BETW EEN THE TWO WAS 3.73%. THEN THE TPO ASSIGNED WEIGHTS T O FUNCTIONS, ASSETS AND RISK CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSES SEE AND ITS A.E. ACCORDING TO THE SAID ANALYSIS, A.E. SHOU LD BE ALLOTTED 75% OF THE PROFIT. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O. W ORKED OUT 75% OF 3.73%, WHICH CAME TO BE 2.80%. ACCORDIN GLY, HE MADE TRANSFER PRICING ADJUSTMENT OF RS.85,34,627 /-. THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAME. 4. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT PROFIT SPLIT METHOD WAS NOT HELD TO BE APPROPRIATE METHOD FOR ROYALTY PAYME NTS IN THE CASE OF A GROUP COMPANY NAMED TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR AUTO PARTS PVT. LTD., BY THE COORDINATE BENCH IN THE ORD ER PASSED ON 18.3.2020 IN IT(TP)A NO.1915/BANG/2017 & IT(TP)A NO.3377/BANG/2018. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. A. R. SUBMITTED THAT THE TAX AUTHORITIES ARE NOT RIGHT IN LAW IN DETERMINING THE ALP OF ROYALTY PAYMENTS UNDER PSM METHOD. IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 4 OF 8 5. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT IN THE ABOVE SAID CASE, THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT TNMM METHOD IS THE APPROPRIATE METHOD. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE ROYALTY @ 5% WHICH IS RBI/FIP B APPROVED RATE. IT HAS BEEN HELD IN THE FOLLOWING C ASES THAT RBI RATE CAN BE CONSIDERED AS CUP RATE FOR ROYALTY. A) SGS INDIA PVT. LTD. (ITA NO.1807/13 DATED 18.11.2015) B) A.W. FABER CASTELL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. (IT(TP)A NO.1018/MUM/2016, DATED 30.9.2016. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE PSM ME THOD CANNOT BE ADOPTED AS MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD. 6. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD. D.R. SUPPORTED THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A). 7. WE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ISSUE WHETHER ROYALTY CAN BE BENCH MAR KED UNDER PSM METHOD HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY THE COORDINAT E BENCH IN THE CASE OF TOYOTA KIRLOSKAR AUTO PARTS PV T. LTD. (SUPRA) AND IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT PSM IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE METHOD OF BENCH MARKING ROYALTY. FOR T HE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE EXTRACT BELOW THE DECISION RENDERED BY THE COORDINATE BENCH. 15. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE A RE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ISSUE WITH REGARD TO MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY BEEN SETTLED BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE TPO AS WELL AS TH E DRP HAVE NOT FOLLOWED THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL ON THE GROUND TH AT ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE TECHNOLOGY HAD AN IMPACT ON THE MAM AND THAT TECHNO LOGY IN QUESTION WAS TO BE USED BY START-UPS AND SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS USING THE TECHNOLOGY FOR A FAIRLY LONG IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 5 OF 8 PERIOD OF MORE THAN 5 YEARS, IT WOULD NOT BE PROPER TO ADOPT THE TNMM AS THE MAM, AS THE ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE TECHNOLOGY WOULD N O LONGER EXIST. IN OUR VIEW, THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE TPO AS WELL AS THE DRP TO COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT TECHNOLOGY IN QUESTION WAS TO BE USED BY A START-UP. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE TPO AND DRP TO COME TO A CONCLUSION THAT THE AS SESSEE IS A START UP IN MANUFACTURE OF VARIOUS PARTS FOR AUTOMOBILES. TH E TECHNOLOGY IN QUESTION WAS THAT OF TMC JAPAN. THE TECHNOLOGY IS B EING USED BY THE ASSESSEE EVEN TODAY. THERE IS NO BASIS FOR THE TPO/ DRP'S CONCLUSION, THAT THE USEFUL ECONOMIC LIFE OF THE TECHNOLOGY WOU LD BE ONLY 5 YEARS. IN ANY EVENT PASSAGE OF TIME CANNOT BE THE BASIS TO DI SCARD TNMM WHICH IS ALREADY HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL AND UPHELD BY THE HON BLE HIGH COURT AS NO LONGER THE MAM BECAUSE THE CONDITIONS NECESSARY FOR PSM AS MAM ARE NOT MET IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. EVEN GOING BY RULE 10B(1)(D), THERE SHOULD BE CONTRIBUTION BY EACH OF THE PARTIES TO A TRANSACTION FOR EARNING PROFITS FROM SALE OF GOODS OR PROVISION OF SERVICES . THEN THE CONTRIBUTION OF EACH OF THE PARTIES IS IDENTIFIED AND THE PROFIT IS SPLIT BETWEEN THOSE PARTIES. IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE TECHNOLOG Y IS GIVEN BY TMC, JAPAN FOR WHICH ROYALTY IS PAID. THE USE OF THE TE CHNOLOGY IN MANUFACTURING AND THE SALE OF THE PRODUCT SO MANUFA CTURED CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROFIT OF THE ASSESSEE AND TMC, JAPAN HAS NOTHI NG TO DO WITH THAT. THERE IS THEREFORE ABSENCE THE FIRST CONDITION FOR APPLICATION OF PSM AS MAM. AS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE PSM IS USED AS M AM ONLY IN A CASE INVOLVING TRANSFER OF UNIQUE INTANGIBLE OR IN MULTI PLE INTER-RELATED INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS WHICH CANNOT BE VALUED S EPARATELY FOR DETERMINING THE ALP. THE OECD GUIDELINES CITED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE CLEARLY SUPPORTS THE AFORESAID APPROACH AN D THE OECD GUIDELINES IN THIS REGARD READS AS FOLLOWS:- FURTHER RELIANCE IS ALSO PLACED ON OECD GUIDELINES , WHICH CLEARLY LAY DOWN THE SITUATIONS IN WHICH THE PSM IS SELECTE D AS AN APPROPRIATE METHOD OF BENCHMARKING. THE RELEVANT E XTRACT FROM THE OECD GUIDELINES (PARA 2.109) IS AS BELOW:- A TRANSACTIONAL PROFIT SPLIT METHOD MAY ALSO BE FO UND TO BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD IN CASES WHERE BOTH PAR TIES TO A TRANSACTION MAKE UNIQUE AND VALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS (E.G. CONTRIBUTE UNIQUE INTANGIBLES) TO THE TRANSACTION, BECAUSE IN SUCH A CASE INDEPENDENT PARTIES MIGHT WISH TO SHARE THE PROFITS OF THE TRANSACTION IN PROPORTION TO THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTRIBUTIONS AND A TWO-SIDED METHOD MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THAN A O NE-SIDED METHOD. IN ADDITION, IN THE PRESENCE OF UNIQUE AND VALUABLE CO NTRIBUTIONS, RELIABLE COMPARABLES INFORMATION MIGHT BE INSUFFICIENT TO AP PLY ANOTHER METHOD. ON THE OTHER HAND, A TRANSACTIONAL PROFIT SPLIT METHOD WOULD ORDINARILY NOT BE USED IN CASES WHERE ONE PARTY TO THE TRANSACTION PE RFORMS ONLY SIMPLE FUNCTIONS AND DOES NOT MAKE ANY SIGNIFICANT UNIQUE CONTRIBUTION (E.G. CONTRACT MANUFACTURING OR CONTRACT SERVICE ACTIVITI ES IN RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES), AS IN SUCH CASES A TRANSACTIONAL PR OFIT SPLIT METHOD TYPICALLY WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE IN VIEW OF THE FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THAT PARTY'. 16.THE REVISED GUIDANCE (JUNE 2018) ON THE APPLICATION OF TRANSACTIONAL PSM, PROVIDED BY THE OECD STATE THE IMPORTANCE OF DELINE ATING THE TRANSACTIONS IN DETERMINING WHETHER THE PSM IS APPLICABLE OR NOT . THE RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM THE OECD GUIDELINES IS PROVIDED BELOW: IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 6 OF 8 '2.125. THE ACCURATE DELINEATION OF THE ACTUAL TRAN SACTION WILL BE IMPORTANT IN DETERMINING WHETHER A TRANSACTIONAL PR OFIT SPLIT IS POTENTIALLY APPLICABLE. THIS PROCESS SHOULD HAVE RE GARD TO THE COMMERCIAL AND FINANCIAL RELATIONS BETWEEN THE ASSO CIATED ENTERPRISES, INCLUDING AN ANALYSIS OF WHAT EACH PARTY TO THE TRA NSACTION DOES, AND THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE CONTROLLED TRANSACTIONS TAKE P LACE. THAT IS, THE ACCURATE DELINEATION OF A TRANSACTION REQUIRES A TW O-SIDED ANALYSIS (OR A MULTI-SIDED ANALYSIS OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF MORE T HAN TWO ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISES, WHERE NECESSARY) IRRESPECTIVE OF WHICH TRANSFER PRICING METHOD IS ULTIMATELY FOUND TO BE THE MOST APPROPRIA TE. 2.126. THE EXISTENCE OF UNIQUE AND VALUABLE CONTRIBUTIONS BY EACH PARTY TO THE CONTROLLED TRANSACTION IS PERHAPS THE CLEAREST INDICATOR THAT A TRANSACTIONAL PROFIT SPLIT MAY BE APPROPRIATE. THE CONTEXT OF THE TRANSACTION INCLUDING THE INDUSTRY IN WHICH IT OCCURS AND THE F ACTORS AFFECTING BUSINESS PERFORMANCE IN THAT SECTOR CAN BE PARTICULARLY RELE VANT TO EVALUATING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE PARTIES AND WHETHER SUCH CONTR IBUTIONS ARE UNIQUE AND VALUABLE. DEPENDING ON THE FACTS OF THE CASE, OTHER INDICATORS THAT THE TRANSACTIONAL PROFIT SPLIT MAY BE THE MOST APPROPRI ATE METHOD COULD INCLUDE A HIGH LEVEL OF INTEGRATION IN THE BUSINESS OPERATI ONS TO WHICH THE TRANSACTIONS RELATE AND /OR THE SHARED ASSUMPTION O F ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT RISKS (OR THE SEPARATE ASSUMPTION OF CLOSELY RELATE D ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT RISKS) BY THE PARTIES TO THE TRANSACTIONS. IT IS IM PORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE INDICATORS ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE AND ON THE CO NTRARY MAY OFTEN BE FOUND TOGETHER IN A SINGLE CASE. 2.127. AT THE OTHER END OF THE, SPECTRUM, WHERE THE ACCURATE DELINEATION OF THE TRANSACTION DETERMINES THAT ONE PARTY TO THE TR ANSACTION PERFORMS ONLY SIMPLE FUNCTIONS, DOES NOT ASSUME ECONOMICALLY SIGN IFICANT RISKS IN RELATION TO THE TRANSACTION AND DOES NOT OTHERWISE MAKE ANY CONTRIBUTION WHICH IS UNIQUE AND VALUABLE ........ '2.147. UNDER THE TRANSACTIONAL PROFIT SPLIT METHOD , THE RELEVANT PROFITS ARE TO BE SPLIT BETWEEN THE ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISES ON A N ECONOMICALLY VALID BASIS THAT APPROXIMATES THE DIVISI6N OF PROFITS THA T WOULD HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED AND REFLECTED IN AN AGREEMENT MADE AT A RM'S LENGTH. IN GENERAL, THE DETERMINATION OF THE RELEVANT PROFITS TO BE SPL IT AND OF THE PROFIT SPLITTING FACTORS SHOULD: BE CONSISTENT WITH THE FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE C ONTROLLED TRANSACTION UNDER REVIEW, AND IN PARTICULAR REFLECT THE ASSUMPT ION OF THE ECONOMICALLY SIGNIFICANT RISKS BY THE PARTIES, AND BE CAPABLE OF BEING MEASURED IN A RELIABLE MANNER.' 17. IT IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE OECD GUIDELINES THAT IN 'ORDER TO DETERMINE THE PROFITS TO BE SPLIT, THE CRUX IS TO UNDERSTAND THE FUNCTIONAL PROFILE OF THE ENTITIES UNDER CONSIDERATION. ALTHOUGH THE COMPARABILITY ANA LYSIS IS AT THE 'HEART OF THE IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 7 OF 8 APPLICATION OF THE ARM'S LENGTH PRINCIPLE', LIKEWIS E, A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN A CORNERSTONE OF THE COMPARABILITY ANALYSIS. I N THE PRESENT CASE THE ASSESSEE LEVERAGES ON THE USE OF TECHNOLOGY FROM TH E AE AND DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE ANY UNIQUE INTANGIBLES TO THE TRANSACTION. IT MAY B E TRUE THAT THE ASSESSEE AGGREGATED PAYMENT OF ROYALTY WITH THE TRANSACTION OF MANUFACTURING AS IT WAS CLOSELY LINKED AND ADOPTED TNMM BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE TRANSACTIONS ARE SO INTERRELATED THAT THEY CANNOT BE EVALUATED SEPARATE LY FOR APPLYING PSM. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT MAKE ANY UNIQUE CONTRIBUTION TO T HE TRANSACTION, HENCE PSM IN THIS CASE CANNOT BE APPLIED. 18. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT TNMM IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE. THEDECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE EARLIER AY 2008-09 HAS ALSO BEEN UPHELD BY THE HON'BLE HIGH CO URT OF KARNATAKA IN ITA NO.104/2015, JUDGMENT DATED 16.7.2018, WHICH WAS AN APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL FOR AY 2008-0 9. THE TRIBUNAL HAS UPHELD TNMM AS MAM FROM AY 2007-08 TO 2011-12. IN T HOSE AYS THE DISPUTE WAS WHETHER TNMM OR CUP WAS THE MAM. IT IS FOR THE FIRST TIME IN AY 2013-14 THAT THE REVENUE HAS SOUGHT TO APPLY PSM AS MAM. IN THE GIVEN FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT TN M METHOD IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD AND THE AO IS DIRECTED TO APPLY THE SAID METHOD IN DETERMINING THE ALP, AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED. 8. IN THE ABOVE SAID CASE, TNMM METHOD WAS HELD TO BE MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED TH AT THE QUESTION - WHETHER TNMM METHOD OR CUP METHOD IS APPROPRIATE METHOD, HAS TO BE DETERMINED ON THE BAS IS OF FACTS PREVAILING IN EACH CASE. HE SUBMITTED THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAD ADOPTED CUP METHOD AND STAND OF THE ASSESSEE IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION RENDERED BY MUMBAI BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF A.W. FABER CASTELL INDIA PVT. LTD. (SUPRA). BE THAT AS IT MAY , IN ANY CASE, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT PSM METHOD IS NOT MOST APPROPRIATE METHOD FOR BENCHMARKING ROYALTY PAYMENT S. HENCE, THE ROYALTY PAYMENT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE HAS TO BE EXAMINED AFRESH. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND RESTORE THE SAME TO IT(TP)A NO.2603/BANG/2018 M/S. TOYOTETSU INDIA AUTO PARTS PRIVATE LTD., RAMANAGARA DIST. PAGE 8 OF 8 THE FILE OF THE AO/TPO FOR EXAMINING THE ALP OF ROY ALTY PAYMENT AFRESH, DULY EXAMINING THE CLAIM OF THE ASS ESSEE. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH JUN, 2021 SD/- (GEORGE GEORGE K.) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (B.R. BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED 18 TH JUN, 2021. VG/SPS COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.