METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD., MUMBAI V. ASST. CIT - 6(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2935/MUM/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7726 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 07-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR SR
• Assessee Lawyers: SATISH MORY
• Keywords: Bogus purchase; Unexplained investment; Question of law; Capital expenditure
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D . T . GARASIA, JM AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM I.T.A. NO. 2935/MUM/2015 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. 201/B, RUNAL & OMKAR ESQUARE, OPP . SION CHUNABHATTI SIGNAL, EASTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY, SION(E) MUMBAI - 400022 VS. ASST. CIT - 6(3) 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400020 PAN: AA ACM9514C (APPELLANT) : (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SATISH MORY RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PURUSHOTTAM KUMAR (SR.A .R.) DATE OF HEARING : 07/03 /2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 29 /03 /2017 O R D E R PER D. T. GARASIA, JM : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A GAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 21 MUMBAI , DATED 19/03/2015 ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF ASST. CIT - 6(3) MUMBAI DATED 03/01/2014 PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12 . 2 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS ARE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE 1) THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN RETAINING THE ADDITION OF RS 2,32,328/ - ON ACCOUNT OF SO CALLED BOGUS PURCHASES EFFECTED BY THE PETITIONER. 2) THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING AND RETAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.8,15,231/ - ON ACCOUNT OF CAPITALIZATION OF INTEREST IN RESPECT OF CAPITAL EXPENSES INC URRED BY OUR PETITIONER DURING THE YEAR ENDED 31.03.2011 . 3) THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN RETAINING AND SUSTAINING FOR AMOUNT OF RS.5,21,358/ - BEING PORTION OF EXPENSES WHICH ACCORDING TO ASSESSING AUTHORITY WAS REQUIRING TO CAPITALIZED 2. THE SHORT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MADE THE ADDITION OF RS.18,58,622/ - AS UNEXPLAINED INVESTMENT IN PURCHASE S SHOWN FROM THREE PARTIES. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PURCHASE S OF RS. 9,08,250/ - FROM SUNICO TRADERS PVT. LTD. , OF RS.5,372/ - FROM ATLANTIC TRADERS , AND RS. 9,45,000/ - FROM SHAH INDUSTRIES, T OTALLING TO RS.18,58,622/ - . THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF SUCH PURCHASES AND PRODUCE THESE PARTIES WITH THEIR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND BILLS FOR EXAMINATION. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE THE SAID PARTIES . ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHARGE D HIS ONUS . M ERE PRODUCTION OF COPIES OF INVOICES DOES NOT PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION S . SIMILARLY, MERE THAT PAYMENT HA S BEEN MADE BY ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE DOES NOT MAKE PURCHASE GENUINENESS UNTIL AND UNLESS AND UNTIL THE RECIPIENT OF THE PAYMENT CONFIRM THE PAYMENT FOR THE PURPOSE WHICH IT WAS TAKEN. THE ASS ESSEE DOES NOT PRODUCE THE PARTIES HENCE VERAC ITY OF CLAIM COULD NOT BE ESTABLISH ED. MOREOVER, THESE PARTIES APPEALS IN THE LIST OF BOGUS DEALERS PROVIDED BY SALES TAX DEPARTMENT . T HUS ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER , THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE THE PARTIES AND HE HAS 3 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 ACCEPTED T HAT GROSS PROFIT OF SUCH PURCHASE S CAN BE ADDED NOT ENTIRE PURCHASE S PRISE AND HE HAS ADDED ENTIRE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE THREE PARTIES TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE MATTER CARRIED TO CIT(A) AND CIT(A) HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY OBSERVING AS UNDER: THER EFORE, SUCH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES DEMANDS REASONABLE AND CONVINCING APPROACH. RECENTLY HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BHOLANATH POLYFAB PVT. LTD. (2013) 355 ITR 290 AND THEREAFTER IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SIMIT P. SHETH ( 2013) 219 TAXMAN 85 (GUI) HAS HELD THAT IN SUCH FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, NOT ENTIRE PURCHASE PRICE BUT ONLY PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED IN SUCH PURCHASES CAN BE ADDED. THE FINDING OF THE HON'BLE GUJARAT HIGH C OURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SIMIT P. SETH IS AS UNDER : - 'WE ARE BROADLY IN AGREEMENT WITH THE REASONING ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) WITH RESPECT TO THE NATURE OF DISPUTED PURCHASES OF STEEL. IT MAY BE THAT THE THREE SUPPLIERS FROM WHOM THE ASSES SEE CLAIMED TO HAVE PURCHASED THE STEEL DID NOT OWN UP TO SUCH SALES. HOWEVER, THE VITAL QUESTION WHILE CONSIDERING WHETHER THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF PURCHASES SHOULD BE ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE OR ONLY THE PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED THEREIN WAS TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER THE PURCHASES THEMSELVES WERE COMPLETELY BOGUS AND NON - EXISTENT OR THAT THE PURCHASES WERE ACTUALLY MADE BUT NOT FROM THE PARTIES FROM WHOM IT WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN MADE AND INSTEAD MAY HAVE BEEN PURCHASED FROM GREY MARKET WITHOUT PRO PER BILLING OR DOCUMENTATION. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) BELIEVED THAT WHEN AS A TRADER IN STEEL THE ASSESSEE SOLD CERTAIN QUANTITY OF STEEL, HE WOULD HAVE PURCHASED THE 4 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 SAME QUANTITY FROM SOME SOURCE. WHEN THE TOTAL SALE IS ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HE COULD NOT HAVE QUESTIONED THE VERY BASIS OF THE PURCHASES. IN ESSENCE, THEREFORE, THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) BELIEVED THE ASSESSEE'S THEORY THAT THE PURCHASES WERE NOT BOGUS BUT WERE MADE FROM THE PARTIES OTHER THAN THOSE MENTIONED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THAT BEING THE POSITION, NOT THE ENTIRE PURCHASE PRICE BUT ONLY THE PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED IN SUCH PURCHASES CAN BE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SO MUCH IS CLEAR BY THE DECISION OF TH IS COURT. IN PARTICULAR, THE COURT HAS ALSO TAKEN A SIMILAR VIEW IN THE CASE OF CIT V. VIJAY M. MISTRY CONSTRUCTION LTD. [2013] 355 ITR 498 (GUJ) AND IN THE CASE OF CIT V. BHOLANATH POLY FAB (P.) LTD. [2013] 355 ITR 290 (GUJ). THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNA L IN THE CASE OF VIJAY PROTEINS LTD. V. ASSTT. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (AHD.) CAME TO BE APPROVED. IF THE ENTIRE PURCHASES WERE WHOLLY BOGUS AND THERE WAS A FINDING OF FACT ON RECORD THAT NO PURCHASES WERE MADE AT ALL, COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE WOULD BE JUSTIF IED IN ARGUING THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF SUCH BOGUS PURCHASES SHOULD BE ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. SUCH WERE THE FACTS IN THE CASE OF PAWANRAJ B. BOKADIA (SUPRA). THIS BEING THE POSITION, THE ONLY QUESTION THAT SURVIVES IS WHAT SHOULD BE THE FAIR PROFIT RATE OUT OF THE BOGUS PURCHASES WHICH SHOULD BE ADDED BACK TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE COMMISSIONER ADOPTED THE RATIO OF 30 PER CENT OF SUCH TOTAL SALES. THE TRIBUNAL, HOWEVER, SCALED DOWN TO 12.5 PER CENT. WE MAY NOTICE THAT IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED THE GROSS PROFIT AT 3.56 PER CENT OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER, IF THE YARDSTICK OF 30 PER CENT, AS ADOPTED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), IS ACCEPTED THE GROSS PROFIT RATE WILL BE MUCH HIGHER. IN ESSENCE, THE 5 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 TRIBUNAL ONLY ESTIMATED THE POSSIBLE PROFIT OUT OF PURCHASES MADE THROUGH NON - GENUINE PARTIES. NO QUESTION OF LAW IN SUCH ESTIMATION WOULD ARISE. THE ESTIMATION OF RATE OF PROFIT RETURN MUST NECESSARILY VAR Y WITH THE NATURE OF BUSINESS AND NO UNIFORM YARDSTICK CAN BE ADOPTED.' FURTHER, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT RECENTLY HONBLE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT HAS ALSO, IN THE CASE OF CIT - 8 VS. HARIRAM BAMBHANI, I.T.A.NO.313 /2013 ORDER DATED 4.2.2015 HAS APPROV ED THE NET PROFIT @4% ON UNACCOUNTED SALES, CONFIRMED BY THE CIT(A). THUS, IT IS VERY OBVIOUS THAT IN RESPECT OF SUCH UNESTABLISHED PURCHASES OR SALES, A PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED TO SUCH TRANSACTIONS CAN BE ASCERTAINED. OF COURSE, WHILE DOING SO THE DECISION HAS TO BE CASE SPECIFIC. IN THIS CASE, IT IS VERY EVIDENT THAT ASSESSEE IS A MANUFACTURER, HENCE PROFIT MARGIN IS DEFINITELY HIGHER THAN SIMPLE TRADER OF SUCH GOODS, HENCE CONSIDERING THE NATURE OF BUSINE SS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE PROFIT ELEMENT EMBEDDED IN SUCH BUSINESS AND RELATED TO SUCH PURCHASES AS OBSERVED BY THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH. WHILE APPROVING THE ADOPTION OF 12.5% OF PROFIT, THE SAME PROFIT RATIO IS TAKEN IN THIS CASE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE ADDITI ON OF RS.2,32,328/ - IS CONFIRMED AND BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS.16,26,294/ - IS DELETED. 4. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ENTIRE PURCHASE CANNOT BE ADDED TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED PURCHASE INVOICES OF THREE PARTIES , LEDGER ACCO UNT COPIES OF THE BANK STATEMENT SHOWING THE PAYMENT OF PURCHASE S TO ABOVE PARTIES TRANSPORT RECEIPTS, R ECEIPT AND ENTRY OF THE MATERIAL IN STOCK REGISTER. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE PURCHASE S AND MADE PAYMENT THROUGH PROPER CHANNEL. THE ASSESSEE DID NOT P RODUCE THE PARTIES, BUT PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE CROSS ED ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUE BACK BY TRANSPORT RECEIPT AND CAPITAL PAYMENT. THEY ARE ALL MADE BY AGENT OF PURCHASER. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PURCHASES FROM THE PARTIES A ND AS PER THE 6 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 DECISION SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. J.M.D. COMP UTERS & COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD., S.I.P. (C) OF NO.28961 OF 2009, T HE ASSESSEE MUST BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF CROSS - EXAMINATION. IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M.K. BROTHERS (163 ITR 249) IT WAS NOT PROVED THAT PART OF FUND GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE TO THIS PARTY HAD COME BACK TO THE ASSESSEE IN ANY FORM. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE PURCHASES ARE RECORDED AND ALL PAYMENTS HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND ALSO QUANTITY DETAIL S O F PURCHASE S HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN THE STOCK REGISTER. THEREFORE, AS PER THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SRI RUPESH CHIMANLAL SAVLA V S. ITO , INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 6179 - 6182/MUM/2016 DATED 30/12/2016 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS DISALLOWED 2% OF TH E PURCHASE S TO MEET THE ANOMALIES. MOR EOVER, IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE THE PURCHASE S BUT THE ASSE SSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE PARTIES FROM WHOM THE PURCHASE S HAVD BEEN MADE , THEREFORE, ADDITION MAY BE REDUCED TO 2%. 5. THE LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF REVENUE AUTHORITY AND HE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE GUJARA T HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SIMIT P. S H ETH (2013) 219 TAXMAN 85 (GUJ) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY ADOPTED 12.5% OF TOTAL PROFIT. 6. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES . L OOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERE D THE SUBMISSION AND HE WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PURCHASES FROM THREE PARTIES AND THESE THREE PARTIES WERE DECLARE D AS BOGUS HAWALA DEALERS AND THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE TO PRODUCE THESE THREE PARTIES BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER . T HE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT BY CHEQUE TO THESE PARTIES AND THUS THE PURCHASES HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. MOREOVER, THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD THIS MUCH GOODS WHICH H E HAS PURCHASE D FROM THE ABOVE PARTIES THEREFORE, IT IS RIGHTLY CONCLUDED THAT THE PURCHASES SHOWN BY THE ASSESSEE IS NOT IN DOUBT , BUT THE ASSESSEE MIGHT HAVE NOT PURCHASE D FROM THESE PARTIES WHO HE MIGHT HAVE PURCHASE D IT FROM THE GREY MARKET. THEREFORE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ENTIRE PURCHASE S CANNOT BE ADDED TO 7 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND CIT(A) HAS RIGHTLY RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT(A) VS. SIMIT SETH (SUPRA) AND OUR INTERFERENCE IS NOT ALLOWED . IN THE RESULT , GROUND NO. 1 OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 7. SECOND GROUND IS AGAINST THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE INTEREST BEARING FUND WAS UTILISED FOR CAPITAL WORK IN PROGRESS. THE OPENING CAPITAL WORK IN PROGRE SS AS ON 01/04/20 10 WAS OF RS. 0.16 CRORE WHEREAS CLOSING CAPITAL WORK IN PROGRESS AS ON 31/03/2011 WAS RS. 3.48 CRORES. SIMILARLY, SECURED LOAN WAS INCREASED FROM RS. 50 LAKH TO 4.49 CRORES. SIMILARLY, UNSECURED LOAN HAVE BEEN INCREASED FROM 1.50 CRORES TO 3.44 CRORES . THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN WHY THE CORRESPONDING INTEREST EXPENDITURE TO CAPITAL WORK IN PROGRESS SHOULD NOT BE CAPITALIZED. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEES SALES HAVE GONE UP AND MOST OF THE SALES ARE EXPORT SALES AND ENTIRE CREDIT LOAN WAS UTILIZED FOR FINANCING THE OVERSEAS EXPORT SALES. THE CASH CREDIT HAS BEEN UTILIZED FOR PURPOSE OF ASSESSEE S DAY TO DAY BUSINESS. THEREFORE, ENTIRE AMOUNT WAS USE FOR THE BUSINESS PURPOSE AND AT THE MOST , EXPENDITURE OF RS.6,96,075/ - MAY BE CAPITALIZED. 8. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. D.R. RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF BOTH THE PARTIES IT IS SEEN FROM THE RECORD THAT CREDIT OBTAINED BY THE ASSESSEE FIRM CANARA BANK HAS BEEN UTILIZED FOR FINANCING OVERSEAS EXPORT. SIMILARLY, CASH CREDIT FACILITY OF RS. 36 LAKH HAVE BEEN UTILIZED FOR DAY TO DAY BUSI NESS. THEREFORE, THE ENTIRE INTEREST EXPENDITURE CANNOT BE DISALLOWED . T HE ASSESSEE HIMSELF HAS CAPITALIZE D T HE EXPENDITURE OF RS.6,96,075/ - A S PER THE WORKING GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(A) HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY DEFECT IN THE WORKING GIVEN BEFORE CIT (A) THEREFORE, WE DIRECT 8 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 THE AO TO CAPITAL IZE INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF RS.6,96,075/ - IN THE RESULT GROUND NO.2 OF ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. THE THIRD GROUND: - 9. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE DETAIL S OF EXPENSES RELATED TO WORK IN PROGRESS AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT SOME OF THE EXPENSES DEBITED UNDER THE HEAD ADMINISTRATION AND SELLING EXPENSES, LIKE TRAVELLING, SALARY ARE DEFINITELY RELATED TO WORK IN PROGRESS. HOWEVER , HE DISALLOWED RS.10 LAKH AND CAPITAL IZED WORK IN PROGRESS. THEREFORE, HE DISALLOWED. 10. THE MATTER CARRIED TO CIT(A) AND CIT(A) HAS PARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL ON THE GROUND THAT 10% OF SUCH EXPENSES CAN BE TREATED AS CAPITAL EXPENDITURE . T HEREFORE, HE SUSTAIN ED THE ADDITION OF RS.5 ,2 1 ,3 58/ - . 11. THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES FOR THE YEAR ENDED ON 31/03/2010 WERE RS.1,60,40,916/ - . THIS YEAR THE EXPENDITURE HAS GONE UP TO RS.1,75,71,545/ - . T HE TOTAL EXPENDITURE HAS ALSO BEEN INCREASED BY 10% . A S A GAINST THIS , SALES HAVE INCREASED BY 72.93%. ALL THE MAJOR EXPENSES UNDER THE HEAD ADMINISTRATION AND S ELLING EXPENSES ARE CLOSE LY RELATED TO INCREASE IN THE TURN OVER. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO SCOPE OF ESTIMATING IN HEADING ON AD - HOC BASIS. 12. THE LD. DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF REVENUE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 13 . WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF BOTH THE PARTIES . L OOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , WE FIND THAT THE TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31/03/2010 WAS RS.1,60, 40,916/ - . THIS YEAR THE EXPENDITURE HAS INCREASE D . THE TOTAL EXPENDITURE HAD INCREASED BY 10% AS AGAINST THIS SALES HAVE INCREASED BY 72.93% . A LL THE MAJOR EXPENSES HAV E BEEN SHOWN UNDER THE HEADING A DMINISTRATION AND SELLING EXPENSES . S UCH EXPENSES 9 METROPOLITAN EXIMCHEM LTD. ITA NO. 2935/M/2015 ARE ADVERTISEMENT AND SALES PROMOTION FREIGHT ON SALES, FREIGHT AND OTHER COMMISSION ON SALES. T HUS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS NO SCOPE OF ESTIMATING THE EXPENDITURE, THEREFORE , WE DELETED THE SAME. IN THE RESULT , GROUND NO 3 IN ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED . IN THE RESULT , APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29 TH MARCH, 2017. S D/ - S D/ - ( RAJESH KUMAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (D.T. GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 29/03/2017 *RAHUL SHARMA* COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, D BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI