ITO (TDS) (OSD) RG 2, MUMBAI V. NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 3156/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2772 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ALOK BAIRAGRA
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax
• Section: 201(1); 2

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI , , , BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2010-11 & 2011-12 ITO(TDS)(OSD)-RANGE-2, R.NO.704, 7 TH FLOOR, SMT. K.G. MITTAL AYURVEDIC HOSPITAL, BUILDING, CHARNI RAOD, MUMBAI-400002 / VS. M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. OBEROI TRADE CENTRE, OBEROI COMPLEX, OFF. NEW LINK ROAD, ANDHERI (WEST), MUMBAI-400053 ( / REVENUE) ( !'# $ /ASSESSEE) PAN. NO. AAACN3947L / REVENUE BY SHRI VIJAY KUMAR SONI-DR !'# $ / ASSESSEE BY SHRI ALOK BAIRAGRA % & $ ' / DATE OF HEARING : 29/10/2015 & $ ' / DATE OF ORDER: 06/11/2015 / O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE BY THE REVENUE, AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDERS DATED 14/02/2014 OF THE LD. FIRST A PPELLATE AUTHORITY, MUMBAI. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED IN THIS A PPEAL PERTAINS TO ALLOWING BANK GUARANTEE COMMISSION AND THUS NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE ON SUCH CHARGES PAID TO BANK M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 2 U/S 194H OF THE ACT AND FURTHER DELETING THE ADDITI ON U/S 201 (1)/201(1A) OF THE ACT. 2. DURING HEARING OF THESE APPEALS, AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, SHRI ALOK BAIRAGRA CLAIME D THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TR IBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KOTAK SECURITIES LTD. VS DCIT (ITA NO.6 657/ MUM/2011) ORDER DATED 03/02/2012. THIS FACTUAL MAT RIX WAS NOT CONTROVERTED BY THE LD. DR, SHRI VIJAY KUMA R SONI. 2.1. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IF THE OB SERVATION MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, LEADING TO ADDITION M ADE TO THE TOTAL INCOME, CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER, MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD, ASSERTIONS MADE BY TH E LD. RESPECTIVE COUNSELS, IF KEPT IN JUXTAPOSITION AND A NALYZED, FIRST, WE ARE EXPECTED TO LOOK AT SECTION 194H, WHI CH IS REPRODUCED HEREUNDER:- COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE 194H. ANY PERSON, NOT BEING AN INDIVIDUAL OR A HI NDU UNDIVIDED FAMILY, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PAYING, ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE, 2001, TO A RESIDENT, ANY INCOME BY WAY OF COMMISSION (NOT BEING INSURANCE COMMISSION REFERRED TO IN SECTION 194D) OR BROKERAGE, SHALL, AT THE TIME OF C REDIT OF SUCH INCOME TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE PAYEE OR AT THE TIME O F PAYMENT OF SUCH INCOME IN CASH OR BY THE ISSUE OF A CHEQUE OR DRAFT OR M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 3 BY ANY OTHER MODE, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, DEDUCT INC OME-TAX THEREON AT THE RATE OF TEN PER CENT : PROVIDED THAT NO DEDUCTION SHALL BE MADE UNDER THIS SECTION IN A CASE WHERE THE AMOUNT OF SUCH INCOME O R, AS THE CASE MAY BE, THE AGGREGATE OF THE AMOUNTS OF SUCH I NCOME CREDITED OR PAID OR LIKELY TO BE CREDITED OR PAID D URING THE FINANCIAL YEAR TO THE ACCOUNT OF, OR TO, THE PAYEE, DOES NOT EXCEED FIVE THOUSAND RUPEES : PROVIDED FURTHER THAT AN INDIVIDUAL OR A HINDU UNDI VIDED FAMILY, WHOSE TOTAL SALES, GROSS RECEIPTS OR TURNOV ER FROM THE BUSINESS OR PROFESSION CARRIED ON BY HIM EXCEED THE MONETARY LIMITS SPECIFIED UNDER CLAUSE (A) OR CLAUSE (B) OF SECTION 44AB DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH SUCH COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE IS CREDI TED OR PAID, SHALL BE LIABLE TO DEDUCT INCOME-TAX UNDER TH IS SECTION: PROVIDED ALSO THAT NO DEDUCTION SHALL BE MADE UNDER THIS SECTION ON ANY COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE PAYABLE BY B HARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED OR MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LIMITED TO THEIR PUBLIC CALL OFFICE FRANCHISEES. EXPLANATION.FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, (I) COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE INCLUDES ANY PAYMENT RECEIVED OR RECEIVABLE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, BY A PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PERSON FOR SERVICES RENDERED (NOT BEING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES) OR FOR ANY SERVICES IN THE C OURSE OF BUYING OR SELLING OF GOODS OR IN RELATION TO ANY TR ANSACTION M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 4 RELATING TO ANY ASSET, VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING, N OT BEING SECURITIES; (II) THE EXPRESSION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES MEANS S ERVICES RENDERED BY A PERSON IN THE COURSE OF CARRYING ON A LEGAL, MEDICAL, ENGINEERING OR ARCHITECTURAL PROFESSION OR THE PROFESSION OF ACCOUNTANCY OR TECHNICAL CONSULTANCY OR INTERIOR DECORATION OR SUCH OTHER PROFESSION AS IS NOTIFIED BY THE BOARD FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 44AA; (III) THE EXPRESSION SECURITIES SHALL HAVE THE ME ANING ASSIGNED TO IT IN CLAUSE (H) OF SECTION 2 OF THE SE CURITIES CONTRACTS (REGULATION) ACT, 1956 (42 OF 1956) ; (IV) WHERE ANY INCOME IS CREDITED TO ANY ACCOUNT, W HETHER CALLED SUSPENSE ACCOUNT OR BY ANY OTHER NAME, IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE PERSON LIABLE TO PAY SUCH INCOME, SUCH CREDITING SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE CREDIT OF SUCH INCO ME TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE PAYEE AND THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SEC TION SHALL APPLY ACCORDINGLY. 2.2. A PLAIN READING OF THE ABOVE PROVISION INDIC ATES THAT TAX WITHHOLDING REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 194H APP LY IN RESPECT OF COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE, WHICH, IN TUR N, IS DEFINED BY EXPLANATION TO SECTION 194 H. NO DOUBT, THIS DEF INITION IS INCLUSIVE BUT THE FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION THAT WE REAL LY NEED TO CONSIDER IN THE FIRST PLACE IS AS TO WHAT ARE THE C ONNOTATIONS OF EXPRESSION COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE IN COMMON PARL ANCE, M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 5 AND THEN PROCEED TO DEAL WITH THE INCLUSIONS THERET O BY THE VIRTUE OF SPECIFIC PROVISION OF LAW. 2.3. WE FIND THAT THE EXPRESSION COMMISSION AND BROKERAGE HAVE BEEN USED TOGETHER IN THE STATUTE. IT IS WELL SETTLED, AS NOTED BY MAXWELL IN INTERPRETATION OF S TATUTES AND WHILE ELABORATING ON THE PRINCIPLE OF NOSCITUR A SO CIIS, THAT WHEN TWO OR MORE WORDS WHICH ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO ANA LOGOUS MEANING ARE USED TOGETHER THEY ARE DEEMED TO BE USE D IN THEIR COGNATE SENSE. THEY TAKE, AS IT WERE, THEIR COLOURS FROM EACH OTHER, THE MEANING OF MORE GENERAL BEING RESTRICTED TO A SENSE ANALOGOUS TO THAT OF LESS GENERAL. EXPLAINING THIS PRINCIPLE IN GENERAL TERMS, HONBLE SHRI M.K. CHATURVEDI, THE TH EN VICE PRESIDENT (MZ) HAS, IN INTERPRETATION OF TAXING STA TUTES (AIFTP JOURNAL : VOL. 4, NO. 7, JULY, 2002, AT P. 7), IN H IS INIMITABLE WORDS OBSERVED: LAW IS NOT A BROODING OMNIPOTENCE IN THE SKY. IT IS A PRAGMATIC TOOL OF THE SOCIAL ORDER. THE TENETS OF L AW BEING ENACTED ON THE BASIS OF PRAGMATISM. SIMILARLY, THE RULES RELATING TO INTERPRETATION ARE ALSO BASED ON COMMON -SENSE APPROACH. SUPPOSE A MAN TELLS HIS WIFE TO GO OUT AN D BUY BREAD, MILK OR ANYTHING ELSE SHE NEEDS, HE WILL NOT NORMALLY BE UNDERSTOOD TO INCLUDE IN THE TERMS ANYTHING ELSE S HE NEEDS A NEW CAR OR AN ITEM OF JEWELLERY. THE DICTUM OF EJUS DEM GENERIS REFERS TO SIMILAR SITUATION. IT MEANS OF THE SAME K IND, CLASS OR NATURE. THE RULE IS THAT WHEN GENERAL WORDS FOLLOW PARTICULAR AND SPECIFIC WORDS OF THE SAME NATURE, THE GENERAL WORDS MUST BE CONFINED TO THE THINGS OF SAME KIND AS SPECIFIED . NOSCITUR A M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 6 SOCIIS IS A BROADER VERSION OF THE MAXIM EJUSDEM GE NERIS. A MAN MAY BE KNOWN BY THE COMPANY HE KEEPS AND A WORD MAY BE INTERPRETED WITH REFERENCE TO BE ACCOMPANYING WO RDS. WORDS DERIVE COLOUR FROM THE SURROUNDING WORDS. 2.4. BROOMS LEGAL MAXIMS (10TH EDN.) OBSERVES TH AT 'IT IS A RULE LAID DOWN BY LORD BACON, THAT COPULATIO V ERBORUM INDICAT ACCEPTATIONEM IN EODEM SENSU THE COUPLING O F WORDS TOGETHER SHOWS THAT THEY ARE TO BE UNDERSTOOD IN TH E SAME SENSE.' 2.5. LET US NOW DEAL WITH LEGAL CONNOTATIONS OF T HESE TWO EXPRESSIONS, NAMELY COMMISSION AND BROKERAGE . THE LAW LEXICON (EDITED BY JUSTICE Y.V. CHANDRACHUD; 19 97 EDN.) OBSERVES THAT 'IN COMMERCIAL LAW, COMMISSION IS A COMPENSATION TO A FACTOR OR OTHER AGENT FOR SERVICE S TO BE RENDERED IN MAKING A SALE OR OTHERWISE; A SUM ALLOW ED AS COMPENSATION TO A SERVANT, FACTOR OR AGENT WHO MANA GES THE AFFAIRS OF OTHERS, IN RECOMPENSE FOR HIS SERVICES.' ACCORDING TO THE GIVEN DEFINITION, 'IT IS AN ALLOWANCE, RECOMPEN SE OR REWARD MADE TO AGENTS, FACTORS AND BROKERS AND OTHERS FOR EFFECTING SALES AND CARRYING OUT BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS. IT IS GENERALLY CALCULATED AS A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE ON THE AMOUNT OF THE TRANSACTIONS ON THE PROFITS TO THE PRINCIPAL.' THE EXPRESSION BROKERAGE IS DEFINED AS FEES OR COMMISSION GIVEN TO OR CHARGED BY A BROKER. IN TURN A BROKER IS DEFINED A S 'A MIDDLEMAN OR AGENT WHO, FOR A COMMISSION ON THE VAL UE OF TRANSACTION, NEGOTIATES FOR OTHERS THE PURCHASE OR SALE OF M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 7 BOOKS, BONDS OR COMMODITIES, OR PROPERTY OF ANY KIN D, OR WHO ATTENDS TO THE DOING OF SOMETHING FOR ANOTHER. 2.6. IN THE LIGHT OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, AND W HEN WE LOOK AT THE CONNOTATIONS OF EXPRESSION COMMISSION OR BR OKERAGE IN ITS COGNATE SENSE, AS IN THE LIGHT OF THE PRINCIPLE OF NOSCITUR A SOCIIS AS WE ARE OBLIGED TO, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW , SCOPE OF EXPRESSION COMMISSION, FOR THIS PURPOSE, WILL BE CONFINED TO AN ALLOWANCE, RECOMPENSE OR REWARD MADE TO AGENTS, FACTORS AND BROKERS AND OTHERS FOR EFFECTING SALES AND CARR YING OUT BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS AND SHALL NOT EXTEND TO THE PAYMENTS, SUCH AS BANK GUARANTEE COMMISSION, WHICH ARE IN T HE NATURE OF FEES FOR SERVICES RENDERED OR PRODUCT OFFERED BY THE RECIPIENT OF SUCH PAYMENTS ON PRINCIPAL TO PRINCIPAL BASIS. E VEN WHEN AN EXPRESSION IS STATUTORILY DEFINED UNDER SECTION 2, IT STILL HAS TO MEET THE TEST OF CONTEXTUAL RELEVANCE AS SECTION 2 ITSELF STARTS WITH THE WORDS IN THIS ACT ( I.E. INCOME TA X ACT), UNLESS CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES, AND, THEREFORE, CONTE XTUAL MEANING ASSUMES SIGNIFICANCE. EVERY DEFINITION IN T HE INCOME TAX ACT MUST DEPEND ON THE CONTEXT IN WHICH THE EXP RESSION IN SET OUT, AND THE CONTEXT IN WHICH EXPRESSION CO MMISSION APPEARS IN SECTION 194 H, I.E. ALONGWITH THE EXPRES SION BROKERAGE, SIGNIFICANTLY RESTRICTS ITS CONNOTATIO NS. THE COMMON PARLANCE MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION COMMISSI ON THUS DOES NOT EXTEND TO A PAYMENT WHICH IS IN THE N ATURE OF FEES FOR A PRODUCT OR SERVICE; IT MUST REMAIN RESTR ICTED TO , AS HAS BEEN ELABORATED ABOVE, A PAYMENT IN THE NATURE OF REWARD FOR EFFECTING SALES OR BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS ETC. T HE INCLUSIVE M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 8 DEFINITION OF THE EXPRESSION COMMISSION OR BROKERA GE IN EXPLANATION TO SECTION 194 H IS QUITE IN HARMONY WI TH THIS APPROACH AS IT ONLY PROVIDES THAT ANY PAYMENT RECE IVED OR RECEIVABLE, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, BY A PERSON ACT ING ON BEHALF OF ANOTHER PERSON FOR SERVICES RENDERED (NOT BEING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES) OR FOR ANY SERVICES IN THE COURSE OF BUYI NG OR SELLING OF GOODS OR IN RELATION TO ANY TRANSACTION RELATING TO ANY ASSET, VALUABLE ARTICLE OR THING, NOT BEING SECURITIES IS INCLUDIBLE IN THE SCOPE OF MEANING OF COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE. THEREFORE, WHAT THE INCLUSIVE DEFINITION REALLY CONTAINS IS NO THING BUT NORMAL MEANING OF THE EXPRESSION COMMISSION OR BRO KERAGE. IN THE CASE OF SOUTH GUJARAT ROOFING TILES MANUFACT URERS ASSOCIATION VS STATE OF GUJARAT [(1976) 4 SCC 601], HONBLE SUPREME COURT WERE IN SEISIN OF A SITUATION IN WHIC H AN EXPRESSION, NAMELY PROCESSING, WAS GIVEN AN INCLU SIVE DEFINITION, BUT THEIR LORDSHIPS WERE OF THE VIEW TH AT THERE COULD BE NO OTHER MEANING OF PROCESSING BESIDES W HAT IS STATED AS INCLUDED IN THAT EXPRESSION AND THAT TH OUGH INCLUDE IS GENERALLY USED IN INTERPRETATION CLAUS E AS A WORD OF ENLARGEMENT, IN SOME CASES CONTEXT MIGHT SUGGEST A DIFFERENT INTENTION. THEIR LORDSHIPS THEN CONCLUDED THAT THO UGH THE EXPRESSION USED IN THE DEFINITION CLAUSE IS INCLUD ES, IT SEEMS TO US THAT THE WORD INCLUDES HAS BEEN USED HERE I N THE SAME SENSE OF MEANS; THIS IS THE ONLY CONSTRUCTION THA T THE WORD CAN BEAR IN THIS CONTEXT. IN OTHER WORDS, AN INCLU SIVE DEFINITION, AS THEIR LORDSHIPS NOTED, DOES NOT NECE SSARILY ALWAYS EXTEND THE MEANING OF AN EXPRESSION. WHEN IN CLUSIVE DEFINITION CONTAINS ORDINARY NORMAL CONNOTATIONS OF AN M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 9 EXPRESSION, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, EVEN AN INCLUSI VE DEFINITION HAS TO BE TREATED AS EXHAUSTIVE. THAT IS THE SITUAT ION IN THE CASE BEFORE US AS WELL. EVEN AS DEFINITION OF EXPRE SSION COMMISSION OR BROKERAGE, IN EXPLANATION TO SECTIO N 194 H, IS STATED TO BE EXCLUSIVE, IT DOES NOT REALLY MEAN ANY THING OTHER THAN WHAT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY STATED IN THE SAID DEFINITION. THEREFORE, AS HELD BY THE COORDINATE BENCHES IN A N UMBER OF CASES INCLUDING SRL RANBAXY LTD VS ACIT (ITA NO. 434/DEL/11; ORDER DATED 16.12.2011), FOSTERS INDIA LTD VS ITO (117 TTJ 346), AND AJMER ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAN GH LTD VS ITO (34 SOT 216), PRINCIPAL AGENT RELATIONSHIP I S A SINE QUA NON FOR INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194 H. I N THE CASE BEFORE US, THERE IS NO PRINCIPAL AGENT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE BANK ISSUING THE BANK GUARANTEE AND THE ASSESSEE. W HEN BANK ISSUES THE BANK GUARANTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE AS SESSEE, ALL IT DOES IS TO ACCEPT THE COMMITMENT OF MAKING PAYME NT OF A SPECIFIED AMOUNT TO, ON DEMAND, THE BENEFICIARY, AN D IT IS IN CONSIDERATION OF THIS COMMITMENT, THE BANK CHARGES A FEES WHICH IS CUSTOMARILY TERMED AS BANK GUARANTEE COMM ISSION . WHILE IT IS TERMED AS GUARANTEE COMMISSION, IT IS NOT IN THE NATURE OF COMMISSION AS IT IS UNDERSTOOD IN COMMO N BUSINESS PARLANCE AND IN THE CONTEXT OF THE SECTION 194H. THIS TRANSACTION, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, IS NOT A TRANS ACTION BETWEEN PRINCIPAL AND AGENT SO AS TO ATTRACT THE TA X DEDUCTION REQUIREMENTS UNDER SECTION 194H. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE CIT(A) INDEED ERRED IN HOL DING THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INDEED UNDER AN OBLIGATION TO DEDU CT TAX AT SOURCE UNDER SECTION 194 H FROM PAYMENTS MADE BY TH E M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 10 ASSESSEE TO VARIOUS BANKS. AS WE HAVE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE UNDER SECT ION 194 H, THE QUESTION OF LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 201( 1A) CANNOT ARISE. 2.7. THE SCOPE AND EFFECT OF SECTION 194H (W.E.F. 01/06/2001), SECTION 194H AS ALSO AMENDMENT OF SECT ION 197 MADE BY THE FINANCE ACT 2001 HAVE BEEN ELABORATED I N DEPARTMENTAL CIRCULAR NO.14 OF 2001. FURTHER, THE S COPE AND EFFECT OF THE AMENDMENT MADE IN OPENING PORTION OF SECTION 194H BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2002 HAVE BEEN FURTHER ELA BORATED IN DEPARTMENTAL CIRCULAR NO.8 OF 2002 DATED 27/08/2 002. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, WE QUASH THE IMPUGNED DEMANDS UNDER SECTION 201(1) AND 201(1A) R .W.S. 194H. FINALLY, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 29/10/2015. SD/- SD/- ( RAJESH KUMAR ) (JOGINDER SINGH) '# / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $# / JUDICIAL MEMBER % MUMBAI; ( DATED : 06/11/2015 F{X~{T? P.S/. . . %$&'()(*& / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *+,- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./,- / THE RESPONDENT. M/S NIMBUS COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ITA NO.3156 & 3157/MUM/2014 11 3. 0 0 1$ ( *+ ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. 0 0 1$ / CIT(A)- , MUMBAI 5. 34 .$ ! , 0 *+' *! 5 , % / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 6' 7% / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, /3+$ .$ //TRUE COPY// / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , % / ITAT, MUMBAI.