PARIJAT CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD, MUMBAI V. CIT 22, MUMBAI

ITA 3496/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3427 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 21-03-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: R V KARDEKAR
• Section: 143(3); 56; 263

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH C , MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 3496/MUM/20 13 : (A.Y : 2009 - 10 ) PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY PARIJAT BHAVAN, PLOT NO. 18, SECTOR - 10A, NERUL (W), NAVI MUMBAI 400706. PAN : AAAAP2429D VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 22, MUMBAI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI R.V. KARDEKAR REVENUE BY : DR. S. PANDIAN (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 21 / 03 /201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 / 03 /201 6 O R D E R PER SANJAY GARG , J UDICIAL M EMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (IN SHORT CIT) PASSED U/S. 263 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SO CIETY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON 7.8.2009. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT AND THE AO ASSESSED THE TOTAL INCOME AS RETURNED BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT MAKING ANY ADDITION. THE LD. CIT, HOWEVER, EXERCISING HIS POWERS U/S. 263 OF THE ACT OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S. 80P OF THE 2 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 ACT. HE OBSERVED THAT AS PER THE AMENDMENTS INTRODUCED VIDE FINANCE ACT, 2006 W.E.F. 1.4.2007, AS PER SUB - SECTION 4 TO SEC. 80P, DEDUCTION U/S. 80P IS NOT AVAI LABLE TO THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY NOT BEING AN AGRICULTURAL CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY. HE SHOW CAUSED THE ASSESSEE IN THIS RESPECT. IN REPLY, THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WAS A CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY AND NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK, AND THUS WAS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S. 80P OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS RESPECT RELIED UPON THE CBDT LETTER IN F.NO. 133/06/2007 - TPL DT. 9.5.2008. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED UPON THE CLARIFICATION GIVEN BY THE RBI IN THIS RESPECT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RELIED UPO N CERTAIN CASE LAWS IN THIS RESPECT. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT REJECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND OBSERVED THAT THE DEPARTMENT HA D NOT ACCEPTED THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KULSWAMI CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. IN ITA NO. 6790/MUM/ 2012 VIDE ORDER DT . 21.8.2015 AND THAT THE DEPARTMENT HAD FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT A GAINST THE SAID DECISION WHICH WA S PENDING. HE THEREAFTER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY , REGISTERED UNDER THE MAHARASHTRA STATE CO - O PERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, WOULD FALL IN THE DEFINITION OF CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND THUS WAS NOT ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S. 80P OF THE ACT. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THE LD. AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS ONLY. THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS NOT PROVIDING ANY CRE DIT FACILITIES TO NON - MEMBERS OR PUBLIC AT LARGE NOR IS IT AUTHORIZED TO ACCEPT DEPOSITS FROM THE PUBLIC AT LARGE. THUS, IT IS DIFFERENT FROM A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. HE, 3 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 THEREFORE, HAS CONTENDED THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SUB - SECTION 4 OF SEC. 80P OF THE ACT AR E NOT ATTRACTED IN CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR HAS STRONGLY RELIED UPON THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS. THE CONTROVERSY IN THIS CASE REVOLVES AROUND THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80P(4) OF THE ACT WHICH READ AS UNDER : 80P(4) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY IN RELATION TO ANY CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CREDIT SOCIETY OR A PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. 6. THE LD. AR HAS FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE OBJECTS OF THE SOCIETY WHICH READ S AS UNDER : 1. TO ENCOURAGE AND PROMOTE HABIT OF THRIFT, SELF - HELP AND CO - OPERATION AMONG THE MEMBERS. 2. TO ACCEPT DEPOSIT FROM MEMBERS. 3. TO PROVIDE CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBER S. 4. TO MANAGE AND PROTECT PROPERTIES OF THE SOCIETY. 7. THE LD. AR HAS THUS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY IS DIFFERENT FROM A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AS IT CANNOT ACCEPT DEPOSITS FROM ANY PERSON OTHER THAN A MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY AND IT CAN NOT ADVANCE LOANS TO ANY OTHER PERSON OTHER THAN A MEMBER OF THE SOCIETY AND THAT THE PROVISIONS OF THE BANKING REGULATIONS ACT, 1950 ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES. THE LD. AR HAS FURTHER INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE ORDER OF THE COO RDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF KULSWAMI CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD. ( SUPRA ) 4 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL HAS THOROUGHLY DISCUSSED DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY AND A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL DT. 28.3.2014 PASSED IN ITA NOS. 3223/MUM/2011 AND 505/MUM/2012 HAS HELD THAT A CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY IS DIFFERENT FROM A CO - OPERATIVE BANK AND THUS IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S. 80P OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT PART OF THE FINDING S OF THE TRIBUNAL, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, IS REPRODUCED BELOW : 6. BEFORE US, IT WAS A COMMON POINT BETWEEN THE PARTIES THAT IDENTICAL CONTROVERSY HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSE'S OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007 - 08, AND 2008 - 09 VIDE ITA NOS. 3223/MUM/2011 & 505/MUM/2012 DATED 28.03.2014, WHEREBY IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT ASSESSEE CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETY DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THE RESTRICTION PLACED IN SUB - SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80P OF THE ACT. THE FOLLOWING DISCUSSION IN THE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 28.03.2014 (SUPRA) IS RELEVANT: - 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ONLY ISSUE ARISING OUT OF BOTH THE APPEALS RELATE TO THE ALLOWABILITY OF THE EXEMPTION/DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ALLOWABILITY OF EXEMPTION OF THE SAID INCOME DEPENDS ON WHETHER THE ASSESSEE/COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY IS A CO - OPERATIVE BANK OR NOT FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE A CT SINCE ACCORDING TO THE SAID PROVISION, DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80P SHALL NOT BE AVAILABLE TO ANY CO - OPERATIVE BANK OTHER THAN PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY OR PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. 4.1 IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FUNCTIONING AS A COOPERATIVE BANK AND BY VIRTUE OF SECTION 80P(4), THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 80P AND ALSO THE ASSESSEE IS NOT COMING WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF PRIMARY AGRICU LTURAL SOCIETY OR PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK. IT IS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT 5 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 IS NOT A COOPERATIVE BANK BUT ONLY A COOPERATIVE SOCIETY TO WHICH CLAUSE (4) OF SECTION 80P IS NOT APPLICABLE. 4.2 IN THIS CONNECTION, I T IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BROUGHT ON RECORD BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES, THE LETTER OF THE CBDT BEARING NO. F. NO. 133/06/2007 - TPL DATED 09.05.2008 ADDRESSED TO THE DELHI URBAN T&C SOCIETY LTD., STATING THAT FOR THE PURPOSES OF SUBSE CTION 4 OF SECTION 80P, 'COOPERATIVE BANK' SHALL HAVE THE SAME MEANING AS ASSIGNED TO IT IN PART V OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT 1949, ACCORDING TO WHICH 'COOPERATIVE BANKS' MEANS A STATE CO - OPERATIVE BANK, A CENTRAL CO OPERATIVE BANK AND PRIMARY CO - OPERAT IVE BANK. THOUGH THE SAID CLARIFICATION IS GIVEN BY THE CBDT IN CONNECTION WITH SOME OTHER ASSESSEE, THE CRUX OF THE MATTER PERTAINS TO THE CLARIFICATION OF 'CO - OPERATIVE BANK' FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBSECTION 4 OF SECTION 80P. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE SAID CL ARIFICATION HAS ALSO BEEN RELIED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN MANY CASES. THEREFORE, 'COOPERATIVE BANKS' MENTIONED IN THE SAID SUBSECTION INDICATES ONLY THE STATE, CENTRAL AND PRIMARY CO - OPERATIVE BANKS ONLY. 4.3 MOREOVER, FOR COMMENCING A BANKING BUSINESS BY THE C O - OPERATIVE SOCIETY, DUE LICENSE HAS TO BE OBTAINED FROM THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND IN THE ASSESSEE'S CASE, THERE IS NO SUCH LICENSE OBTAINED FOR COMMENCING ANY BANKING BUSINESS. THE MERE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN PROVIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO IT S MEMBERS AND THEREBY EARNS INTEREST AND DIVIDEND CANNOT MAKE THE 'SOCIETY' INTO A 'BANK' FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT. IF THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE WAS NOT TO GRANT DEDUCTION TO COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS OF PRO VIDING CREDIT FACILITIES TO ITS MEMBERS, THEN THIS SECTION WOULD HAVE BEEN DELETED. THIS PROPOSITION IS SUPPORTED BY VARIOUS DECISIONS INCLUDING THE DECISION OF THE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. JAFARI MOMIN VIKAS COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD AND THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS. JAYALAKSHMI MAHILA VIVIDODESHAGALA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI LTD. [2012] 137 ITD 163. 6 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 4.4 IN ADDITION TO THE AFOREMENTIONED DISCUSSION, THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN COOPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE BA NKING REGULATION ACT 1949 AND THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY REGISTERED UNDER THE MAHARASHTRA STATE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT 1960 AS BROUGHT OUT BY THE LD.CIT(A) ON THE BASIS OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: SL. NO. CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETI ES CO - OPERATIVE BANKS 1 THE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES ARE REGISTERED UNDER MAHARASHTRA STATE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1960 AND GOVERNED, REGULATED, ADMINISTERED AND SUPERVISED BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA CO - OPERATIVE BANKS ARE REGISTERED UNDER MAHARASHTRA CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ACT, 1960 AND ADMINISTERED BY REGISTRAR OF CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, GOVT. OF MAHARASHTRA. CO - OPERATIVE BANKS ARE REGULATED AND SUPERVISED BY THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA. PROVISIONS O F BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 WITH MODIFICATIONS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 56 OF THE BANKING REGULATION ACT, 1949 ARE APPLICABLE TO CO - OPERATIVE BANKS. SCHEDULE I TO SCHEDULE V ARE APPLICABLE TO CO - OPERATIVE BANK. 2 CO - OPERATIVE SOCIETIES ARE CLASSIFIED AS R ESOURCE/THRIFTS SOCIETIES IN THE CERTIFICATE OF REGISTRATION ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETY. CO - OPERATIVE BANKS ARE CLASSIFIED AS CO - OPERATIVE BANK. 3 CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES CAN ACCEPT DEPOSITS AND ADVANCE LOANS ONLY TO THE MEMBERS. HE NCE THE BUSINESS ACTIVITIES ARE RESTRICTED TO MEMBERS AND HENCE IT CAN BE TERMED AS A MUTUAL ASSOCIATION/SELF HELP GROUP. CO - OPERATIVE BANKS CAN ACCEPT DEPOSITS FROM PUBLIC. HOWEVER, UNLIKE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES THEY CAN ADVANCE LOANS TO THE MEMBE RS ONLY. 4 CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES CANNOT ACCEPT DEPOSITS FROM PUBLIC. CO - OPERATIVE CAN ACCEPT DEPOSITS FROM PUBLIC. 5 THE PROVISIONS OF BANKING REGULATION ACT 1949 ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO THE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES. THE PROVISIONS OF BANKING REGULATION ACT 1949 ARE APPLICABLE TO THE CO - OPERATIVE BANK. 7 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 6 THE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES DO NOT REQUIRED LICENSE FROM RESERVE BANK OF INDIA TO CARRY ON ITS BUSINESS. THE CO - OPERATIVE BANKS ARE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN LICENSE FROM RESERVE BANK OF INDIA TO CARRY ON ITS BUSINESS. 7 THE CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES DO NOT HAVE CHEQUE FACILITIES, CLEARING FACILITIES AND THEY CANNOT ISSUE DEMAND DRAFTS, PAY ORDERS ETC. THE CO - OPERATIVE HAVE CHEQUE FACILITIES, CLEARING FACILITIES AND THEY ISSUE DEMAND DRAFT S, ASSESSMENT YEAR ORDER, BANK GUARANTEES ETC. 8 CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETIES CANNOT USE WORD BANK/BANKERS IN THEIR NAME CO - OPERATIVE BANKS ARE MANDATORILY REQUIRED TO USE WORD BANK/BANKERS IN THEIR NAME. 9 RESERVE BANK OF INDIA HAS NO STATUTORY POWER O F CONTROL AND SUPERVISION OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES. RESERVE BANK OF INDIA HAS VESTED WITH STATUTORY POWERS OF CONTROL AND SUPERVISION OF COOPERATIVE BANKS. THE ABOVE DISTINCTION MAKES IT VERY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT A CO - OPERATIVE BANK FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT. 4.5 AS REGARDS THE CLAIM OF THE REVENUE THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 08, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED THE DEDUCTION OF THE SECTION 80P OF THE ACT IN THE RETURN OF INCOME BUT CLAIMED THE SAME ONLY DURING THE COUR SE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND HENCE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ADMISSIBLE IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE INDIA LTD. [284 ITR 323 (SC) (2006)], IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF THE CIT VS. PRUTHVI BROKERS AND SHAREHOLDERS P. LTD. [(2012) 349 ITR 336 (BOM)] HAS HELD THAT THE APPELLATE AUTHORITIES HAVE THE POWER TO CONSIDER THE CLAIM NOT MADE IN RETURN OF INCOME. THE HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT WHILE DECIDING SO, HA S CONSIDERED THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF GOETZE INDIA LTD. (SUPRA). IN VIEW OF THAT MATTER, THE LD.CIT(A) GIVING RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AT THE APPELLATE STAGE ON THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION NOT MADE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME IS JUSTIFIED . 4.6 CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND POSITION OF LAW, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LD.CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN 8 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 DIRECTING THE AO TO ALLOW THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 80P OF THE ACT ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE, A COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY IS NOT A BANK FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 80P(4) OF THE ACT. THUS THE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A) DATED 11.02.2011 AND 29.11.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007 - 08 AND 2008 - 09 RESPECTIVELY ARE UPHELD. 7. FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID PRECEDENT, WHICH HAS BEEN RENDERED IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE UNDER IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, WE HEREBY AFFIRM THE ORDER OF CIT(A) UPHOLDING ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR EXEMPTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT. THUS THE REVENUE FAILS IN ITS APPEAL. 8 . NOW, COMING TO THE ORDER OF CIT PASSED U/ S 263 OF THE ACT, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT HAS NOT DISCUSSED AS TO HOW THE ASSESSEE SOCIETY WOULD FALL UNDER THE DEFINITION OF A CO - OPERATIVE BANK. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT IS A NON - SPEAKING ORDER. HE, WITHOUT ASSIGNING ANY COGENT AND CONVINCING REASON, HAS SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE AO. HOWEVER, IN THE LIGHT OF THE DECISION OF THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL AS REPRODUCED ABOVE, ORDER OF THE AO CANNOT BE SAID TO BE ERRONEOUS OR PREJUDICIAL TO THE INTEREST OF THE REVENUE. THE ORDER OF LD. CIT PASSE D U/S. 263 OF THE ACT IS THUS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW AND SAME IS SET ASIDE. 9 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HEREBY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21/03/ 201 6 . SD/ - SD/ - ( RAJESH KUMAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( SANJAY GARG ) JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE : 0 4 / 0 4 / 2016 *SSL* 9 PARIJAT CO - OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY ITA NO. 3496/MUM/2013 COPY TO : 1) THE APPELLANT 2) THE RESPONDENT 3) THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 4) THE CIT CONCERNED 5) THE D.R, C BENCH, MUMBAI 6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T, MUMBAI