LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 2(3)-1, MUMBAI

ITA 3620/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3486 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-06-2013
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2011
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: REEPAL G TRALASHAWALA
• Keywords: Charitable institution; Source of fund
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI . . , ! ' #'' '$ , % ! & BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER . : 3620 / / 2011 A.Y. 2004-05 ITA NO. : 3620/MUM/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2004-05) M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD., 10, HOMI MODY STREET, 2 ND FLOOR, FORT, MUMBAI -400 001 .: PAN: AAACS 6733 P VS THE ITO WARD 2(3)-1, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 5 TH FLOOR, MUMBAI -400 020 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI REEPAL G. TRALASHAWALA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR /DATE OF HEARING : 03-06-2013 !' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12-06-2013 * O R D E R #'' '$ , : PER VIVEK VARMA, JM: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISEN FROM THE ORDER O F CIT(A) 6, MUMBAI, DATED 01.02.2011, WHEREIN, THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAV E BEEN TAKEN: A. ADDITION U/S 68 RS. 3,55,000/- 1. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION MADE UNDER SECTION 68 OF THE ACT IN RE SPECT OF 5 PARTIES AMOUNTING IN ALL AGGREGATING TO RS. 3,55,00 0/- ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT FAILED TO PROVE CREDITWOR THINESS OF THE AFORESAID PARTIES WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THA T THE APPELLANT HAD DISCHARGED THE ONUS CAST UPON IT AND HENCE, THE ADDITION MADE OF RS. 3,55,000/- IS UNJUSTIFIED AND MAY BE DE LETED. 2. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A) FAILE D TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE HIM AND WI THOUT VERIFYING THE SAME HAS MADE CONTRARY OBSERVATIONS I N THE ORDER AND HENCE, THE ADDITION CONFIRMED OF RS. 3,55,000/- IS UNJUSTIFIED AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 2 B. ADDITION OF CASH DEPOSITED IN LEDGER ACCOUNT OF SHRI JAIDEEP KAPADIA RS. 40,54,400/- 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION OF SUM OF RS. 40,54,400/- IN RESPECT OF CASH RECEIVED FROM SHRI J AIDEEP KAPADIA AND DEPOSITED IN BANK ACCOUNT OF APPELLANT ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT FAILED TO PROVE THE SOURC E OF DEPOSITS WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT PROPER EXPLANATI ON WITH COMPLETE DETAILS WAS FURNISHED TO THE AO & CIT(A) A ND WITHOUT VERIFYING THE SAME, THE ADDITION MADE OF RS. 40,54, 400/- IS UNJUSTIFIED AND MAY BE DELETED. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS WERE FROM SALE OF PLOTS MADE ON BEHALF OF BAI NATHIBAI DAMODAR THACKERSEY MULJI CHARITABLE TRUST AND DULY CONFIRMED BY THE SAID TRUST AND HENCE, THE APPELLANT HAD DISC HARGED THE ONUS OF PROVING THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS AND THU S, THE ADDITION MADE OF RS. 40,54,400/- IS UNJUSTIFIED AND MAY BE DELETED. 5. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT( A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANT RECEIVED CASH FROM SH RI JAIDEEP KAPADIA THEREBY EXPLAINING THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT AN D HENCE, NO ADDITION COULD BE MADE IN THE HANDS OF THE APPELLAN T AND THE ADDITION THEREFORE MADE OF RS. 40,54,400/- IS WITHO UT ANY BASIS, UNJUSTIFIED AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. C) ADDITION TOWARDS CASH DEPOSIT IN BANK ACCOUNT 6. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE APPELLANT W ITHOUT APPRECIATING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS EXPLAINED THE S OURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS AND ALSO FILED DETAILS IN RESPECT OF THE S AME AND HENCE, WITHOUT VERIFYING THE DETAILS, THE ADDITION MADE OF RS. 46,64,000/- IS WITHOUT ANY BASIS, UNJUSTIFIED AND M AY BE DELETED. 7. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE SOURCE OF CASH DEPOSITS WERE DULY SUPPORTED BY AGREEMENTS FOR SALE OF PLOTS / ADVANCE RECEIVED ON SALE OF PLOTS, ETC. AND HENCE, WITHOUT MAKING ANY ATTEMPT TO VERIFY THE SAME OR CALLING FO R REMAND REPORT AND MERELY ON HIS OWN SUSPICIOUS AND DOUBTS, THE ADDITION CONFIRMED IS UNJUSTIFIED AND LIABLE TO BE DELETED. 2. GROUND NO. 1 PERTAINS TO THE ADDITION OF RS. 3,55,000/- IN AGGREGATE, FOUND CREDITED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ISSUE WAS RAISED BY THE AO, WHEN HE FOUND THAT T HE FOLLOWING AMOUNTS ARE CREDITED IN THE BOOKS IN THE FOLLOWING NAMES: S.NO. NAME OF THE LENDER AMOUNT 1 SHRI ANANDKUMAR JAIPRAKASH SARDA 50,000 2 MS SUMANGALA PRABHAKARRAO GUNGUNE 50,000 3 SHRI SURESH RAMKRISHNJI GUNGUNE 45,000 4 SHRI VASANTRAO OMKARRAOJI KALE 60,000 5 MS. VEENA MALHOTRA 1,50,000 TOTAL 3,55,000 $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 3 AS PER THE DETAILS FILED, THE AO FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FILED PAN DETAILS IN ANY OF THE ABOVE CREDITORS, AT SERIAL NOS. 1 TO 4. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE AMOUNTS RECEIV ED BY THESE CREDITORS ARE THROUGH ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES OR DEMAN D DRAFTS AND DEPOSITED IN ITS BANK ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSEE ALSO POINTED OUT THAT MS. VEENA MALHOTRA, AT SERIAL NO. 5 WAS NOT COOPERATING, BUT T HE AMOUNT SO RECEIVED FROM HER WAS THROUGH REGULAR BANKING CHANNEL. 4. THE AO DISBELIEVED THE EXPLANATION AS GIVEN BY THE AS SESSEE AND ADDED THE AGGREGATE OF THESE AMOUNTS OF RS. 3,55,000/-, T O THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 5. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE CIT(A). 6. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE WAS ABLE TO FURNISH THE PAN DETAILS OF THE FOLLOWING: S.NO. NAME OF THE PARTY PAN 01 SHRI ANANDKUMAR JAIPRAKASH SARDA ATCPS 6372 E 02 MS SUMANGALA PRABHAKARRAO GUNGUNE ACGPK 1700 K 03 SHRI SURESH RAMKRISHNJI GUNGUNE ABQEG 7408 B 04 SHRI VASANTRAO OMKARRAOJI KALE NO PAN 05 MS. VEENA MALHOTRA NOT COOPERATING THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT PARTY AT SERIAL NO. 4 DOES NOT HAVE A PAN BUT THE PERSON OWNED 3.63 ACRES OF LAND FOR AGRIC ULTURE AT VILLAGE KALWADI ALONG WITH THE LETTER OF TALATI, WHICH WOULD PRO VE THE GENUINESS OF LOAN OF RS. 60,000/-. 7. THE CIT(A), ON CONSIDERING THE DETAILED REPLY OF THE ASSESS EE, FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT FURNISHED COMPLETE DET AILS, WHICH COULD DISCHARGE THE ONUS LAY ON THE ASSESSEE. HE ALSO CO NCLUDED THAT THERE IS NO PERSON WITH THE NAME OF MS. SUMANGALA PRABHA KARRAO GUNGUNE EXISTED WITH THIS PAN, EVEN THOUGH THE ASSESSE E FURNISHED THE EVIDENCE THAT THE LADYS MAIDEN NAME WAS MS. ASHA B HAGVANTRAO KHERDE, WHOSE PAN DETAILS MATCHED. THE CIT(A), HOWEVER, T AKING AND $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 4 CONSIDERING THE ENTIRE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, SUSTAINED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 AT RS. 3,55,000/-. 8. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS NOW BEFORE THE ITAT. 9. BEFORE US, THE AR SUBMITTED THAT COMPLETE DETAILS COULD NOT BE FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO, BUT THE DETAILS WERE FURNISHED BEFO RE CIT(A). THE AR ASSAILED THE DETAILS AS PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK, B UT HE HIMSELF CONCLUDED THAT PERSONS AT SERIAL NOS. 2 AND 4, I.E. MS SUMA NGALA PRABHAKARRAO GUNGUNE LENDING RS. 50,000/- WAS A SCHOOL T EACHER & SHRI VASANTRAO OMKARRAOJI KALE LENDING RS. 60,000/- COULD NOT BE DOUBTED BECAUSE OF THEIR KNOW SOURCES OF INCOME, AS EVIDE NCED. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER EVIDENCE GIVEN MS SUMANG ALA PRABHAKARRAO GUNGUNE WAS MS. ASHA BHAGVANTRAO KHERDE . THE AR THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT AT LEAST THESE TWO CREDITS SHO ULD BE TREATED AS GOOD CREDITS. 10. THE DR ON THE OTHER HAND SUBMITTED THAT THE SINCE THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEEMING PROVISIONS HAVE NOT BEEN FULFILLE D, THE CONDITIONS PREVAILING IN SECTION 68 ARE APPLICABLE TO THE CAS E OF THE ASSESSEE AND SUBMITTED THAT THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES HA VE TAKEN REASONABLE, REASONED AND APPROPRIATE VIEW TO SUSTAIN THE ADDITION. 11. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AND ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE ANY SERIOUS ATTEMP T TO ESTABLISH THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE CREDITORS. WE ALSO FIND THAT EV EN THE AR PRIMARILY DEALT WITH THE CREDITS OF MS. SUMANGALA WHO IS A T EACHER AND SHRI VASANTRAO, AN AGRICULTURIST, WHO OWNED 3.63 ACRES OF AGRICULTURAL LAND, BOTH LIVING IN VILLAGES. CREDITS IN THE NAME OF SHRI ANAND KUMAR JAIPRAKASH SARDA, SHRI SURESH RAMKRISHNJI GUNGUNE & MS. V EENA MALHOTRA ARE CONSIDERED AS NOT GENUINE & WE SUSTAIN T HE ADDITION MADE ON THESE CREDITS. $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 5 12. IN THE CASE OF MS SUMANGALA PRABHAKARRAO GUNGUNE NO DETAILS OF FAMILY AND INCOME DETAILS WERE EITHER FILED BEFORE THE REVE NUE AUTHORITIES OR EVEN BEFORE US. THE AR HAS ALSO NOT BEEN ABLE TO SUBSTANTIATE AS TO HOW THE CREDITOR MS. SUMANGALA PRABH AKARRAO GUNGUNE ALIAS MS. ASHA BHAGVANTRAO KHERDE WAS ABLE TO S AVE A SUM OF RS. 50,000/-, FROM HER TEACHING PROFESSION, WHICH HAS BEE N ADVANCED AS LOAN TO THE ASSESSEE. SAME IS THE CASE WITH SHRI VASANTRAO OMKARRAOJI KALE, NO DETAILS EXCEPT FOR HIS CULTIVA BLE LAND HOLDING OF 3.63 ACRES HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO SUBSTANTIATE H IS SAVINGS TO LEND A LOAN OF RS. 60,000/-. THESE VAGUE DETAILS, IN OUR OPINIO N ARE NOT GOOD ENOUGH REASONS TO TREAT THE IMPUGNED LOANS AS GE NUINE. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SUSTAIN THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 IN THE CASE OF THESE TWO CREDITORS AS WELL. 13. IN THE RESULT, WE REJECT THE FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL. 14. GROUND NO. B IS DEPOSIT IN THE NAME OF SHRI JAIDEEP KAP ADIA OF RS. 40,54,400/-. 15. IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO FOUND THAT RS . 40,54,400/- WERE CREDITED TO THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI JAIDEEP KAPADIA ON VARIOUS DATES. ON BEING ASKED, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY EXP LAINED THAT SHRI JAIDEEP KAPADIA, DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY CO LLECTED PAYMENTS FOR AND ON BEHALF OF BAI NATHIBAI DAMODHAR THAKKE RSEY MULJI CHARITABLE TRUST, MUMBAI ON ACCOUNT OF PLOT OWNED BY THE TRUST. IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT SHRI JAIDEEP KAPADIA USED TO COLLECT THE SALE PROCEEDS, PRIMARILY IN CASH AND DEPOSIT THE SAME WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, WHO IN TURN USED TO ISSUE CHEQUES / DEMAND DR AFTS TO THE TRUST, BY DEBETING THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI JAIDEEP KAPADIA. THE AO, DID NOT FIND THE EXPLANATION TO BE CONVINCING, HE THEREFORE, ADD ED THE SUM OF RS. 40,54,400/- U/S 68 IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 16. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE APPROACHED THE CIT(A), WHO CA ME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THERE WAS NO LOGICAL REASON TO RECEIVE TH E PAYMENT ON $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 6 BEHALF OF ANOTHER PARTY IN CASH AND THEN TRANSFERRING THE MONEY TO THE TRUST BY ISSUING CHEQUES WITHOUT ANY VESTED INTEREST IN THE DEAL. ACCORDING TO THE CIT(A), DIRECTOR WAS WORKING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. HE FURTHER CONCLUDED THAT THE SOURCE OF THE DIR ECTORS FUNDS ARE NOT ADEQUATELY EXPLAINED, HENCE THE ADDITION MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT WAS PROPER. HE, THEREFORE, SUSTAINED THE ADDITION OF RS. 40,5 4,400/- IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 17. THE ASSESSEE IS NOW BEFORE THE ITAT. 18. BEFORE US, THE AR REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFO RE THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND ADDED THAT THE LAND DID NOT BELO NG TO THE ASSESSEE OR THE DIRECTOR. IT BELONGED TO THE TRUST. THE ASSESSEE, WAS ONLY ACTING AS THE CONFIRMING PARTY TO THE SALE OF PLOTS B ELONGING TO THE TRUST AND SINCE THE PAYMENTS WERE COLLECTED BY THE DIRE CTOR, WHO WAS DEPOSITING THE SAME IN ASSESSEES BANK ACCOUNT. HIS NAM E WAS USED, ONLY TO IDENTIFY THE NATURE OF THE PAYMENT. THIS ASPECT, THE AR SUBMITTED, HAS NOT BEEN LOOKED INTO BY THE REVENUE AUTH ORITIES, WHO HAVE SIMPLY GONE AHEAD TO INVOKE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 68 MERELY ON BOOK ENTRIES. THE NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES HAVE NE ITHER BEEN LOOKED INTO NOR CONSIDERED BY THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. HE , THEREFORE, PRAYED THAT, SINCE THE PURPOSE, NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCE S ARE IMPORTANT TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WITH REGARD TO THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE IMPUGNED ADDITION, THE ISSUE BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 19. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE DR RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AND SUBMITTED THAT THEY HAVE LOOKED INTO ALL A SPECTS AND SUBMISSIONS BEFORE ARRIVING AT THE CONCLUSION TO MAKE THE ADDITION. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. HENCE, THERE WOULD BE NO JUSTIFICATION TO GIVE A NY RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. 20. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF THE PARTIES AND WE FIND THAT THE ADDITION OF RS. 40,54,400/- IS MADE U/S 68 OF THE INCOME TA X ACT. $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 7 UNDER SECTION 68, AN ADDITION CAN BE MADE IF THE TRANSACT ION IS NOT GENUINE; THE CREDITWORTHINESS OF THE PERSON, WHOSE MONEY IS CREDITED IN THE BOOKS IS NOT ESTABLISHED AND WHERE THE IDENTITY OF THE CREDITOR IS NOT PROVED. IN THE CASE BEFORE US, IT HAS A PECULIAR TANG ENT TO SECTION 68, WHERE, THE DIRECTOR COLLECTED THE SALE PROCEEDS AND D EPOSITED THEM WITH THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. SO FAR, THE REVENUE AUTHORIT IES HAVE LOOKED INTO, THIS ASPECT AND FACT, WHICH IS UNDISPUTED. BUT THE FACT, AS TO WHY THE DIRECTOR COLLECTED AND WHY THE ASSESSEE COM PANY WHO HAD RENOUNCED ITS RIGHTS ON THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT TO UNDERT AKE THE SALE OF SUB PLOTS BELONGING TO THE TRUST, AND WHY WAS THE ASSES SEE COMPANY, THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR WAS STILL COLLECTING PAYMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE TR UST, HAS NOT BEEN LOOKED INTO. THE REAL MOTIVE AND PURPOSE H AS YET TO BE ASCERTAINED IN THE LIGHT OF ARGUMENTS OF THE AR. WHY THE S ALE AND SALE PROCEEDS COLLECTED BY SHRI JAIDEEP KAPADIA, AND DEPOSITE D IN THE COMPANYS BANK ACCOUNT AND HOW THE COMPANY MADE PAY MENTS TO THE TRUST HAS TO BE LOOKED INTO, AS A THREAD GOING THROUGH THE BEADS. 21. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF TH E CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO, WITH THE DIRECTION, THAT THE AO SHALL COME TO SOME DEFINITE CONCLUSION AFTER LOOKING INTO THE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE TRUST AND THE ASSESSEE COMPA NY, THE DIRECTOR COLLECTING THE SALE PROCEEDS, AS PER AGREEMENT TO SALE, H OW HE DEPOSITED THE SALE PROCEEDS IN THE COMPANYS BANK ACCO UNT AND WHY THE DIRECTOR WAS BEING DEBITED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPAN Y. 22. GROUND NO. B IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 23. GROUND NO. C. 24. THE GROUND IS AGAINST THE ADDITION OF RS. 46,64,000/- U /S 68. ACCORDING TO THE GROUNDS BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE HAS URGED THAT THE CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF CASH D EPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 8 25. FROM THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDERS, TH E CIT(A) HAS ACTUALLY RESTORED THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 26. ACCORDING TO US, THE GROUND TAKEN IN THE GROUNDS O F APPEAL IS MISPLACED, INCORRECT AND INCONSISTENT WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 27. IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE CAN ONLY OBSERVE THAT APPROPRIATE DIRECTIONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN BY THE CIT(A), WHICH THE AO SH ALL COMPLY WITH. 28. SINCE, THERE IS, AS SUCH, NO LIVE ISSUE IN SO FAR AS THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, ARISING FROM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A), AND AS OBSERV ED BY US, AND, THAT THE GROUND IS MISPLACED, WE REJECT THE SAME. 29. THE GROUND NO. C IS REJECTED. 30. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH JUNE, 2013. SD/- SD/- ( .. ) ( #'' '$ ) ! ! (P.M. JAGTAP) (VIVEK VARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 12 TH JUNE, 2013 / COPY TO:- 1) / THE APPELLANT. 2) / THE RESPONDENT. 3) $ $ ( ( ) - 6 %* / THE CIT (A)-6, MUMBAI. 4) $ $ ( 2, %* / THE CIT2, MUMBAI, 5) +,- . / , $ . , %* / THE D.R. A BENCH, MUMBAI. $ . . . 3620 /%% / 2011 M/S. SHRI LAXMI COTTON TRADERS LTD. ITA NO. 3620/MUM/2011 9 6) -0 1 COPY TO GUARD FILE. $23 / BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / [ 4 / 5 6 $ . , %* DY. / ASSTT. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T., MUMBAI *895 . . * CHAVAN, SR. PS