Arvind Metals & Minerals Private Limited, Kolkata V. A.C.I.T, Circle - 4(1), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 434/KOL/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 110 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9637 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2019
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAUL
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH TIWARI
• Keywords: Speculation loss; Speculative transactions
• Section: 43B; 143(3); 43(5); 43; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C, BENC H KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM ./ITA NO.434/KOL/2019 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15) ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. 23/24, RADHA BAZAR STREET, KOLKATA-700001 VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA ./ ./PAN/GIR NO.: AACCA 2199 K (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANISH TIWARI, FCA RESPONDENT BY :SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 27/02/2020 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08/07/2020 / O R D E R PER DR. A.L. SAINI, AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, PERT AINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY TH E COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL)-2, KOLKATA, IN APPEAL NO. 10115/CIT(A)-2/2 017-18, WHICH IN TURN ARISES OUT OF AN ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) DATED 27/ 12/2016. 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1. (A). THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG AND UNJUSTIFIED IN CONFORMING A.O'S ORDER WHE RE LOSS ON FORWARD BOOKING ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 2 22 2 OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE OF RS. 1,45,374/- WAS DISALLOWE D AS REGULAR BUSINESS LOSS U/S 28. (B). THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG AND UNJUSTIFIED IN TREATING THE LOSS OF RS. 1,45,374/- AS SPECULATIVE LOSS WITHOUT CONSIDERING THAT FOR PAYMENT OF IMPORT PURCHASES TH E ASSESSE(IMPORTER) IS REQUIRED TO MAKE PRIOR BOOKING OF FOREIGN EXCHANGES . 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, LD. CIT(A) IS WRONG AND UNJUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING AO'S DISALLOWAN CES OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES RS. 1,12,214/- WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE STATUTORY PA YMENTS OF ESI U/S 43B. 3. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, LD. CIT (A) IS WRONG AND UNJUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING AO'S ADHOC DISA LLOWANCE OF TRAVELLING & CONVEYANCE OF RS. 1,78,912/- MADE ARBITRARILY WITHO UT APPLICATION OF MIND. 4. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, A DDUCE OR AMEND ANY GROUND OR GROUNDS ON OR BEFORE THE DATE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL. 3. GROUND NO. 1 RELATES TO ADDITION OF RS. 1,45,374 /- ON ACCOUNT OF LOSS ON FORWARD BOOKING OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE. 4. BRIEF FACTS QUA THE ISSUE ARE THAT DURING THE SC RUTINY PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSES COMPANY HADDEBITE D PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT OF RS. 1,45,374/- ON ACCOUNT OF LOSS OF FORWARD CONTRA CT CANCELLATION. IN THIS REGARD, ASSESSEE COMPANY WAS ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE ALLOWABIL ITY OF THIS EXPENSE. IN REPLY,THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FILED LETTER DATED 16/12 /2016. RELEVANT PORTION OF THE LETTER IS REPRODUCED BELOW:- ' WE ARE AN IMPORTER AND IN ORDER TO MINIMIZE THE R ISK OF CURRENCY FLUCTUATION WE BOOK FOREIGN CURRENCY IN ADVANCE WITH THE BANKS FOR THE SPECIFIED DATE IN WHICH WE WERE TO MAKE THE PAYMENT. AT TIMES, DUE TO NON- AVAILABILIT Y OF FUND PARTIAL AMOUNT OF THE FOREIGN CURRENCY NEEDS TO BE CANCELLED. THE DIFFERENTIAL RA TES OF FORWARD BOOKING AND CANCELLATION ARE THEN DEBITED TO OUR ACCOUNT WHICH IS BEING CHARGED UNDER THE HEAD LOSS ON FORWARD CANCELLATION. THIS IS NOT THE SPECULATIV E TRANSACTION AS THE SAME IS BEING DONE WITH THE UNDERLYING DOCUMENT FOR WHICH FOREIGN CURRENCY ARE BEING BOOKED AND IS HONORED ON THE DUE DATE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CONTENT ION OF THE ASSESSEE AND HELD AS FOLLOWS: A FORWARD CONTRACT IS AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN A BUYER AND A SELLER GETTING THE SELLER TO DELIVER A SPECIFIED ASSET OF SPECIFIED QU ALITY AND QUANTITY TO THE BUYER ON A SPECIFIED DATE AT A SPECIFIED PLACE AND THE BUYER IN TURN IS OBLIGATED TO PAY THE ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 3 33 3 SELLER A PRE-NEGOTIATED PRICE IN EXCHANGE OF THE DE LIVERY. THE DEFINITION OF SPECULATIVE TRANSACTION IN SECTION 43(5) GIVES A SIMPLE TEST FOR DECIDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCOME-TAX WHAT A SPECULATIVE TRANSACTIO N MEANS. IF A CONTRACT FOR SALE OR PURCHASE IS ULTIMATELY SETTLED OUT AND NO ACTUAL DELIVERY OF THE GOODS WAS EFFECTED UNDER THE SETTLEMENT THEN IT IS A SPECULAT IVE TRANSACTION. PROFIT/LOSS IN RESPECT OF UNPERFORMED CONTRACTS IS CONSIDERED SPEC ULATION PROFIT/LOSS. IN SHORT, IN ORDER THAT A TRANSACTION MAY FALL WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE EXPRESSION SPECULATIVE TRANSACTION', IT MUST BE A TRANSACTION IN WHICH A C ONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF SALE OF ANY COMMODITY, INTENDING STOCKS AND SHARES, IS PERI ODICALLY OR ULTIMATELY SETTLED OTHERWISE THAN BY ACTUAL DELIVERY OR TRANSFER OF TH E COMMODITY OR SCRIPS.IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS OF THE ISSUE, I HAVE DECIDED TO TRE AT THIS LOSS AS SPECULATION LOSS AND ACCORDINGLY, ADJUSTMENT IS MADE IN THE COMPUTAT ION OF TOTAL INCOME. 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS CONFIRMED T HE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVING THE FOLLOWINGS: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, STATEMENT OF FACTS AND SUBMISSION OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLATE COMP ANY AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERI ALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS. THE AO HAS MENTIONED THAT THESE EXPENSES DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THE YEAR UN DER CONSIDERATION. I AGREE WITH THE VIEW AS TAKEN BY THE AO. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AS MENTIONED ABOVE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY COGENT MATERIAL EVIDENCE, 1 DO N OT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE SAME IS HERE BY UPHELD. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 6. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE AS SESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS RELIED ON T HE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR HAS PRIMARILY REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH WE HAVE ALREADY NOTED IN OUR EARLIER PARA AND THE SAME IS NOT BEING REPEATED FOR THE SAK E OF BREVITY. 8. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY GON E THROUGH THE SUBMISSION PUT FORTH ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE DOCU MENTS FURNISHED AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON, AND PERUSED THE FACT OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A) AND OTHER MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NOTE THAT THIS GROUND RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF LOSS ON FORWARD BOOKING OF RS. 1 ,45,374/- CONSIDERING THE SAME AS SPECULATIVE IN NATURE. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BEIN G AN IMPORTER HAS FOREIGN CURRENCY EXPOSURE. HENCE IN ORDER TO HEDGE ITS FORE IGN CURRENCY EXPOSURE, THE ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 4 44 4 ASSESSEE COMPANY ENTERS INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE BANK IN ADVANCE FOR THE SPECIFIED DATE ON WHICH THE PAYMENTS ARE TO MADE.TH ERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE DUE TO LACK OF AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS THE FORWARD CONTAC T ENTERED BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY WITH THE BANKS CANNOT BE EXECUTED. IN SUCH A SITUATION THE FORWARD CONTRACT IS REQUIRED TO CANCEL. WHEN THE CONTRACT I S CANCELLED, THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE RATE ORIGINALLY AGREED AND THE RATE ON THE DATE OF CANCELLATION IS RECOVERED BY THE BANK FROM THE CUSTOMERS. THE ASSES SEE COMPANY IN SUCH A SITUATION WHERE ANY PAYMENT IS MADE TO BANKS OF CAN CELLATION OF FORWARD CONTRACT, DEBITS THE CHARGES TO ITS PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT UND ER THE HEAD 'LOSS ON FORWARD CANCELLATION'. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US REL EVANT BANK STATEMENTS HIGHLIGHTING THE CHARGES PAID TO BANK. IN THE INS TANT CASE,LD AO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE, CONSIDERED THE A BOVE TRANSACTION AS SPECULATIVE IN NATURE AND DISALLOWED THE SAME.WE NOTE THAT CLAUSE (A) OF SUB-SECTION 5 OF SECTION 43 OF THE ACT STATES THAT FORWARD CONTRACT IS NOT A SPECULATIVE TRANSACTION. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 43(5)(A) OF THE ACT, IS REPROD UCED BELOW: 'A CONTRACT IN RESPECT OF RAW MATERIAL OR MERCHANDI SE ENTERED INTO BY A PERSON IN THE COURSE OF HIS MANUFACTURING OR MERCHANTING BUSI NESS TO GUARD AGAINST LOSS THROUGH FUTURE PRICE FLUCTUATIONS IN RESPECT OF HIS CONTRACTS FOR DELIVERY OF GOODS MANUFACTURED BY HIM OR MERCHANDISE SOLD BY HIM SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE SPECULATIVE TRANSACTIONS. A PLAIN READING OF SECTION 43(5)(A) MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THE IMPUGNED LOSS CANNOT BE REGARDED AS SPECULATION. THE ACT CLEARLY EXCLUDES HEDGING FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS FOR THE DEFINITION OF SPECULATIVE TRANSACTION. HENCE THE ACTIONS OF ID AO IN CONSIDERING THE LOSS ON HEDGING FOREIGN CURRENCY EXPOSURE AS SPECULATIVE IS NOT JUSTIFIED. FOR THAT WE RELY ON THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS. SOARAJMULL NAGARMULL [129 ITR 169] WHEREIN THE COURT OBSERVED THAT 'WHERE ASSESSEE ENTERS INTO FORWARD CONTRACTS IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE I N ORDER TO COVER THE LOSS ARISING DUE TO DIFFERENCE IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATE AND/OR VALUATION, IS NOT OF SPECULATIVE IN NATURE AND WAS INCIDENTAL TO THE ASS ESSEE'S REGULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS. AS SUCH IT WAS ALLOWABLE AS A TRADE LOSS. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS AND LEGAL POSITION ON THE ISSUE INVOLVED, THE DISALLOWANCE ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 5 55 5 OF RS. 1,45,374/- ON THE GROUND OF SPECULATIVE TRA NSACTION REQUIRES TO BE DELETED HENCE WE DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,4 5,374/-. 9. GROUND NO. 2 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO D ISALLOWANCE OF PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSES OF RS. 1,12,214/-. 10. BRIEF FACTS QUA THE ISSUE ARE THAT,DURING THE S CRUTINY PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSE OF RS. 1 ,12,214/-HAD BEEN DEBITED IN THE ACCOUNTS BY THE ASSESSEE COMPANY. ON QUERY, THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY SUBMITTED THAT SAID EXPENSE IS RELATED TO THE ESI PAYMENT RELATED TO THE PREVIOUS YEAR 2012-13. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE PLEA OF THE ASSE SSEE AND HELD THAT THE EXPENDITURE IS NOT RELATED FOR THIS ASSESSMENT YEAR , THEREFORE, THE ENTIRE EXPENSE UNDER THE HEAD PRIOR PERIOD EXPENSE WAS DISALLOWED. 11. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHO HAS CONFIRMED T HE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVING THE FOLLOWINGS: I HAVE CONSIDERED THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, STATEMENT OF FACTS AND SUBMISSION OF THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPELLATE COMP ANY AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FRAMED IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERI ALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS MENTIONED THAT THESE EXPENSES DOES NOT PERTAIN TO THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. I AGREE WITH THE VIEW AS TAKEN BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AS MENTIONED ABOVE, IN THE ABSENC E OF ANY COGENT MATERIAL EVIDENCE, I DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE SAME IS HEREBY UPHELD. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THIS G ROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 12. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY G ONE THROUGH THE SUBMISSION PUT FORTH ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE DOCU MENTS FURNISHED AND THE CASE LAWS RELIED UPON, AND PERUSED THE FACT OF THE CASE INCLUDING THE FINDINGS OF THE LD CIT(A) AND OTHER MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NOTE THAT THIS GROUND RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,12,214/- TOWARDS ESI PAYMENT RELATING TO AY 2013-14. LEARNED COUNSEL SUBMITS THAT DURING THE RELEVANT AS SESSMENT YEAR, THE ASSESSEE COMPANY DEPOSITED THE ESI FOR THE AY 2013-14 AFTER IT CAME TO KNOW THAT THE ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 6 66 6 COMPANY WAS LIABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ESI. HENCE, IT DEPOSITED THE SAME WITH THE RELEVANT AUTHORITY FOR EARLIER YEAR A ND FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AT ONCE DURING THE AY 2014-15. THE LD. COUNSEL SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE EARLIER YEAR I.E. PRIOR TO THE A.Y 2014-15, THE ASS ESSEE COMPANY WAS UNAWARE TO THE ESI PROVISION AND ITS APPLICABILITY TO THE ORGA NIZATION. HENCE, ON BECOMING AWARE OF THE PROVISIONS AND ITS APPLICABILITY TO TH E ORGANIZATION, THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED THE ENTIRE SUM AS REQUIRED UNDER THE ESI ACT WHICH INCLUDED PAYMENTS FOR THE AY 2013-14. WE NOTE THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43B OF THE ACT WHICH PROVIDES THAT CERTAIN EXPENDITURE / PAYMENTS WHICH ARE OTHERWISE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER THE ACT SHALL BE ALLOWED AS A DEDUC TION ONLY IN THE YEAR OF ACTUAL PAYMENT IRRESPECTIVE OF THE YEAR OF ACCRUAL OF SUCH EXPENDITURE. SINCE THE ASSESSEE MADE PAYMENTS RELATING TO AY 2013-14 DURING THE REL EVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014- 15, APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 43B OF THE A CT, THE SAME IS ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTS WE DELETE T HE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1,12,214/-. 13. GROUND NO.3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE RELATES TO A D HOC DISALLOWANCE OF TRAVELLING AND CONVEYANCE EXPENSES OF RS. 1,78,912/-. 14. AT THE OUTSET ITSELF, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT THE ORDER IS PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U /S 143(3) OF THE ACT THEREFORE NO AD HOC DISALLOWANCE SHOULD BE MADE BY ASSESSING OFF ICER. HOWEVER,LD. DR SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBMIT A FEW BILLS AND VOUCHERS RELATING TO TRAVELLING EXPENSES AND CONVEYANCE EXPENSES THEREFORE, ASSESSI NG OFFICER MADE AD HOC DISALLOWANCE.WE HAVE HEARD LD. D.R. FOR THE REVENUE AND NOTED THAT ASSESSING OFFICER HAS PASSED THE ORDER U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO SUBMIT FEW BILLS AND VOUCHERS RELATING TO TRAVELLIN G EXPENSES/CONVEYANCE EXPENSES BEFORE THE AO FOR HIS VERIFICATION, THEREFORE WE DI SALLOW RS. 50,000/- OUT OF RS. 1,78,912/- TO FILL THE GAP OF SMALL ANOMALIES DONE BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT INSTANT ADJUDICATION SHALL NOT BE TREATED AS A PRECEDENT IN ANY PRECEDING OR SUCCEEDING ASSESSMENT YEAR. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT TH E ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 7 77 7 THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF RS. 1,28,912/- (1,78,912 50 ,000). HENCE, GROUND NO.3 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 15. BEFORE PARTING, IT IS NOTED THAT THE ORDER IS B EING PRONOUNCED AFTER 90 DAYS OF HEARING. HOWEVER, TAKING NOTE OF THE EXTRAORDINARY SITUATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND LOCKDOWN, THE PERIOD OF LOCKD OWN DAYS NEED TO BE EXCLUDED. FOR COMING TO SUCH A CONCLUSION, WE RELY UPON THE DECISION OF THE CO- ORDINATE BENCH OF THE MUMBAI TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE O F DCIT VS. JCB LIMITED IN ITA NO. 6264/MUM/2018 AND ITA NO. 6103/MUM/2018 FOR A.Y. 2013-14 ORDER DATED 14.05.2020. 16. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 08.07.2020 SD/- ( S.S.GODARA ) SD/- (A.L.SAINI) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /KOLKATA; / DATE: 08/07/2020 ( SB, SR.PS ) COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. 2. ACIT, CIRCLE-4(1), KOLKATA 3. C.I.T(A)- 4. C.I.T.- KOLKATA. 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATABENCHES, KOLKATA. 6. GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSIST ANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKA TA BENCHES ARVIND METALS & MINERALS PVT. LTD. ITA NO.434KOL/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2014-15 P PP PA AA AG GG GE EE E | || | 8 88 8