ACIT 19(3), MUMBAI V. VINOD M. SHAH, MUMBAI

ITA 4390/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9910 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 04-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS KAVITA KAUSHAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PARESH SHAPARIA CA
• Keywords: Business income; Speculative transactions; Capital Gains
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 143(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JM) & SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018(AY: 2009-10) THE ACIT-19(3), ROOM NO. 206, MATRU MANDIR MUMBAI-400007 VS SHRI VINOD M SHAH CHANKYA INTERNATIONAL PVT LTD 218/219, JAYWANT INDUSTRIAL ESTATE 63, TARDEO ROAD, MUMBAI-34 PAN : AAIPS 5669 R APPELLANT RESPONDEDNT APPELLANT BY MRS. KAVITA KAUSHAL SR DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI PARESH SHAPARIA CA /AR DATE OF HEARING 05-12-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 20-12-2019 O R D E R PER PAWAN SINGH, JM : 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE CHALLENGING THE CO RRECTNESS OF THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX {LD CIT (A)}-7, MUMBAI DATED 02-04-2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1) 'WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) IS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING SHO RT TERM CAPITAL LOSS OF RS. 3,89,77,779/- AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, IN STEAD OF BUSINESS LOSS AS ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER?' 2) 'WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN ALLOWING LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS OF RS. 1,19,257/- AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, INSTE AD OF BUSINESS LOSS AS ASSESSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER?' 2. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDI VIDUAL AND WHILE FILING RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2009-10 H AS SHOWN INCOME ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 2 FROM BUSINESS, CAPITAL GAIN & OTHER SOURCES. THE AS SESSEE DECLARED TOTAL TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.2,11,770/-. THE RETURN OF INCO ME WAS INITIALLY PROCESSED UNDER SECTION (U/S) 143(1) OF THE I.T. AC T, 1961 (ACT). THEREAFTER, THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND NOTICES U/S 143(2) AND 142(1) WERE ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS AND SH ORT TERM CAPITAL LOSSES ON SALE OF SHARES. THE AO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY THE LOSSES ON SHARE TRADING UNDE R THE HEAD CAPITAL GAIN SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS BUSINESS LOSS. THE A SSESSEE FILED ITS DETAILED REPLY DATED 09.12.2011, THE AO HAS EXTRACT ED THE CONTENTS OF REPLY IN PARA 4 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. IN THE RE PLY THE ASSESSEE BESIDES THE OTHER CONTENTION CONTENDED THAT HE IS I N THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND EXPORT OF GARMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS EMPLOYED MORE THAN 10 PERSONS FOR HIS BUSINESS. THE ASSESSE E IS INVESTOR IN SHARE AND THE LOSS SUFFERED BY HIM IS LONG TERM OR SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS. THE ASSESSEE HAS NO INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIE S FOR INVESTING IN SHARES. THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN HIS INVESTMENTS IN H IS BALANCE SHEET UNDER THE HEAD INVESTMENTS. THE AO, AFTER CONSID ERING THE SUBMISSIONS AND TAKING IN CONSIDERATION OF FREQUENC Y OF TRANSACTION, PERIOD OF HOLDING REJECTED THE CONTENTION OF THE AS SESSEE AND TREATED ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 3 THE LOSS ON INVESTMENTS IN SHARES AS BUSINESS LOSS ES AGAINST LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE CLAIMING HIMSELF AS AN INVESTORS IN SHARES. ON APP EAL, THE LD. CIT(A) REVERSED THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A), THE REVENUE HAS FILED THE PRESENT APPEAL B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE (LD. DR) FOR THE REVENUE AND THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATI VE (LD.AR) OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. DR HEAVILY RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE SUBMITS THAT TH E NATURE OF INVESTMENT, FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTION AND PERIOD OF HOLDING CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT THE INVESTOR, RATHER INVESTING MONEY FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAXIMISING THE INCOME/ GAIN AND IS C LEARLY INDULGING IN THE BUSINESS OF SHARES. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS I N THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND EXPORT OF GARMENTS AND GARMENT PA NELS AND ACCESSORIES AND GROUP COMPANIES EMPLOYING MORE THAN 10 EMPLOYEES. THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAVE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE FACIL ITIES OR STAFF ETC EMPLOYED FOR THE EARNING OF CAPITAL GAINS. ASSESSE E HAS INVESTMENTS IN SHARES WHICH ARE ALSO REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE SHEE T UNDER THE HEAD INVESTMENTS RIGHT FROM THE DAY ONE. ALL THE INVE STMENT IN SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS ARE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS OWN FUNDS. THERE IS NO ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 4 BORROWING MADE BY HIM FOR INVESTMENTS IN SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS. THE INTENTION OF ASSESSEE WAS TO EARN DIVIDEND AND APPRECIATION IN VALUE OF INVESTMENTS. DURING THE YEAR THE DIVIDEND EARNED IS OF RS. 77.13 LACS. THE ASSESSEE HAS NO FUTURE AND OPTIONS (DERIVATIVE) TRANSACTIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN AND GIVEN DEL IVERY OF THE SHARES AND ARE DULY REFLECTED IN THE DEMAT ACCOUNT. COPIES OF DEMAT STATEMENTS FOR APRIL 08 TO MARCH 09 WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE AO. THE AVERAGE PERIOD OF HOLDING IN RESPECT OF SHARES SOLD IS APPROXIMALTY 98 DAYS ONLY SHARES HELD AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL ASSE TS ARE CONSIDERED. IN CASES THE AVERAGE HOLDING PERIOD IS CONSIDERED IN R ESPECT OF ALL THE SHARES SOLD BY ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR, THE AVERAG E PERIOD OF HOLDING IS 379 DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO INCURRED A HUGE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,33,649/- ON DEMAT CHARGES. FURTHER, THE ASSESSEE HAS ALWAYS ACCOUNTED FOR HIS INVESTMENT IN SHARES AS INVESTMEN T AND NOT AS STOCK IN TRADE. UP TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 THE INVEST MENT IN SHARES HAS ALWAYS BEEN TREATED AS INVESTMENTS (AND NOT AS BUSI NESS TRANSACTION. FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR (AY) 2005-06 FOR THE FIRST TIME , THE DEPARTMENT TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS ARE BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS. HOWEVER, THE HON'BLE INCOME TAX APP ELLATE TRIBUNAL HAS UPHELD THE VIEW OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERED SHAR E TRANSACTIONS AS INVESTMENT TRANSACTIONS. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS PLACED ON RECORD. ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 5 FURTHER, THE COST VALUE OF INVESTMENTS AS ON 31-03- 2009 IS AT RS.61,21,91,339/- FOR SHARES AND RS.44,04,342/- FOR MUTUAL FUNDS AND THE OWN CAPITAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AT RS.67,55,72,3 54 AND NO BORROWINGS HAVE BEEN USED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR PURCH ASE OF SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS WHICH COULD BE SEEN FROM THE BALANCE-S HEET, ITSELF. THE INVESTMENT IN SHARES WAS MADE THROUGH INITIAL PUBLI C OFFER (IPO) OR PURCHASES THROUGH REGISTERED & RECOGNIZED STOCK BRO KER EITHER ON BSE OR NSE. ALL THE SHARES, SECURITIES AND MUTUAL FUND S ARE REFLECTED IN THE BALANCE-SHEET UNDER THE HEAD, INVESTMENTS FOR ALL THE YEARS AND ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT. ALL THE SHARES PURCHAS ED OR SOLD ARE DELIVERY BASED. ALL THE SHARES ARE DULY REFLECTED IN DEMAT ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE LD AR FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER A RGUED THAT WHEN THE SHARES WHICH ARE SHOWN AT THE TIME OF ITS PURCHASE IN THE BALANCE-SHEET AS INVESTMENTS AND WHICH IS ACCEPTED IN EARLIER YEA RS, THEN SALE OF THE SAID INVESTMENTS IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS CANNOT BE TREA TED AS STOCK IN TRADE AND THEREBY THE SALE OF THE SAID SHARES REQUIRES TO BE ACCEPTED AS SHORT OR LONG TERM CAPITAL LOSS / GAIN. 5. THE LD AR FOR THE ASSESSEE ALSO FURNISHED THE DETAI LS OF HIS INVESTMENT AND TREATMENT BY ASSESSING OFFICER FROM AY 2004-05 TILL 2016-17 AND WOULD SUBMIT THAT IN AY 201-12, 2014-15 TO 2016-17 THE REVENUE ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AS INVESTOR IN SHARE S AND ALLOWED CAPITAL ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 6 GAIN IN ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3). THE RET URN FOR AY 2012-13 &2013-14 WAS NOT SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY. THE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR AY 2011-12 TO 2016-17 IS ALSO PLACED ON RECORD. IN SUPPORT OF HIS SUBMISSIONS THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS GOPAL PUROHIT 336 ITR 287 (BOM). 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF BOTH THE PARTI ES AND HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. WE HAVE AL SO DELIBERATED ON VARIOUS CASE LAW RELIED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE LOW ER AUTHORITIES. WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHILE TREATIN G THE LONG TERM AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS AS BUSINESS LOSS HAS OBSERV ED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS INVOLVED IN FREQUENT PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES DU RING THE YEAR INCLUDING THE SPECULATIVE TRANSACTIONS. THE TOTAL PURCHASES WERE 118 AND SALES 95 IN THE YEAR. AND THAT EACH PURCHASE A ND SALE IS A COMPLETE TRANSACTION IN ITSELF. IN CASE OF PURCHASE, THE BU YER GETS THE SHARES AND THE SELLER GETS MONEY SO THAT TRANSACTION IS COMPLE TE AND VICE VERSA IN SALE. SO THE TOTAL NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS IN THE Y EAR BY THE ASSESSEE IS 213 IN AS MANY AS 220 DAYS THAT THE SHARE MARKET WO RKS. THE ASSESSEE, BUT FOR FEW DAYS, HAS ON AN AVERAGE MADE AT LEAST O NE TRANSACTION (EITHER PURCHASED OR SOLD) EVERY DAY IN THE SHARES. THIS FREQUENCY OF ASSESSEES TRANSACTION INDICATES AN INTENTION TO SE LL FOR PROFIT. BY NO ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 7 STRETCH OF IMAGINATION CAN ONE BE SAID TO BE INVEST ING IN A THING / GOODS / STOCK / ARTICLE ETC IF HE IS EITHER BUYING IT OR SELLING IT EVERY DAY. THE NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS IN CASE OF INVESTMENT IS FEW AND FAR IN BETWEEN. ONE WOULD ARGUE THAT THE FREQUENCY OF THE ASSESSEE S TRANSACTION IS LESS THAN THAT OF A BUSINESS. NO DOUBT THE FREQUENCY IS LESS THAN THAT OF A PROVISION STORES, OR CLOTH RETAIL STORES, ETC, BUT SURELY IN MANY BUSINESSES SUCH AS REAL ESTATE, ART DEALER, HIGH EN D LUXURY GOODS, LUXURY CAR DEALERS (MERCEDES, PORSCHE, BENTLEY, FERRARI ET C), WEDDING DRESS DESIGNERS, HIGH END FASHION BOUTIQUES, ETC WHERE TH E VALUE OF EACH TRANSACTION IS HIGH, THE FREQUENCY WILL BE MUCH LES SER THAN THE FREQUENCY OF THE ASSESSEE SHARE TRANSACTIONS. 7. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE MADE EXHAUSTIV E SUBMISSIONS AND FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, WHICH HAVE BEEN RECORDED BY LD.CIT(A) AT PARAS 6.1 & 6.2 OF HIS ORDER. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT ON SIMILAR ISSUES, THE TRIBUNAL FOR AYS 2005-06 & 2007-08 ALLO WED SIMILAR RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS GIVEN DETAILED HISTORY OF INVESTMENTS IN SHARE IN A TABULAR FORM. FROM THE PERUSAL OF THE DETAILED HISTORY, WE HAVE NOTED THAT THE ASSESS EE WAS ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN ON I NVESTMENT IN SHARES BY TRIBUNAL FOR A.Y. 2005-06; ASSESSMENT FOR AY 200 6-07 WAS NOT SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND FOR AY 2007-08 SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 8 TREATED AS A BUSINESS LOSS. HOWEVER, ON APPEAL BEF ORE THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO.934 /MUM/2011 ALLOWED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE . 8. AGAIN FOR AYS 2010-11 THE CASE WAS NOT SELECTED FO R SCRUTINY. AGAIN THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2011-12 WAS SELECTED FO R SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AN D ALLOWED CAPITAL GAIN IN ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3 ) RWS 147DATED 17.12.2018. HOWEVER, FOR AYS 2014-15 TO 2016-17, TH E ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED CAPITAL GAIN IN THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENTS UN DER SECTION 143(3) VIDE ORDER DATED 22.12.2016, 11.02.2017 AND 05.12.2 018 RESPECTIVELY. 9. WE HAVE FURTHER NOTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HA S ACCEPTED LTCG ON SALES OF 9 SCRIP OF RS. 6,44,09,662/-. THE CONTENT ION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT HE HAS NOT INVESTED ANY BORROWED MONEY IN INVE STMENT IN SHARES IS NOT DISPUTED BY ASSESSING OFFICER. 10. FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WORKING AND THE PERIOD OF HOLDING OF SHORT TERM LOS S ON INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND MUTUAL FUNDS AND SUBMITTED THAT ONLY TOT AL 20 SCRIP WERE SOLD DURING THE YEAR AS A SHORT TERM INVESTMENT AND ONLY 2 MUTUAL FUNDS WERE SOLD. THE DETAILS OF WORKING FOR SHORT T ERM CAPITAL LOSS ON SHARES, FOR APPRECIATION OF PERIOD OF HOLDING AND N UMBER OF SCRIP, THE DETAILS EXTRACTED ARE AS UNDER; PERIOD NO. OF SC R IP STCL(RS) ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 9 0-30 06 67,72,342 31-60 03 (11565785) 61-90 04 (149531) 91-180 05 (6971022) 181-270 02 (2168564) 271 - 365 04 (24401645) TOTAL (38484205 SIMILARLY, THE PERIOD OF HOLDING AND NUMBER OF MUTU AL FUNDS SOLD DURING THE YEAR ON WHICH SHORT TERM CAPITAL LOSS WA S SHOWN ARE AS UNDER PERIOD NO. OF MUTUAL FUNDS SOLD STC (L)/ G(RS) 0-30 01 38115 31-60 01 1937 61-90 01 516 91-180 NIL NIL 181-270 01 (399500) 271-365 NIL NIL TOTAL (358932) 11. THE AFOREMENTIONED DETAILS FURNISHED BY LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT DISPUTED BY LD DR FOR THE REVENUE. AT THE COST OF REPETITION, WE RETREAT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED AS AN INVESTO R BY TRIBUNAL IN APPEALS FOR AYS 2005-06 & 2006-07 AND THE AO FOR AY S 2014-15 TO 2016-17 HAS ALLOWED CAPITAL GAIN ON SIMILAR TRANSAC TIONS, THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY FOR THE YEAR UNDER CO NSIDERATION. 12. THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN CASE OF CIT VS GOP AL PUROHIT (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE REVENUE MUST ADHERE UNIFORMIT Y IN TREATMENT AND CONSISTENCY WHEN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES ARE ID ENTICAL, PARTICULARLY IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE (ASSESSEE ITSELF). WE HAVE FURTHER NOTED THAT CBDT IN ITS CIRCULAR NO.6/2016(F.NO.225/12/2016-ITA -II) DATED 29- 02-2016 HAS INSTRUCTED ITS OFFICERS; ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 10 (A) WHERE THE ASSESSEE ITSELF, IRRESPECTIVE OF THE PERIOD OF HOLDING THE LISTED SHARES AND SECURITIES, OPTS TO TREAT THEM AS STOCK- IN-TRADE, THE INCOME ARISING FROM TRANSFER OF SUCH SHARES/SECURITIES WOULD BE TR EATED AS ITS BUSINESS INCOME, (B) IN RESPECT OF LISTED SHARES AND SECURITIES HELD FOR A PERIOD OF MORE THAN 12 MONTHS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE DATE OF ITS TRANSF ER, IF THE ASSESSEE DESIRES TO TREAT THE INCOME ARISING FROM THE TRANSFER THEREOF AS CAPITAL GAIN, THE SAME SHALL NOT BE PUT TO DISPUTE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R. HOWEVER, THIS STAND, ONCE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN A PARTICULAR ASSESSMENT YE AR, SHALL REMAIN APPLICABLE IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS ALSO AND THE TAXPAYE RS SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED TO ADOPT A DIFFERENT/CONTRARY STAND IN THIS REGARD IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS; (C) IN ALL OTHER CASES, THE NATURE OF TRANSACTION (I.E. WHETHER THE SAME IS IN THE NATURE OF CAPITAL GAIN OR BUSINESS INCOME) SHALL CO NTINUE TO BE DECIDED KEEPING IN VIEW THE AFORESAID CIRCULARS ISSUED BY THE CBDT. 13. CONSIDERING THE AFORESAID FACTUAL AND LEGAL SUBMISS ION AND CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL FOR AY 2005-06 & 2006-07 AND IN AY 2014-15 TO 2016-17 T HE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AS INVESTOR IN SHARES WAS ALLOWED BY ASSES SING OFFICER HIMSELF. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO FOLLOWED THE DECISION O F JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF CIT VS GOPAL PUROHIT (SUPRA) AND ALLO WED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD CIT(A) HAS GIVEN CATEGORICAL FINDI NG AFTER CONSIDERING THE PERIOD OF HOLDING, FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTION AND NUMBERS OF SCRIP. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDE R OF LD.CIT(A) ON BOTH THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE. ACCORDINGLY, WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). IN THE RESULT THE G ROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ITA NO. 4390/MUM/2018 VINOD M SHAH (AY 2009-10) 11 14. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20-12-2019. SD/- SD/- (S RIFAUR RAHMAN) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER MUMBAI, DT : 20 TH DECEMBER, 2019 PK/- COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR /TRUE COPY/ BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI