PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 1, MUMBAI

ITA 4683/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 468319914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 29-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 10-06-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income; Business expenditure; Search and seizure; Salary income; Opportunity of being heard; Revised return
• Section: 143(3); 153A

Judgement Text

C IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI .. , # %, & # ' BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, AM AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, J M ./ I.T.A. NO.4683 & 4684 /MUM/2011 ( &% % / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03 & 2003-04 ./ I.T.A. NO.4742 /MUM/2011 ( &% % / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2004-05 ./ I.T.A. NO.4686 & 4687 /MUM/2011 ( &% % / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2005-06 & 2006-07 SHRI PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN, 626, PANCHRATNA BUILDING, OPERA HOUSE, MUMBAI 400 004. / VS. THE DY . COMM.OF INCOME TAX CENT. CIR. 1, MUMBAI. . / PAN : AADPJ5102D ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) APPELLANT BY SHRI RAJEEV KHANDELWAL & SHRI NEELKUMAR KHANDELWAL RESPONDENT B Y : SHRI GIRIJA DAYAL / DATE OF HEARING : 03-12-2013 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22-1-2014 [ / O R D E R PER BENCH . : THESE FIVE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST FI VE SEPARATE ORDERS DATED 25-03-2011 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A) 36, MUM BAI FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2006-07 INVOLVE COMMON ISSUES AND THE SAME THEREFORE HAVE BEEN HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY A SINGLE CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 2 2. FIRST, WE SHALL TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESS EE FOR A.Y. 2005-06 BEING ITA NO. 4686/MUM/11 WHEREIN THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASS ED A LEADING ORDER WHICH HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY HIM TO DISPOSE OF THE AP PEALS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REMAINING YEARS. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS AN INDIVIDUA L WHO IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING IN ROUGH AND POLISHED DIAMONDS IN THE NAME AND STYLE OF HIS PROPRIETARY CONCERN M/S DIAMOND STAR. A SEARCH AND SEIZURE OPERATION WAS CONDUCTED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL A S IN THE CASES OF PERSONS/ENTITIES CONNECTED WITH HIM ON 31-3-2008 IN CLUDING THE CASE OF ONE SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR JAIN. DURING THE COURSE OF SEA RCH, CERTAIN CHEQUE BOOKS AND BLANK LETTER HEADS OF VARIOUS CONCERNS WERE FOU ND AND SEIZED. IN THE STATEMENT RECORDED, THE ASSESSEE INITIALLY ACCEPTED THAT HE WAS GIVING ACCOMMODATION BILLS TO VARIOUS PARTIES THROUGH HIS DIFFERENT CONCERNS. PURSUANT TO THE SEARCH ACTION, NOTICE U/S 153A OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 WAS ISSUED BY THE A.O. IN RESPONSE TO WHICH THE RET URN OF INCOME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 23-7-2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 2,59,250/-. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASSESSEE FILED A REVISED RETURN O F INCOME ON 29-12-2009 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 4,59,250/-. DURING TH E COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, A LETTER WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 3-12-2009 STATING THEREIN THAT HE WAS THE PROPRIETOR OF M/S DIAMOND STAR AND THE ACCOMMODATION BILLS WERE ISSUED FROM THE SAID PROPRIETARY CONCERN ONLY TO M/S ARIHANT CORPORATION DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2003-04 AND 2 004-05. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT EXCEPT THESE TRANSACTIONS, THE OTHER TRANSACTI ONS OF TRADING IN DIAMONDS AS RECORDED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT ARE GENUINE. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUING ACCOMM ODATION BILLS HAD BEEN DULY INCORPORATED IN THE P&L ACCOUNT AND THE SAME W AS ALREADY SUBJECTED TO TAX. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE MARGIN IN ISSUING A CCOMMODATION BILLS WAS NOT MORE THAN 0.5% WHEREAS THE PROFITS SHOWN IN THE P&L ACCOUNT BEING MORE THAN 0.5%, NO FURTHER ADDITION WAS REQUIRED TO BE M ADE ON ACCOUNT OF ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 3 ACCOMMODATION BILLS. THIS STAND OF THE ASSESSEE WA S NOT FOUND ACCEPTABLE BY THE A.O. AND RELYING ON HIS STATEMENT MADE ORIGINAL LY AS WELL AS THE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOUND IN THE FORM OF CHEQUE BO OKS AND BLANK LETTER HEADS, HE REJECTED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSE SSEE AND PROCEEDED TO MAKE A BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT. ACCORDINGLY, HE E STIMATED THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF COMMISSION/BROKERAGE @1% ON THE TOTAL TURNOVER OF RS. 79,29,400/- AT RS. 79,294/- AND ASSESSED THE SAME TO TAX IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS O F BUSINESS OR PROFESSION. THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS SEPA RATELY BROUGHT TO TAX BY HIM IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD IN COME FROM OTHER SOURCES. HE ALSO BROUGHT TO TAX A SUM OF RS. 48,00 0/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM M/S MANAN TRADING CO. PVT. LTD. UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM SALARY. ON APPEAL, THE LD. CIT(A) UPHELD THE ASSES SMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE A.O. U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153 A OF THE ACT. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESS EE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS :- 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LD. AOS ACTION TO HOLD THAT THE APPELLANT WAS ENGAGED IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION BILLS/ENTRIE S. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LD. AOS ACTION OF R EJECTING THE BOOK RESULTS U/S 145(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ID. AOS ACTION OF E STIMATING THE BUSINESS INCOME AT RS. 79,294/- AS PER PARA 7.8 OF THE ASSES SMENT ORDER. 4. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LD. AOS ACTION OF D ISALLOWING THE BUSINESS EXPENDITURE AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,31,204/-. 5. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LD. AOS ACTION OF A SSESSING THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 1,10,041/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 4 6. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW THE ID. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE LD. AOS ACTION IN M AKING ADDITION OF RS. 48, 000/- ON ACCOUNT OF SALARY ALLEGEDLY (RECEIVED FROM M/S MANAN TRADING COMPANY PVT. LTD. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSEDTHE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AS REGARDS T HE COMMON ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL RELAT ING TO ESTIMATION OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS BUSINESS, IT IS OBS ERVED THAT A SIMILAR ISSUE WAS INVOLVED IN THE CASE OF SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR JAI N, AN ASSESSEE BELONGING TO THE SAME GROUP WHEREIN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF T HE ASSESSEE WERE REJECTED BY THE A.O. ON THE ALLEGATION, BASED ON STATEMENT R ECORDED DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH AND EVIDENCE FOUND IN THE FORM OF BLANK L ETTER HEADS AND CHEQUE BOOKS OF VARIOUS CONCERNS, THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS IN DULGING IN PROVIDING ACCOMMODATION BILLS. AFTER REJECTING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT, THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR JAIN WA S ALSO ESTIMATED BY THE A.O. BY APPLYING THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 1% WHICH WA S BROUGHT DOWN BY LD. CIT(A) TO 0.5%. ON FURTHER APPEAL, IT WAS CONTENDE D ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL THAT THERE WAS NO DEFECT OR DIS CREPANCY POINTED OUT BY THE A.O. IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE TO JUS TIFY THE REJECTION THEREOF. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT THERE WAS NO INCRIMINATING MATERIAL FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF SEARCH EXCEPT FEW CHEQUE BOOKS AND LETTER HEADS BELONGING TO OTHER PERSONS TO ESTABLISH THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS INDULGIN G IN GIVING ACCOMMODATION BILLS. IT WAS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT EVEN THE ESTIM ATE OF BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSE AS MADE BY THE A.O. BY APPLYING THE NET PROFIT RATE OF 1% WAS WITHOUT REFERENCE TO ANY COGENT MATERIAL. THE TRIBU NAL FOUND MERIT IN THESE CONTENTIONS RAISED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE CASE OF SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND DIRECTED THE A.O. TO ACCEPT THE BOOK S OF ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ALL THE RELEVANT YEARS I.E. ASSESSMENT YEARS 2002-03 TO 2008-09 VIDE ITS COMMON ORDER DATED 16-1-2014 PASSED IN ITA NO. 5788 TO 5794/M/2011 AND 5951-5953 & 5954-5955/M/2011. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE APPEAL FILED I N THE PRESENT CASE AS WELL AS ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 5 ALL THE MATERIAL FACTS RELEVANT THERETO ARE SIMILAR TO THAT OF THE CASE OF SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR JAIN, WE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOW THE ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 16-01-2014 (SUPRA) PASSED IN THE SAID CASE AND DIRE CT THE A.O. TO ACCEPT THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AS DECLARED ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ARE ACCO RDINGLY ALLOWED. 6. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 5 RELA TING TO HEAD OF INCOME UNDER WHICH THE INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE INTEREST INCOME OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF B USINESS OR PROFESSION WAS ASSESSED BY THE A.O UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTH ER SOURCES WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESS EE. HE HAS URGED THAT THIS ISSUE MAY THEREFORE BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. SINCE THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD, W E RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. GROUND N O. 5 IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 7. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 6 RELA TING TO TAXING THE AMOUNT OF RS. 48,000/- RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FRO M M/S MANAN TRADING COMPANY PVT. LTD. AS SALARY INCOME, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS ADDITION WAS ALSO MADE BY THE A .O. TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT GIVING ANY OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE THEREFORE RESTORE THIS ISSUE ALSO TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPO RTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. GROUND NO. 6 IS ALSO TREATED AS ALLOW ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 8. NOW, WE SHALL TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2002-03 BEING ITA NO. 4683/M/11, GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF WHICH INVOL VE A SIMILAR ISSUE AS INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 200 5-06 RELATING TO ESTIMATION ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 6 OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS BUSINESS. S INCE ALL THE MATERIAL FACTS RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE AS INVOLVED IN THE YEAR UNDE R CONSIDERATION ARE SIMILAR TO A.Y. 2005-06, WE FOLLOW OUR CONCLUSION DRAWN IN A.Y. 2005-06 AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO ASSESS THE BUSINESS INCOME OF THE ASSES SEE AS DECLARED ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF TH E ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2002-03 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 9. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 5 RELA TING TO HEAD OF INCOME UNDER WHICH THE INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE I NVOLVED IN A.Y. 2005-06. FOLLOWING OUR CONCLUSION DRAWN IN A.Y. 2005-06, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. GROUND N O. 5 IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 10. AS REGARDS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2003-04 BEING ITA NO. 4684/M/2011, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 THEREOF RELATING TO ESTIMATION OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS BUSINESS IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE AS INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 T O 4 OF ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2005-06. WE THEREFORE FOLLOW OUR CONCLUSION DR AWN IN A.Y. 2005-06 AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO ASSESS THE BUSINESS INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE AS DECLARED ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2003-04 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 11. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 5 REL ATING TO HEAD OF INCOME UNDER WHICH THE INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED THEREIN IS SIMI LAR TO THE ONE INVOLVED IN A.Y. 2005-06. FOLLOWING OUR CONCLUSION DRAWN IN A. Y. 2005-06, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. GROUND NO. 5 IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURP OSE. ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 7 12. AS REGARDS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2004-05 BEING ITA NO. 4742/M/2011, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 THEREOF RELATING TO ESTIMATION OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS BUSINESS IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE AS INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 T O 4 OF ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2005-06. WE THEREFORE FOLLOW OUR CONCLUSION DR AWN IN A.Y. 2005-06 AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO ASSESS THE BUSINESS INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE AS DECLARED ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2003-04 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 13. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 5 REL ATING TO HEAD OF INCOME UNDER WHICH THE INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE I NVOLVED IN A.Y. 2005-06. FOLLOWING OUR CONCLUSION DRAWN IN A.Y. 2005-06, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. GROUND N O. 5 IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 14. AS REGARDS THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A.Y. 2006-07 BEING ITA NO. 4687/M/2011, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 THEREOF RELATING TO ESTIMATION OF THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS BUSINESS IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE AS INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 1 T O 4 OF ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2005-06. WE THEREFORE FOLLOW OUR CONCLUSION DR AWN IN A.Y. 2005-06 AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO ASSESS THE BUSINESS INCOME OF TH E ASSESSEE AS DECLARED ON THE BASIS OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. GROUND NO. 1 TO 4 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2003-04 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 15. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 5 REL ATING TO HEAD OF INCOME UNDER WHICH THE INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE TO TAX IN TH E HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THIS ISSUE IS SIMILAR TO THE ONE I NVOLVED IN A.Y. 2005-06. FOLLOWING OUR CONCLUSION DRAWN IN A.Y. 2005-06, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 8 FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER AND SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. GROUND NO. 5 IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 16. AS REGARDS THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO. 6 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2006-07 RELATING TO THE HEAD OF INCOME UNDER W HICH CONSULTANCY FEES AND DERIVATIVE INCOME IS ASSESSED TO TAX, THE LD. C OUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THIS INCOME DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION WAS ASSESSED B Y THE A.O. UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPOR TUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF BEING HEARD. HE HAS URGED THAT THIS ISSUE MAY THER EFORE BE SENT BACK TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH. SIN CE THE LD. D.R. HAS NOT RAISED ANY OBJECTION IN THIS REGARD, WE RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE A.O. FOR DECIDING THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING AN OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. GROUND NO. 6 IS ACCORDINGLY TREATED AS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 17. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 -1-2014. . # % & 22-1-2014 SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (P.M. JAGTAP ) #* JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; & DATED 22-1-2014 [ .*../ RK , SR. PS ITA 4683,4684,4742,4686-87/M/11 9 , -&./ 0/ / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 1 () / THE CIT(A)36, MUMBAI. 4. 1 / CIT (CENTRAL)-1, MUMBAI 5. 4 **6 , 6 , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI C BENCH 6. : / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, 4 * //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI