ITO 1(2)(2), MUMBAI V. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 5274/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7550 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 24-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S PADMAJA
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL I BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (AM) & SHRI PAWAN SINGH (JM) I.T.A. NO. 5274 /MUM/20 16 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 11 - 12 ) ITO - 1(2)(2) ROOM NO. 527 5 TH FLOOR AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400 020. V S . M/S. KRIS HABH TRADING & SERVICES P RI V A T E L IMI T E D 4 TH FLOOR, LAXMI BUILDING 6 SHOORJI VALLABHDAS MARG MUMBAI - 400 001. PAN : AAECK1050F ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) A SSESSEE BY SHRI DHARMESH SHAH DEPARTMENT BY MS. S. PADMAJA DATE OF HEARING 8 . 0 3 . 201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 4 . 0 4 . 201 8 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM) : - THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05 - 05 - 2016 PASSED BY LD CIT(A) - 2, MUMBAI AND IT RELATES TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED B Y THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.2134.91 LAKHS MADE BY THE AO U/S 68 OF THE ACT AND ALSO IN FURTHER HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM SET OFF OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.10,040/ - AGAINST THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT . 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE ABOVE SAID ISSUES ARE DISCUSSED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE IS A DEVELOPER AND DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IT DID NOT CARRY ON ANY BUSINESS ACTIVITY. IT FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING A TOTAL LOSS OF RS.10,04 0/ - . THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED UNSECURED LOANS OF RS.3988.30 LAKHS DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED A SUM OF RS.1853.39 LAKHS THROUGH BANKING CHANNELS AND THE REMAINING AMOUNT OF RS.21 34.91 LAKHS WERE RECEIVED THROUGH ASSIGNMENT OF LIABILITIES FROM OTHER RELATED CONCERNS. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO RECEIVED ASSETS BY WAY OF ASSIGNMENTS OF ALMOST EQUAL AMOUNT FROM M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 2 RELATED CONCERNS. WE ARE CONCERNED WITH THE LIABILITIES OF RS.2134.91 LAKHS TA KEN BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE ASSESSEE BELONGS TO HITEN A KHATAU GROUP. UNDER A SCHEME OF RESTRUCTURING/MERGER, 16 COMPANIES OF THE GROUP WERE MERGED WITH A COMPANY NAMED M/S GREAT VIEW PROPERTIES P LTD. THE ORDER OF HONBLE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY WAS R ECEIVED ON 28 - 01 - 2011 AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF MERGER WAS DETERMINED AS 30 - 06 - 2010. 4. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE TEN OF COMPANIES, WHICH WERE MERGED WITH M/S GREAT VIEW PROPERTIES P LTD, HAVE ASSIGNED THEIR ASSETS AND LIABILITIES TO THE ASSESSEE HEREI N. IT WAS NOT NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HEREIN WAS NOT PART OF MERGER PROCESS. THE AO NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN OVER THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES ON 31 - 12 - 2010 AND 31 - 03 - 2011. SINCE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF MERGER WAS MENTIONED AS 30 - 06 - 2010 AS PER THE ORDER OF HONBLE HIGH COURT PASSED ON 28 - 01 - 2011, THE AO TOOK THE VIEW THAT ALL THE 16 COMPANIES (INCLUDING THE 10 COMPANIES WHICH TRANSFERRED THEIR ASSETS AND LIABILITIES TO THE ASSESSEE) HAVE CEASED TO EXIST FROM 30 - 06 - 2010. IN THAT CASE, THE NON - E XISTING COMPANIES COULD NOT HAVE ASSIGNED THEIR ASSETS AND LIABILITIES TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY, AS THOSE COMPANIES CANNOT BE SAID TO POSSESS THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. ACCORDINGLY THE AO TOOK THE VIEW THAT THE NATURE AND GENUINENESS OF THE ENTRIES PASSED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DOUBTFUL. ACCORDINGLY THE AO ASSESSED A SUM OF RS.2134.91 LAKHS AS INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. WHILE DOING SO, HE DID NOT ALLOW SET OFF OF BUSINESS LOSS OF RS.10,040/ - AGAINST THE INCOME SO ASSESSED. 5. THE LD CIT(A) NOTICED THAT T HE ORDER OF HIGH COURT WAS PASSED ONLY ON 28 - 01 - 2011, EVEN THOUGH THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF MERGER WAS DETERMINED AS 30 - 06 - 2010. HE NOTICED THAT TILL THE TIME THE ORDER WAS PASSED BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, ALL THE 16 COMPANIES WERE CARRYING ON BUSINESS IN TH E USUAL COURSE. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS PROVIDED IN THE TERMS OF MERGER THAT THE TRANSACTIONS, AGREEMENTS ETC., CARRIED ON BY THOSE COMPANIES SINCE 30 - 06 - M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 3 2010 TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL MERGER WAS BINDING ON THE MERGED COMPANY, VIZ., M/S GREAT VIEW PROPERTIES P L TD. THE LD CIT(A) FURTHER NOTICED THAT DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE PETITION BEFORE HONBLE HIGH COURT, THE 10 COMPANIES HAVE GIVEN PROPOSAL TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY FOR ASSIGNMENT OF THEIR ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO ACCEPTED THE PROPOSA L ON 31 - 12 - 2010. IT WAS FURTHER NOTICED THAT THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES THAT WERE ASSIGNED TO THE ASSESSEE WERE INCORPORATED IN THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY BY PASSING THE JOURNAL ENTRIES. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO NOTICED THAT ALL THE TEN COMPANIES HAD RE CEIVED THE LOANS FROM VARIOUS PERSONS IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND NOT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO NOTICED THAT THE AO HAS EXAMINED ONLY THE LIABILITIES TAKEN OVER BY THE ASSESSEE, BUT IGNORED THE ASSETS TAKEN OVER, I.E., THE NET V ALUE OF ASSETS TAKEN OVER BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH THE ASSIGNMENT PROCESS FROM 10 COMPANIES WAS ONLY RS.61,452/ - . ACCORDINGLY THE LD CIT(A) TOOK THE VIEW THAT VIEW TAKEN BY THE AO IN THIS REGARD WAS NOT JUSTIFIED AND ACCORDINGLY DELETED THE ADDITION OF RS. 2134.91 LAKHS. SINCE THE ABOVE SAID ADDITION WAS DELETED BY THE LD CIT(A), THE QUESTION OF ADJUDICATION OF ISSUE RELATING TO SET OFF LOSS OF RS.10,040/ - DID NOT ARISE BEFORE HIM. THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A). 6. THE LD CI T D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ESTABLISHED THE NATURE AND GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS, WHICH WERE MANDATORY CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED U/S 68 OF THE ACT. THE LD CIT - DR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT A PARTY TO THE PROCESS OF MERGER OF VARIOUS ENTITIES. SHE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED VARIOUS DOCUMENTS IN ORDER TO GIVE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE. SHE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THOSE DOCUMENTS AT THE FAG END OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE AO A ND HENCE THE LD CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE OBTAINED A REMAND REPORT FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD CIT - DR REITERATED THAT ALL THE COMPANIES HAVE BEEN MERGED WITH M/S GREAT VIEW PROPERTIES P LTD ON 30 - 06 - 2010 AND THEY HAVE CEASED TO EXIST FROM THAT DATE. HENC E THOSE COMPANIES COULD NOT HAVE TRANSFERRED THE LIABILITIES TO THE ASSESSEE ON 30 - 12 - 2010. ACCORDINGLY SHE M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 4 SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS. ACCORDINGLY SHE CONTENDED THAT THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A O SHOULD BE SUSTAINED. 7. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAS ASKED THE DETAILS ONLY ON 04 - 02 - 2014 AND THE ASSESSEE FILED ALL THE DETAILS ON 10 - 02 - 2014 ITSELF. SINCE THE AO INSISTED FOR CERTIFIED COPIES, THE ASSESSEE COULD FILE CER TIFIED COPIES ONLY ON 28 - 03 - 2014. OTHERWISE, ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE AO WELL IN ADVANCE. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE HIGH COURT HAS PASSED ORDER ON 28 - 01 - 2011 AND TILL THAT DATE ALL THE 16 COMPANIES WERE CARRYING ON BUSINESS IN THE USUAL MANNER. SINCE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF MERGER HAS BEEN MENTIONED AS 30 - 06 - 2010, IT HAS BEEN EXPRESSLY PROVIDED THAT ALL THE TRANSACTIONS, AGREEMENTS ETC., ENTERED BY THESE 16 COMPANIES ARE BINDING ON THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY, VIZ., M/S GR EAT VIEW PROPERTIES P LTD. THE TEN COMPANIES UNDER CONSIDERATION HAVE GIVEN PROPOSAL FOR ASSIGNMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES TO THE ASSESSEE ON 15 - 10 - 2010 AND 15 - 12 - 2010. THE ASSESSEE HAS ACCEPTED THE PROPOSALS ON 31 - 12 - 2010. THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES WERE TAKEN OVER BY THE ASSESSEE MAINLY BY PASSING JOURNAL ENTRIES ONLY. THE LD A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE TEN COMPANIES, FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF M/S GREAT VIEW PROPERTIES P LTD, CONFIRMATION FROM THE CONCE RNED COMPANIES IN ORDER TO PROVE THE NATURE AND GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS. THE LD A.R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THESE LOANS WERE TAKEN BY THOSE TEN COMPANIES IN THE EARLIER YEARS AND NOT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS TAKEN OVER THE ASSETS ALSO, BUT THE AO HAS IGNORED THE ASSETS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ACCEPTED THE TRANSACTIONS ENTERED WITH THESE 10 COMPANIES THROUGH BANKING CHANNEL, BUT REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE TRANSACTIONS CARRIED THROUG H PASSING OF JOURNAL ENTRIES. ACCORDINGLY HE CONTENDED THAT THE LD CIT(A) WAS JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE ADDITIONS, SINCE THESE LOAN TRANSACTIONS ARE MERE TAKING OVER OF LIABILITIES THROUGH ASSIGNMENT PROCESS AND FURTHER THE M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 5 ASSESSEE HAS PROVED THE GENUIN ENESS OF TRANSACTIONS BY FURNISHING ALL RELEVANT DOCUMENTS. 8. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE NOTICE THAT THE AO HAS NOTICED THAT THE 10 COMPANIES, WHICH ASSIGNED THE LIABILITIES AND ASSETS TO THE ASSESSEE, WERE DEEMED T O HAVE BEEN MERGED ON 30 - 06 - 2010. ACCORDINGLY HE HAS TAKEN THE VIEW THAT THESE COMPANIES BECOME NON - EXISTING COMPANIES FROM 30 - 06 - 2010 ITSELF AND HENCE THEY COULD NOT HAVE ASSIGNED THE LIABILITIES/ASSETS TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON 31 - 12 - 2010. THOUGH THE AO HAS STATED THAT THE JOURNAL ENTRIES WERE ALSO PASSED ON 31.3.2011, IT WAS ESTABLISHED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT ALL THE JOURNAL ENTRIES HAVE BEEN PASSED ONLY ON 31.12.2010. THIS VIEW OF THE AO HAVE BEEN PROVED TO BE WRONG BY THE ASSESSEE BY SHOWING THAT THE SE COMPANIES HAVE CONTINUE TO CARRY ON ITS ACTIVITIES TILL THE DATE OF PASSING OF ORDER BY HONBLE HIGH COURT, I.E., TILL 28.01.2011. SINCE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF MERGER WAS FIXED AS 30 - 06 - 2010, IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED IN THE TERMS OF MERGER THAT THE TRANSACTIONS, AGREEMENTS ETC., CARRIED ON/ENTERED BY THESE COMPANIES SINCE 30 - 06 - 2010 TILL THE DATE OF ACTUAL MERGER SHALL BE BINDING ON THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY AND FURTHER IT SHALL BE DEEMED THAT THOSE TRANSACTIONS WERE CARRYING ON BUSINESS ON BEHALF OF THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER WAS EXTRACTED BY LD CIT(A) IN PARAGRAPH 9 OF ITS ORDER AS UNDER: - 7 CONDUCT OF BUSINESS TILL EFFECTIVE DATE WITH EFFECT FROM THE APPOINTED DATE AND UP TO AND INCLUDING THE EFFECTIVE DATE: 7.1 THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN CARRYING ON AND SHALL CARRY ON THEIR BUSINESS AND ACTIVITIES AND SHALL BE DEEMED TO HAVE HELD AND STOOD POSSESSED OF AND SHALL HOLD AND STAND POSSESSED OF ALL THEIR PROPERTIES AND ASSETS P ERTAINING TO THE BUSINESS AND UNDERTAKING OF THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES FOR AND ON ACCOUNT OF AND IN TRUST FOR THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY. THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES HEREBY UNDERTAKE TO HOLD THEIR SAID ASSETS WITH UTMOST PRUDENCE UNTIL THE EFFECTIVE DATE, M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 6 7.2 TH E TRANSFEROR COMPANIES SHALL CARRY ON THEIR BUSINESS AND ACTIVITIES WITH REASONABLE DILIGENCE, BUSINESS PRUDENCE AND SHALL NOT, EXCEPT IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF BUSINESS OR WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY ALIENATE CHARGE, MORTGAGE, ENCUMBER OR OTHERWISE DEAL WITH OR DISPOSE OF THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES OR PART THEREOF. 7.3 ALL THE PROFITS OR INCOME ACCRUING OR ARISING TO THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES OR EXPENDITURE OR LOSSES ARISING OR INCURRED OR SUFFERED BY THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES PER TAINING TO THE BUSINESS AND UNDERTAKING OF THE TRANSFEROR COMPANIES SHALL FOR ALL PURPOSES BE TREATED AND BE DEEMED TO BE AND ACCRUE AS THE INCOME OR PROFITS OR LOSSES OR EXPENDITURE AS THE CASE MAY BE OF THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY. 7.4 THE TRANSFEROR COMPANI ES SHALL NOT VARY THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF ANY OF THE EMPLOYEES EXCEPT IN THE ORDINARY COURSE OF BUSINESS OR WITHOUT THE PRIOR CONSENT OF THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY OR PURSUANT TO ANY PRE - EXISTING OBLIGATION UNDERTAKEN BY THE TRANSFEROR COMPAN IES AS THE CASE MAY BE, PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE. 7.5 THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY SHALL BE ENTITLED, PENDING THE SANCTION OF THE SCHEME, TO APPLY TO THE CENTRAL/STATE GOVERNMENT, AND ALL OTHER AGENCIES, DEPARTMENTS AND AUTHORITIES CONCERNED AS ARE NECESSARY UNDER ANY LAW OR RULES, FOR SUCH CONSENTS, APPROVALS AND SANCTIONS, WHICH THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY MAY REQUIRE PURSUANT TO THIS SCHEME . HENCE WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THOSE TEN COMPANIES HAVE CEASED TO EXIST FROM 3 0 - 06 - 2010. WE ALSO NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FURNISHED THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE ALL THE TEN COMPANIES AS WELL AS THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY TO ESTABLISH THE GENUINENESS OF THE JOURNAL ENTRIES PASSED BY IT. WE NOTICE THAT THE AO DID NOT FIND FAULT WITH ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS. 9. WE NOTICE THAT THE AO HAS OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT A PARTY TO THE AMALGAMATION PROCESS. IN OUR VIEW, IT MAY NOT BE RELEVANT, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS GOT THE LIABILITIES AND ASSETS ASSIGNED TO IT BEFORE THE FINAL ORDER WAS PASSED BY HONBLE HIGH COURT AND FOR THAT PURPOSE THE ASSESSEE NEED NOT BE A PARTY TO THE AMALGAMATION PROCESS. FURTHER THE ASSIGNMENT PROCESS CARRIED ON BY THE TEN COMPANIES WAS ALSO BINDING ON TRANSFEREE - COMPANY, WHICH THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY H AS ALSO ACKNOWLEDGED BY PASSING SUITABLE M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 7 CONTRA ENTRIES IN ITS BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS. IN EFFECT, THE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF THE TEN COMPANIES HAVE COME INTO THE BOOKS OF THE ASSESSEE HEREIN AND WITH THE CORRESPONDING ENTRY PASSED BY THE TRANSFEREE COMPANY. 10. THE PARTIES HAVE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE LOAN TRANSACTIONS WERE ENTERED BY ALL THE TEN COMPANIES IN THE EARLIER YEARS, I.E., THESE ARE NOT LOANS TAKEN DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THUS WHAT WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE ASSESSEE WAS LOAN TAKEN I N THE EARLIER YEARS AND NOT TAKEN DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. 11. ANOTHER IMPORTANT ASPECT IS THAT THESE COMPANIES HAVE ASSIGNED BOTH ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. HOWEVER THE AO HAS ACCEPTED THE TRANSFER OF ASSETS, BUT REFUSED TO ACCEPT THE TRANSF ER OF LIABILITIES. IF TRANSFER OF ASSETS IS ACCEPTED AS GENUINE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO REJECT THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSFER OF LIABILITIES. IN ANY CASE, WE NOTICE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVED THE GENUINENESS OF TRANSACTIONS BY FURNISHING THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ALL THE CONCERNED COMPANIES. 12. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING DISCUSSIONS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY WE UPHOLD HIS ORDER PASSED ON THIS ISSUE . 13. THE NEXT ISSUE RELATES TO THE SET OFF OF BUSINESS LOSS AGAINST THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT. SINCE THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN DELETED BY LD CIT(A), THE QUESTION OF ADJUDICATING THE ABOVE SAID ISSUE DID NOT ARISE AND HENC E THE LD CIT(A) DID NOT ADJUDICATE THE SAME. SINCE WE HAVE ALSO CONFIRMED THE ORDER PASSED BY LD CIT(A) ON THE ADDITION MADE U/S 68 OF THE ACT, THE QUESTION OF SET OFF OF BUSINESS LOSS DOES NOT ARISE. M/S. KRISHABH TRADING & SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 8 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 4 . 0 4 .201 8 . SD/ - SD/ - (PAWAN SINGH ) (B.R.BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 4 / 0 4 / 20 1 8 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// SENIOR P RIVATE S ECRETARY PS ITAT, MUMBAI