ASST CIT 2(1), MUMBAI V. B P COMTRADE P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6019/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 75339 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-12-2012
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAKASH K JOTHWANI
• Section: 147; 11; 143(3); 14A; 115JB

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI . . , , , BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA , JUDICIAL MEM BER . / ITA NO. 6019 / MUM./ 2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 0 7 0 8 ) DY . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN 101, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 .. / APPELLANT V/S M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 24/26, CAMA BUILDING DALAL STREET, FORT, MUMBAI 400 023 .... / RESPONDENT . / PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AAACA3758Q . / ITA NO. 6022 / MUM./ 2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 08 09 ) ASSTT. C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN 101, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI 400 020 .. / APPELLANT V/S M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 24/26, CAMA BUILDING DALAL STREET, FORT, MUMBAI 400 023 .... / RESPONDENT . / PERMANENT ACCOUNT NUMBER AAACA3758Q / ASSESSEE BY : MR. PRAKASH K. JOTHWANI / REVENUE BY : MR. SURENDRA KUMAR / DATE OF HEARING 13 . 01 .201 4 / DATE OF ORDER 22.01.2014 M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 2 / ORDER , / PER AMIT SHUKLA , J.M. THE AFORESAID APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE, CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 20 TH JUNE 2011 AND 21 ST JUNE 2011, PASSED BY THE LEARN ED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) IV, MUMBAI, FOR THE QUANTUM OF ASSESSMENT PASSED UNDER SECTION 143 R/W 147 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 08 AND 2008 09 RESPECTIVELY. 2 . SINCE THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN BOTH THE YEARS UNDER APPEAL ARE COMMON, THEREFORE, TH ESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND, AS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE, ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY WAY OF THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. HOWEVER, IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPLICATION, IT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO TAKE NOTE OF FACTS OF ONE APPEAL. WE ARE, ACCORDINGLY, STAT ING TH E FACTS AS THEY APPEAR IN ITA NO . 6019/MUM. /2011, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 08. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY HE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN QUASHING THE REOPENING OR DER OF THE A.O. WHEN THERE WAS GENUINE ESCAPEMENT OF INCOME DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E FROM THE TAX LIABILITY UNDER SECTION 115JB CONTRARY TO THE WISH OF THE LEGISLATION, SINCE THE SECTION WAS BROUGHT INTO EXISTENCE TO TAX THE COMPANIES WHO OTHERWISE WERE IGNORING ZERO / LESSER TAXATION DUE TO VARIOUS EXEMPTIONS / REBATES. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE A.O. IS EMPOWERED ENOUGH TO REOPEN ANY ASSESSMENT AS PER EXPLN. 2(C) OF SECTION 147 EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS FULL DISCLOSURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE. M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 3 3 . FACTS IN BRIEF : THE ASSESSEE IS CARRYING ON THE B USINESS OF COMMODITY BROKERS REGISTERED WITH NCDEX, MCX AND NMCE. APART FROM THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DEALING IN INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND SECURITIES. IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FILED ALONG WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN TAXABLE INCOM E UNDER THE HEAD PROFIT & GAIN OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSION AT ` 10,24,97,010 THAT IS UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT . THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SHOWN COMPUTATION OF INCOME UNDER SECTION 115JB OF ` 10,27,55,722. S INCE THE TAX PAYABLE UNDER THE NORMAL CO MPUTATION OF INCOME WAS MORE, THEREFORE, THE INCOME WAS SHOWN UNDER THE NORMAL COMPUTATION OF THE ACT AND NOT UNDER THE MAT PROVISIO N . ON THE TAX PAYABLE UNDER THE NORMAL COMPUTATION, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E, AS A RESULT OF WHICH THE TAX PAYABLE WAS SHOWN AT NIL . AS AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) VIDE ORDER DATED 9 TH OCTOBER 2009, AT AN INCOME OF ` 1,24,80,226, AFTER MAKING DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT . THUS, THE INCOME WAS ASSESSED UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND NOT UNDER SECTION 115JB . THEREAFTER, THE SAID ASSESSMENT WAS RE OPENED UNDER SECTION 147 ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE TO PAY TAX AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB AND REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E IS NOT ALLOWABLE UNDER BOOK PROFIT . THE ASSESSEE RAISED OBJECTIONS BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT FIRSTLY, NO INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT, AS THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT LIABLE TO PAY TAX UNDER SECTION 115JB , AS THE TAX UNDER NORMAL PROVISION WAS MUCH HIGHER THAN THE TAX UNDER SECTION 115JB AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE TAX PAYABLE O N THE NORMAL INCOME WAS ` 3,07,49,103 , WHEREAS , THE TAX PAYABLE UNDER SECTION 115JB WAS ` 1,02,75,572. SECONDLY, T HE ASSESSEE IS ALSO LIABLE FOR REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E FOR ` 3,07,49,103, AS IT HAS PAID SECURITY TRANSACTION TAX. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 4 REJECTED THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION AND COMPUTED THE INCOME AS PER SECTION 115JB AND DENIED THE RELIEF CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 88E ON THE GROUND THAT THE S AME IS NOT ALLOWABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF MAT. 4 . BEFORE THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS), DETAIL SUBMISSIONS WERE MADE ALONG WITH OBJECTIONS RAISED FOR RE OPENING THE CASE UNDER SECTION 147. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) APPRECIATED THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION AND AFTER ANALYZING THE ASSESSEES COMPUTATION OF INCOME, OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE TO COMPUTE TAX UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS AND NOT UNDER SECTION 115JB , BECAUSE THE TAX PAYABLE UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISION WAS HIGHER. HE HELD THAT , FIRST OF ALL THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE ASSESSEES CASE AND QUASHED THE FINDINGS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THIS ISSUE AFTER OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER: FROM THE LANGUAGE OF THE ABOVE SECTION IT IS CLEAR THAT IT IS ON LY WHEN INCOME TAX PAYABLE ON TOTAL INCOME AS COMPUTED UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IS LESS THAN 10% OF ITS BOOK - PROFIT THEN SUCH BOOK PROFIT SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE THE TOTAL INCOME AND TAX SHALL BE PAYABLE @ 10%. THEREFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE GROSS TAX LIABILITY UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT BEFORE ANY REBATE OR ADJUSTMENT ON ACCOUNT OF ADVANCE TAX OR TDS IS TO BE COMPARED WITH 10% OF THE BOOK PROFIT. EVEN OTHERWISE, HAD THE NET TAX LIABILITY TO BE CONSIDERED, THEN IT WILL GENERALLY B E HIGHER THAN 10% OF THE BOOK PROFIT BECAUSE MOST OF THE INCOME - TAX IS PAID EITHER IN THE FORM OF ADVANCE TAX OR TDS. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THE GROSS TAX LIABILITY ON THE INCOME UNDER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF ACT IS TO BE COMPARED WITH THE 10% OF T HE BOOK - PROFIT AND IF THE GROSS TAX LIABILITY ON THE INCOME UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF INCOME - TAX ACT IS HIGHER, THAN IT IS TO BE TAXED UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, OTHERWISE THE BOOK - PROFITS ARE TO BE TAXED. THEREFORE, IN THE CASE OF THE A SSESSEE IT IS THE INCOME UNDER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, WHICH IS TO BE TAXED BECAUSE THE GROSS TAX LIABILITY ON SUCH INCOME IS HIGHER THAN 10% OF THE BOOK - PROFIT AND ONCE IT IS DECIDED THAT INCOME IS TO BE TAXED AS CALCULATED AS PER THE NORMAL PROVISI ONS OF THE ACT, THEN THE DISPUTE ENDS BECAUSE IN SUCH A SITUATION A.O. HAS NO OBJECTION IN ALLOWING REBATE U/S 88E AND RIGHTLY SO. THEREFORE, A.O. HAS COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTOOD THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAW BECAUSE IT IS NOT THE NET TAX LIABILITY AFTER TDS, ADV ANCE TAX AND REBATE WHICH IS TO M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 5 BE COMPARED, BUT THE GROSS TAX LIABILITY ON THE INCOME COMPUTED UNDER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IS TO BE COMPARED. EVEN THE 'FORM' FOR RETURN OF INCOME, PRESCRIBED FOR THE ASSESSEE, IN 'PART B -- THE STT COMPUTATION OF TA X LIABILITY ON TOTAL INCOME' AS REPRODUCED ABOVE, CLEARLY SUPPORTS THIS VIEW BECAUSE IN POINT NO.3, GROSS TAX PAYABLE IS TO BE HIGHER OF THE TAX PAYABLE ON TOTAL INCOME AS PER NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AS PER POINT NO. 2C AND TAX PAYABLE ON DEEMED TOTAL INCOME UNDER SECTION 115JB AS PER POINT NO. 1. AND IT IS NOT THE NET TAX LIABILITY WHICH IS TO BE COMPARED. HENCE, THE ACTION OF THE A.O. DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. 5 . ON THE SECOND ASPECT WHETHER REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E IS ALLOWABLE WHILE COMPUTING BOOK PRO FIT UNDER SECTION 115JB, HE HELD THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE, THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE FOR CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 88E EVEN WHEN THE COMPUTATION IS MADE UNDER SECTION 115JB. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) IN THIS REGARD ARE AS UNDER: 12. THERE IS NO DISPUTE ON THE FACT THAT STT HAS BEEN PAID AND OTHER FORMALITIES HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH. THE A.O. HAS ONLY HELD THAT REBATE U/S. 88E IS NOT ALLOWED WHEN THE INCOME IS TAXED U/S. 115JB. EVEN THOUGH SUB - SECTION (1) OF SECTION 115 JB STARTS WITH THE NONABSTANTE CLAUSE IT IS ONLY FOR COMPUTATION OF TAXABLE INCOME AND IT HAS NO ROLE AS FAR AS ALLOWING OF REBATE U/S. 88E IS CONCERNED. ON THE CONTRARY SUB - SECTION (5) OF SECTION 115JB PROVIDES FOR A SAVING CLAUSE THAT THE REST OF THE PRO VISIONS OF THE ACT SHALL APPLY AND, THEREFORE, THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO DEDUCTION AND REBATE ETC. WILL APPLY. SECTION 88E DOES NOT PRESCRIBE ANY CONDITION THAT SUCH REBATE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED IF THE INCOME IS ASSESSED U/S. 115JB, WHEREAS SECTION 88E CLEA RLY SAYS THAT THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO A REBATE PROVIDED THAT STT HAS BEEN PAID AND THE INCOME IS ASSESSED UNDER THE HEAD 'PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSINESS OR PROFESSION' AND THE ASSESSEE FULFILLS BOTH THE CONDITIONS ON WHICH THERE IS NO DISPUTE. THE REFORE, EVEN AS PER SECTION 88E SUCH A REBATE IS ALLOWABLE OUT OF TAXES PAYABLE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION 115JB. EVEN THE COMPUTATION PART OF RETURN OF INCOME IN 'PART B' AS REPRODUCED ABOVE CLEARLY SHOWS THAT FIRST THE GROSS TAX LIABILITY IS T O BE FOUND OUT IN POINT NO.3 OF 'PART B - TTI' WHICH MAY BE EITHER UNDER 115JB OR AS PER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND ONLY OUT OF THIS GROSS TAX PAYABLE, REBATE U/S. 88E IS ALLOWED AT POINT NO.6 WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT REBATE U/S. 88E IS AVAILABLE EVEN WHEN TAX IS PAYABLE U/S.115JB . M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 6 6 . THEREAFTER, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE BENCH, IN HORIZON CAPITAL LTD. V/S ITO AND BASED ON THE AFORESAID FINDINGS, HE HELD THAT THE RE OPENING ITSELF IS BAD IN LAW AND O THERWISE ALSO, THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE FOR DEDUCTION U /S 88E , WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME U /S 115JB. 7 . BEFORE US, THE LEARNED COUNSEL, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT NOW THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE KARNATAK A HIGH COURT IN CIT V/S HORIZON CAPITAL LTD., [2011] 245 CTR (KAR.) 601, WHEREIN THE HIGH COURT HAS HELD THAT EVEN IF THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN MADE UNDER SECTION 115JB, REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E IN RESPECT OF PAYMENT OF STT , IS TO BE ALLOWED. THIS DECISION O F THE HIGH COURT HAS ALSO BEEN FOLLOWED BY THE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, IN ACIT V/S SHREEPATI HOLDINGS AND FINANCE PVT. LTD., ITA NO.6046/MUM./ 2011, ORDER DATED 27 TH JULY 2012. 8 . ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, STRONGLY RELIED UP ON THE FINDINGS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 9 . AFTER CAREFULLY CONSIDERING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND ALSO GOING THROUGH THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AS WELL AS THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE JUDGMENT RELIED UPON BY THE LEARN ED COUNSEL, WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE TO PAY TAX UNDER THE NORMAL PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND THE TAXABLE INCOME WAS LIABLE TO BE SET O FF AGAINST THE REBATE CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 88E. THE REVENUES CASE IS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO LIABLE FOR GETTING ASSESSED UNDER SECTION 115JB AND THE TAX WOULD BE PAID ON SUCH BOOK PROFIT , WITHOUT GIVING RELIEF UNDER SECTION 88E. PRIMA FACIE, ON THE FIRST ISSUE WHETHER THE M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 7 INCOME IS TO BE COMPUTED UNDER SECTION 11 5JB AND THE ASSESSMENT IS TO BE MADE UNDER MAT PROVISIONS OR NOT, WE UPHOLD THE VIEW OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 115JB WA S NOT APPLICABLE AS THE TAX ON NORMAL COMPUTATION WAS HIGHER. SECONDLY, THE OTHER MAIN POINT WHETHER THE RELIEF / REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E IS AVAILABLE ON THE COMPUTATION UNDER SECTION 115JB OR NOT, HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN HORIZON CAPITAL LTD. (SUPRA), WHICH HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY THE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH IN SHREEPATI HOLDI NGS AND FINANCE PVT. LTD. (SUPRA). THE RELEVANT OBSERVATION OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT IS AS UNDER: 14. UN DER SECTION 88E, WHERE THE TOTAL INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE IN A PREVIOUS YEAR INCLUDES ANY INCOME, CHARGEABLE UNDER THE HEAD 'PROFITS AND GAINS OF BUSIN ESS OF PROFESSION', ARISING FROM TAXABLE SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS, HE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO A DEDUCTION, FROM THE AMOUNT OF INCOME - TAX ON SUCH INCOME ARISING FROM SUCH TRANSACTIONS SECTION ALSO PROVIDES THE LIMIT TO WHICH DEDUCTIONS SHALL BE GIVEN. 15. THER EFORE, IT IS CLEAR THAT. THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO PAY SECURITIES TRANSACTION TAX WHEN HE ENTERS INTO SECURITIES TRANSACTION. TAX IS PAYABLE SIMULTANEOUSLY AFTER REALIZING THE CONSIDERATION. HOWEVER, IF THAT TRANSACTION IS INCLUDED IN THE TOTAL INCOME OF T HE ASSESSEE WHERE THE TOTAL INCOME IS ASSESSED EITHER UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OR UNDER SECTION L1SJB WHEN TAX CHARGEABLE ON SUCH INCOME IS ARRIVED AT, HE IS GIVEN THE BENEFIT OF TAX DEDUCTIONS OF THE AMOUNT, WHICH HE HAS PAID UNDER SECTION 88E BY V IRTUE OF SECTION 87. WHEN UNDER SECTION 82A, THE ASSESSEE IS MADE LIABLE TO PAY TAX WITH AN ASSURANCE THAT IT WILL BE DEDUCTED ARID 87 OF THE ACT GIVES EFFECT TO SUCH PROMISE MADE UNDER THE STATUTE. THAT IS THE REASON WHY THE WORD USED IS REBATE. THE AMOUN T PAID IS HANDED BACK TO THE ASSESSEE. IN OTHER WORDS, PAYMENT OF TAX TWICE ON THE SAME INCOME IS AVOIDED. THEREFORE, THE CONTENTION THAT THIS BENEFIT IS NOT A VAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE WHOSE TOTAL INCOME IS ASSESSED UNDER SECTION L1SJB HAS NO SUBSTANCE. IN OTHER WORDS, WHEN THE TOTAL INCOME IS ASSESSED AND THE TAX CHARGEABLE IS COMPUTED, IT IS FROM THAT TAX WHICH IS CHARGEABLE; THE TA X PAID UNDER SECTION 88E IS GIVEN DEDUCTION, BY WAY OF REBATE, UNDER SECTION 87 OF THE ACT. THIS IS THE LEGISLATIVE INTENT. TH AT IS A PROMISE TO GIVE DEDUCTION OF THE TAX ALREADY PAID. THIS IS THE MOD, IN WHICH TAX ALREADY PAID IS HANDED BACK AT THE TIME OF FINAL COMPUTATION. THEREFORE, TH E JUDGMENT REFERRED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND DOES NOT SUFFER F ROM AN LEGAL INFIRMITY, WHICH CALLED FOR INTERFERENCE. WE DO NOT SEE ANY SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LA W INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL, WHICH MERITS ADMISSION. THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 8 10 . THUS, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID DECISION, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE FOR REBATE UNDER SECTION 88E , EVEN IF THE ASSESSMENT IS TO BE MADE AFTER COMPUTING THE BOOK PROFIT UNDER SECTION 115JB. 11 . AS REGARDS THE ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF RE OPENING UNDER SECTION 147, THIS HAS BECOME PURELY ACADEMIC IN VIEW OF THE FINDINGS GI VEN ON MERITS. HENCE, THE SAME IS NOT ADJUDICATED UPON. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE TREATED AS DISMISSED. 12 . SINCE THE FACTS AND ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 09 ARE IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS AND ISSUES RAISED IN THE ASSESS MENT YEAR 2007 08, THEREFORE, THE FINDINGS GIVEN IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 08 WILL APPLY MUTATIS MUTANDIS TO THE APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 09 ALSO. 13 . 2007 08 2008 09 1 3 . IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEALS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 08 AND 2008 09 ARE TREATED AS DISMISSED. 22 ND JANUARY 2014 ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22 ND JANUARY 2014 SD / - . . P.M. JAGTAP ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SD / - AMIT SHUKLA JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED : 22 ND JANUARY 2014 M/S. B.P CONTRADE PVT. LTD. 9 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED T O : ( 1 ) / THE ASSESSEE ; ( 2 ) / THE REVENUE; ( 3 ) ( ) / THE CIT(A ) ; ( 4 ) / THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED ; ( 5 ) , , / THE DR, ITAT, MUMBAI ; ( 6 ) / GUARD FILE . / TRUE CO PY / BY ORDER . / PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY / / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI