ASST CIT 11(3)(2), MUMBAI V. YASH JEWELLERY P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6288/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3461 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAUDHARY ARUN KUMAR SINGH
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Question of law; Commercial expediency; Rule 8D
• Section: 143(3); 10AA; 14A; 10B; 56

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2010-11 & 2011-12 ACIT, CIRCLE-11(3)(2), ROOM NO.427, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 4 TH FLOOR, M.K. MARG, MUMBAI 400020 VS. M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD., 603 & 604, BLOCK NO.1, SEEPZ ++, SEZ, MIDC, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 400 096 PAN: AAACY 2834R (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : MS. AARTI VISSANJI, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI CHAUDHARY ARUNKUMAR SINGH, D.R . DATE OF HEARING : 08.04.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.04.2019 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE ABOVE TITLED TWO APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED B Y THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDERS EVEN DATED 09.06.2017 O F THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER R EFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 & 2 011-12. ITA NO.6283/M/2017 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE 1 ST GROUND OF APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS.2,88, 69,872/- BY LD. CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE AO TOWARDS NOTIONAL INTER EST ON INTEREST FREE ADVANCE GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAS PAID MORE THAN RS.10 CORES AS INTEREST ON THE ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 2 BORROWED FUNDS AND THERE BEING NO COMMERCIAL EXPEDI ENCY FOR ADVANCING INTEREST FREE ADVANCES. 3. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE AO OBSERVED THAT ASSESSEE HAS PAID INTEREST ON THE BORROWED FUNDS WHILE GIVING THE INTEREST FREE A DVANCES OF RS.6,04,77,159/- OUT OF TOTAL ADVANCES OF RS.17,10, 95,433/- AS ON 31.03.2011. THE AO ALSO NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE H AS SUO MOTO DISALLOWED A SUM OF RS.1,06,32,804/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST ATTRIBUTABLE TO INTEREST FREE ADVANCES @ 3.23%. TH E ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT THE SUO-MOTO DISALLOWA NCE WAS MADE TO AVOID LITIGATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE RATE OF DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST @ 3.23% P.A.WAS CALCULATED AFTER GIVING WEIGHTAGE TO THE IN TEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE TO THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE THE R ATE OF DISALLOWANCE AS PROPOSED BY THE AO AT 12% IS NOT JU STIFIED. HOWEVER THE AO AFTER REJECTING THE CONTENTIONS OF T HE ASSESSEE APPLIED A RATE OF 12% P.A. AND AFTER MAKING ALLOWA NCE OF SUO- MOTO DISALLOWANCE MADE NET ADDITION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.2,88,69,872/- TO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN T HE ASSESSMENT FRAMED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT DATED 28.02 .2014. 4. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) ALL OWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AFTER TAKING INTO ACCOUNT TH E CONTENTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS BY OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER: UNDER THIS GROUND OF APPEAL THE APPELLANT HAS DISP UTED DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,88,69,872/- I HAVE CONSIDERED TH E RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) HAS DISALLOWANCE TH E SAME BY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT FURNISHED DETAILS OF INTEREST PAI D THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREFORE DISALLOWED INTEREST AT RATE OF 12% ATTRIBUTABLE TO INTEREST FREE ADVANCES GRANTED OUT OF INTEREST BEARING FUNDS TAKEN BY THE APPELLANT AC CORDINGLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WORKED OUT DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 3,95,02,676/-THEREAF TER THE ASSESSING OFFICER ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 3 ADDED RS. 2,88,69,872/-AFTER DEDUCTING RS. 1,06,32, 804/- ALREADY DISALLOWED SUO MOTTO BY THE APPELLANT FINALLY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R CALCULATED TRIE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,88,69,872/- (3,95,02,676-L,06,32 ) 804). ON THE OTHER HAND THE APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT THIS SUO MOTTO DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 1 ,06,32,804/- WAS WORKED OUT BY ADAPTING WEIGHTED AVERAGE COST OF BORROWING AT THE RATE OF 3.23%.THE APPELLANT THEREFORE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT NOTIONAL RATE OF 1 2% ADOPTED BY ASSESSING OFFICER WAS ERRONEOUS. I THEREFORE FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS WRONGLY ADOPTED NOTIONAL RATE OF INTEREST ACCORDINGLY, I DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 2,88,69,872/- IN RESPECT OF INT EREST ATTRIBUTABLE TO V INTEREST FREE ADVANCES, ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO. 1 SUCCEEDS. 5. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT, W E OBSERVE FROM PAGE NO.13 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH CONTAINED T HE SUMMARIZED POSITION OF ASSESSEES OWN FUNDS AND BO RROWED FUNDS IN A TABULAR FORM RIGHT FROM 2007-08 TO 2010- 11 THAT INTEREST FREE FUNDS IN THE FORM OF SHARE APPLICATIO N MONEY PENDING ALLOTMENT OF SHARES AND RESERVE AND SURPLUS ES WERE RS.177,02,42,970/- WHEREAS THE BORROWINGS IN THE FO RM OF SECURED AND UNSECURED LOANS WERE RS.112,33,06,967/- WHILE INTEREST FREE ADVANCES GIVEN WERE RS.6,04,77,159/-. WE FIND MERITS IN THE CONTENTIONS OF THE LD. A.R. THAT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF HDFC BANK LTD VS CIT (20 14 )366 ITR 505 (BOM) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT NO DISALLOWANCE IS TO BE MADE WHERE THE INTEREST FREE FUNDS WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE ARE MORE THAN THE INTER EST FREE ADVANCES. WE FURTHER NOTICE THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE SUO-MOTO DISALLOWANCE OF 3.23% P.A. AFTER GIVING WEIGHTAGE T O THE INTEREST FREE FUNDS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. IN THE EA RLIER YEAR ALSO , THE ASSESSEE HAS WORKED OUT THE DISALLOWANCE AT AVE RAGE COST OF THE FUNDS WHICH WORKED OUT TO 4.01% BY DRAWING OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE NO.4 TO 9 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHEREIN THE DET AILED CALCULATIONS HAVE BEEN GIVEN. WE, THEREFORE, DO NO T FIND ANY ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 4 INFIRMITY OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A) WHICH OTHERWISE APPEARS TO BE A VERY REASONED AND SPEAKIN G ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, WE ARE INCLINED TO UPHOLD THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) BY DISMISSING THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 6. THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.2 IS AGAINST THE D ELETION OF ADDITION MADE ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS.9 ,32,000/- BY LD. CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 10AA OF THE ACT. 7. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT AO OBSERVED DURING C OURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT ASSESSEE EARNED INTERES T INCOME OF RS.3,14,892/- UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM OTHER SOU RCES WHICH WAS CREDITED IN THE P&L ACCOUNT BESIDES SHOWI NG INTEREST INCOME OF RS.1,07,60,017/- AS INCOME FROM INVESTMEN T ACTIVITIES. THE AO ALSO FOUND THAT AN INTEREST INC OME OF RS.9,32,534/- WAS REDUCED FROM INTEREST COST DEBITE D TO P&L ACCOUNT AS IS CLEAR FROM SCHEDULE R TO ANNUAL AUDI TED ACCOUNTS AND ACCORDINGLY CALLED UPON THE ASSESSEE TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS.9,32,534/- SHOULD NOT BE TAXED AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES WHICH WAS REPLIED BY THE ASSESSEE BY SUBMITTING VIDE LETTER DATED 21.02.2015 THAT WORKI NG CAPITAL FACILITIES WERE USED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE PURPOS E OF ITS BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF JEWELLERY FROM THE UNI TS SITUATED AT SEZ THE PROFIT WHEREOF BEING ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE I NTEREST INCOME EARNED ON FIXED DEPOSITS HAS DIRECT NEXUS WI TH THE OPERATION CARRIED OUT BY THE ASSESSEE FROM AFORESAI D UNIT AS THE FIXED DEPOSITS WERE REQUIRED TO BE PLEDGED WITH THE BANK FOR SECURING THE CREDIT FACILITIES AND THEREFORE THE IN TEREST INCOME REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PROFITS OF BUSINESS FOR QUANTIFYING ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 5 DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA OF THE ACT. THE AO RE JECTED THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND TREATED THE INTERES T OF RS.9,32,534/- AS INTEREST INCOME AT PAR WITH OTHER INTEREST INCOME AND EXCLUDED THE SAME FOR THE PURPOSE OF COM PUTING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA OF THE ACT. 8. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) ALL OWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER: UNDER THIS GROUND OF APPEAL THE APPELLANT HAS DISP UTED THE EXCLUSION OF INTEREST INCOME OF RS.9,32,534/- FROM THE EXPORT TURNOVER WH ILE CALCULATING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA. I HAVE PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT O RDER AND FIND THAT THE AO HAS EXCLUDED THE INTEREST INCOME FROM THE EXPORT TURNOV ER BECAUSE THE APPELLANT HAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF JEWELRY AND NOT IN THE B USINESS OF MONEY LENDING ON THE OTHER HAND THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THEY OBSERV ED CREDIT FACILITY FROM THE BACK ON A SPECIFIC CONDITION THAT THEY WILL PLACE THE FI XED DEPOSIT WITH THE BANK AND PLEDGE THE SAME FOR CREDIT FACILITY, I HAVE CAREFUL LY CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSION AND FIND THAT THE BORROWING IS DIRECTLY UTILIZED FOR TH E JEWELLARY BUSINESS, MORE OVER INTEREST ON FIXED DEPOSIT WAS EARNED BECAUSE OFF PL ACING OF FIXED DEPOSIT WAS THE PRECONDITION FOR AVAILING OF BANK FACILITIES. I AM OF THE OPINION THAT INTEREST INCOME HAS DIRECT NEXUS WITH THE PRIMARY BUSINESS ACTIVITY OF THE APPELLANT. I DIRECT THE AO THE INCLUDE THE INTEREST INCOME OF RS. 9,32,534/- T O THE PROFITS FROM ELIGIBLE UNITE WHILE CALCULATION DEDUCTION U/S. 10AA, ACCORDINGLY GROUND NO. 3 IS ALLOWED. 9. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT, W E OBSERVE THAT ASSESSEE HAS DEPOSITED A FDR WITH THE BANK FOR AVAILING CREDIT FACILITIES WHICH WAS A PRECONDITION FOR SANC TIONING OF THE CREDIT FACILITIES ON WHICH ASSESSEE HAS EARNED RS.9 ,32,534/- AND THE SAID INTEREST WAS CLAIMED AS PART OF THE PROFIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 10AA OF THE ACT. THE LD . CIT(A) ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND TH AT INTEREST INCOME HAS DIRECT NEXUS WITH THE PRIMARY BUSINESS A CTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE AND ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTI ON 10AA OF THE ACT. WE ALSO FIND THAT THE SIMILAR ISSUE HAS B EEN DECIDED BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT & ORS. VS. ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 6 HEWLETT PACKARD GLOBAL SOFT LTD. (2018) 403 ITR 453 (KARN) (FB) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS UNDER: 37. ON THE ABOVE LEGAL POSITION DISCUSSED BY US, W E ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE RESPONDENT-ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO 100 PER CENT EX EMPTION OR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION UNDER SECTION 1OA OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY IT ON THE DEPOSITS MADE BY IT WITH THE BANKS IN THE OR DINARY COURSE OF ITS BUSINESS AND ALSO INTEREST EARNED BY IT FROM THE STAFF LOANS AND SUCH INTER-BUSINESS AND ALSO INTEREST EARNED BY IT FROM THE STAFF LOANS AND SUCH INTEREST INCOME WOULD NOT BE TAXABLE AS INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES' UNDER SECTIO N 56 OF THE ACT. THE INCIDENTAL ACTIVITY OF PARKING OF SURPLUS FUNDS WITH THE BANKS OR ADVANCING OF STAFF LOANS BY SUCH SPECIAL CATEGORY OF ASSESSEES COVERED UNDER SE CTION 10A OR 10B OF THE ACT IS INTEGRAL PART OF THEIR EXPORT BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND A BUSINESS DECISION TAKEN IN VIEW OF THE COMMERCIAL EXPEDIENCY AND THE INTEREST INCOM E EARNED INCIDENTALLY CANNOT BE DE-LINKED FROM ITS PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED BY THE UNDERTAKING ENGAGED IN THE EXPORT OF ARTICLES AS ENVISAGED UNDER SECTION I0A O R SECTION 10B OF THE ACT AND CANNOT BE TAXED SEPARATELY UNDER SECTION 56 OF THE ACT. 10. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE AS DECIDED BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT (SUP RA) IN THE AFORESAID CASE THE SURPLUS FUNDS WERE PUT IN THE FDR WHEREAS THE ASSESSEES CASE STANDS ON BETTER FOOTING ON THE GROUND THAT FDR WAS PLACED WITH THE BANK AS A PRECONDITION FOR SANCTIONING THE CREDIT FACILITIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS E LIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 10AA OF THE ACT. WE, THEREFORE, DO NO T FIND ANY DEFECT OR INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND UPHOLD THE SAME BY DISMISSING THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 11. THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.3 & 4 IS AGAINST THE DELETING OF DISALLOWANCE OF RS.2,04,96,643/- BY LD. CIT(A) A S MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 14AA READ WITH RULE 8D. 12. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE AO FOUND DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE HU GE INVESTMENTS TO THE TUNE OF RS.45,01,04,750/- AS ON 31.03.2011 IN THE SECURITIES WHICH ARE CAPABLE OF YIELDING EXE MPT INCOME AND NO DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE TOWARDS EXPENSES INCURRED ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 7 IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. ACCORDINGLY THE AO ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED. THE ASSES SEE REPLIED TO THE SAID NOTICE BY SUBMITTING THAT THE INVESTMENTS WERE MADE OUT OF OWN FUNDS AND NO DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 14A IS REQUIRED TO BE MADE. HOWEVER, THE A O REJECTING THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE CALCULATED THE DISA LLOWANCE BY APPLYING SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D AT RS.2,04,9 6,643/- COMPRISING INTEREST OF RS.1,82,46,120/- UNDER RULE 8D2(II) AND RS.22,52,524/- UNDER RULE 8D2(III). THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE ON THE GROUND THAT THE INVESTMENTS IN THE SECURITIES CAPABLE OF YIELDING EXEMPT INCOME WERE M ADE OUT OF OWN FUNDS AND ALSO THAT DURING THE YEAR THESE INVES TMENTS DID NOT YIELD ANY DIVIDEND INCOME. 13. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE DEPARTMENT, WE OBSERVE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT EARNED ANY EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR AND ONCE IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT ASSESSEE HAS N OT RECEIVED ANY EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR NO DISALLOWANCE U NDER SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D CAN BE MADE. THE SAI D DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT VS . BALLARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD. IN ITA NO.15 OF 2016 DATED 13.10.20 16. FURTHER WE OBSERVE THAT IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT VS. OIL INDU STRY DEVELOPMENT BOARD (2019) 103 TAXMANN.COM 326 SC IN WHICH THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE BY HOLDING THAT NO SUBSTANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW AROSE FOR OUR CONSIDERATION. IN THE SAID CASE THE TRIBUNAL H AS HELD THAT NO DISALLOWANCE IS CALLED FOR WHERE THERE IS NO EXE MPT INCOME ITA NOS.6288 & 6283/M/2017 M/S. YASH JEWELLERY PVT. LTD. 8 WHICH HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COU RT. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE IN T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) WHICH IS A CORRECT AND REASONED ORDER AND IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RATIO LAID BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT AND JURISDICTION HIGH COURT. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.3 & 4 OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL ARE DISMISSED BY UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). ITA NO.6288/M/2017 14. THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE IDENTICAL TO THE ONES AS STATED ABOVE IN ITA NO.6283/M/2017 FOR A.Y. 2010- 11, THEREFORE, OUR FINDING IN ITA NO.6283/M/2017 FO R A.Y. 2010- 11, WOULD, MUTATIS MUTANDIS APPLY TO THIS APPEAL A S WELL. 15. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30.04.2019. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (RAJESH KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 30.04.2019. * KISHORE, SR. P.S. COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT (A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR CONCERNED BENCH //TRUE COPY// [ BY ORD ER DY /ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.