ASST CIT 6(2)(2), MUMBAI V. ESSAR HOUSE LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6980/MUM/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7674 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R MANJUNATHA SWAMY
• Keywords: Business income; Business expenditure; Earning of tax free income; Revenue expenditure; Rule 8D; Set aside
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH E, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 ACIT (CIR)-6(2)(1), R.NO.563, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI - 400020 VS. M/S. ESSAR HOUSE LTD., 11, K.K. MARG, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI 400 034 PAN: AAACJ2883P (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT) ITA NO.7332/M/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD., 11, KESHAVRAO KHADYE MARG, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI 400 034 PAN: AAACJ2883P VS. ACIT (CIR)-6(2)(2), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI - 400020 (APPELLANT) (RE SPONDENT) PRESENT FOR: ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ANUJ KISNADWALA, A.R. SHRI VIJAY MEHTA, A.R. REVENUE BY : SHRI R. MANJUNATHA SWAMY, D.R. DATE OF HEARING : 15.02.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.04.2019 O R D E R PER RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE REVEN UE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 02.09.2016 OF THE COMMISSIO NER OF ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 2 INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS TH E CIT(A)] RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. ITA NO.6980/M/2016 (REVENUES APPEAL) 2. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE ID C1T(A) HAS ERRED, IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S 14A R. W.R 8D OFRS.53,24,46,761/- IGNORING THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 5/2014 DATED 11.02.2 014 THAT DISALLOWANCE U/S 14A HAS TO BE MADE IRRESPECTIVE OF THE FACT WHETHER ANY EXEMPT INCOME HAS BEEN EARNED DURING THE YEAR BY THE ASSESSEE OR NOT? 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE ID CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF IN TEREST ON SALES TAX LIABILITY OF RS.281,19,00,000/- WITHOUT GIVING ANY WORKING/FINDI NG AS TO HOW THE ASSESSEE HAS INCURRED THE SAID EXPENSES? 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE EXPENSE CLAIMED AS INTEREST ON SALES T AX LIABILITY WHEN THE C1T(A) HAS ACCEPTED THAT THE TRANSACTION IS COLOURABLE TRANSAC TION. 4 ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE INTEREST EXPENSES, WITHOUT APPRECIATIN G THE FACT THAT THE INTEREST ON SALES TAX LIABILITY HAS BEEN PAID TO ESSAR OIL LTD, AS PER THE AGREEMENT WITH M/S. ESSAR OIL LTD. AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NO CONNECTION T O THE INCOME EARNED BY M/S. ESSAR OIL LTD. 5, 'ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMST ANCES OF THE CASE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE EXPENSES OF THE NATURE OF INT EREST ON SALES TAX LIABILITY WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE ENTERED INT O AGREEMENT DATED MARCH 2009 WITH M/S. ESSAR OIL LTD BY WAY OF MISREPRESENTATION OF FACTS AS M/S. ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE BENEFIT AND HENCE, THE AGR EEMENT ITSELF WAS VOID. 6. THE APPELLANT PRAYS THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A PPEALS) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO BE RESTORED. 7. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND OR A LTER ANY GROUND OR TO SUBMIT ADDITIONAL NEW GROUND, WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY. 3. THE ISSUE RAISED IN FIRST GROUND OF APPEAL IS AG AINST THE DELETION OF DISALLOWANCE BY THE LD. CIT(A) OF RS.53 ,24,46,761/- AS MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D. 4. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS IN T HE BUSINESS OF RENTING OF PROPERTY AND TRADING IN SHARES AND SECUR ITIES. DURING ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 3 THE INSTANT YEAR, THE ASSESSEE INVESTED RS.180,551 ,60,000/- IN THE SECURITIES ON WHICH THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RECEIV E ANY EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR BY WAY OF DIVIDEND. THE ASS ESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE AO THAT NO DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT CAN BE MADE AS THE ASSESSEE DOES NOT HAV E RECEIVE ANY EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR. AO DID NOT ACC EPT THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND CALCULATED THE DISA LLOWANCE AT RS.53,24,46,751/- ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST AND ADMINI STRATIVE EXPENSES BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D. 5. IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE LD. CIT(A) DEL ETED THE DISALLOWANCE AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE CO NTENTIONS AND SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THAT NO DISALLOWANCE CA N BE MADE WHERE THERE IS NO EXEMPT INCOME BY RELYING ON THE D ECISION OF LAKHANI MARKETING 272 ITR 265 (P&H HC) AND SHIVAM MOTORS 272 CTR 277 (ALLAHABAD). 6. THE LD. D.R. RELIED HEAVILY ON THE ORDER OF AO B Y SUBMITTING THAT ASSESSEE HAS MADE HUGE INVESTMENTS IN THE SHARES AND SECURITIES AND THUS MIGHT HAVE INCURRED SOME EXPENDITURE IN CONNECTION THEREWITH. THE LD. D.R. ARGUED THAT EVEN IF NO INCOME WAS RECEIVED BY WAY OF DIVIDEND D URING THE YEAR EVEN THEN IT IS QUITE LIKELY THAT ASSESSEE MAY RECEIVE INCOME IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS. THE LD DR ARGUED THAT PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D HAVE TO BE APPLIED MA NDATORILY W.E.F. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 AND THEREFORE THE OR DER OF THE AO MAY BE RESTORED BY SETTING ASIDE LD CIT(A) ORDER . ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 4 7. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT ASS ESSEE HAS NOT EARNED ANY EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR WHICH WAS ALSO NOTED BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER ON PAGE NO. 2 PARA 4.1. THE LD. A.R. CONTENDED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY EXEMPT INCOME DURING THE YEAR, NO DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT COULD BE MADE. IN DEFENCE O F HIS ARGUMENTS THE LD. A.R. RELIED ON THE FOLLOWING DECI SIONS: I) PR. CIT V. M/S BALLARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD. (ITA NO .51 OF 2016) DATED 13.10.2016 (BOMBAY HIGH COURT) II) PR. CIT V. M/S RIVIAN INTERNATIONAL P. LTD (ITA NO 693 OF 2015) DATED 21.11.2017 (BOMBAY HIGH COURT) III) M/S REDINGTON INDIA LTD V. ADDL. CIT (ITA NO: 520 OF 2016) DATED 23.12.2016 IV) CHEMINVEST LTD. V. CIT [281 CTR 447 (DEL)] V) CIT V. SHIVAM MOTORS (P) LTD. [272 CTR 277 (ALL) ] VI) CIT V. CORRTECH ENERGY (P) LTD. [272 CTR 262 (G UJ)] VII) CIT V. LAKHANI MARKETING INCL. [272 CTR 265 (P &H)] VIII) CIT V. HOLCIM INDIA (P) LTD. (272 CTR 282 (DE L)] IX) CIT V. WINSOME TEXTILE INDUSTRIES LTD. (319 ITR 204 P&H) THE LD. A.R. PRAYED BEFORE THE BENCH THAT IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE VARIOUS DECISIONS AS STATED ABOVE THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE MAY BE DISMISSED BY U PHOLDING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE. 8. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSING THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND ALSO THE RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE VARIOUS DECISIONS AS STATED HEREINABOVE, WE FIND THAT THERE ARE MERITS IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. A.R. THAT WHEN THERE IS NO EXE MPT INCOME RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR, NO DISALL OWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D CAN BE MADE. IN THE CASE OF PR. CIT VS. BALLARPUR INDUSTRIES LTD. IN ITA NO.15 OF 2 016 DATED 13.10.2016, THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT H AS HELD THAT NO DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A READ WITH RULE 8D IS REQUIRED ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 5 TO BE MADE WHEN THERE IS NO EXEMPT INCOME. ACCORDI NGLY, THE GROUND NO.1 IS DISMISSED. 9. THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.2 TO 5 IS AGAINST THE DELETION OF DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF INTEREST RS.296.19 CR ORES ON SALES TAX LIABILITY BY LD. CIT(A) AS MADE BY THE AO. 10. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT DURING THE YEAR, TH E ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF RS.296 .19 CRORES ON SALES TAX LIABILITY OF RS. 1895.52 CR UNDERTAKEN FR OM ESSAR OIL LTD. UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT AGAINST THE I NTEREST INCOME OF RS.296.90 CRORES RECEIVED ON ZERO COUPON BONDS OF IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT. LTD. IN THE COMPUTA TION OF INCOME. THE AO, AFTER NOTICING THE SAME DURING TH E ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ISSUED A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE A SSESSEE AS TO WHY THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOW ED AS CLAIMED U/S 57(III) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMI TTED BEFORE THE AO THAT THERE IS A DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN THE INTERES T INCOME AND INTEREST EXPENDITURE HENCE THE SAME IS ALLOWABLE UN DER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT TH E SAID EXPENDITURE WAS INCURRED ON THE SALES TAX LIABILITY UNDERTAKEN FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. THE ASSESSEE DERIVED INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST OF RS.296.90 CRORES DURING THE YEAR FROM ZERO COUPON BONDS OF IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT. L TD. OF RS. 1805.52 CR AGAINST WHICH INTEREST OF RS.296.19 CRO RES WAS PAID TO ESSAR OIL LTD. ON SALES TAX LIABILITY UNDERTAKE N FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS CLAIMED. THE AO CAME TO THE CONCLUSION TH AT THE TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN TWO GROUP CONCERNS WERE ENTERE D INTO TO EVADE THE TAXES AND THEREFORE ARE COLOURABLE TRANS ACTIONS ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 6 ESPECIALLY IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GOPINATHAN 248 ITR 449 AND T HUS DISALLOWED THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE. 11. THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, P ARTLY ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE BY OBSERVING AND HOLDING AS UNDER: 8.3 I HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, COPY OF BALANCE SHEET, PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT AND SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT. O N CAREFULLY PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET AND COMPUTATION OF INCOME, IT IS SEEN THAT APPELLANT HAS SHOWN THE INCOME UNDER THE FOLLOWING HEADS. 1 INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY RS 9,60,71,66 1/- 2 INCOME FROM BUSINESS (-) RS 15,47,79,024/- INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES RS 72,36,6747- GROSS TOTAL INCOME/ TOTAL INCOME RS 5,14,70,689/- ON PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IT IS SEE N THAT ONLY INCOME FROM ASSET HIRING OF RS 72,00,000/- AND BALANCE WRITTEN BACK O F RS 26,296/- ARE OFFERED FOR TAX AS A BUSINESS INCOME. BALANCE RECEIPT IS EITHER SHO WN AS INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY OR INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. ON CAREFULLY PERUSAL OF THE PROFIT & LOSS ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET, IT IS SEEN THAT THE APPE LLANT HAS ACQUIRED THE INVENTORIES OF RS 153,59,95,449/- DURING THE YEAR. TOTAL INVENTORIES AS ON 31.03.2012 IS RS 155,12,01,450/-. THE INVENTORIES C ONTAIN DEBENTURES AND DEEP DISCOUNT BONDS WHICH REGAIN UNSOLD AT THE YEAR END. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT, DURING THE YEAR, THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED THE FINANCE COST OF RS 311,20,00,841/- OUT OF WHICH RS 296,18,97,878; - IS CLAIMED FOR THE EXPENSES U/S 57 OF THE ACT, THAT IS, BALANCE FINANCE COST OF RS.15,01,02,963/- IS CLAIMED AS BUS INESS EXPENSES. IT IS FOUND THAT BECAUSE OF SUCH A HEAVY FINANCE COST THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED A HEAVY BUSINESS LOSS. IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR, THOUGH THE APPELLANT HA S SOLD THE SHARES & SECURITIES OF RS 31.66CR THERE WAS A TOTAL FINANCE COST OF RS 1.4 3 CR ONLY. THE INCREASE IN FINANCE COST IS APPARENTLY ATTRIBUTABLE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING THE INVENTORIES AND NON RECEIPT OF TRADE RECEIVABLE OF RS 301,90,45,296/-. DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ONLY A HEAVY RECEIPT OF INTEREST IS A PPEARING AND NO OTHER RECEIPT IS APPEARING WHICH INDICATES THAT THE TRADE RECEIVABLE IS THE INTEREST RECEIVABLE AND THAT IS RECEIVABLE FROM THE GROUP CONCERN IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT LTD. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THAT AS FAR AS THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT IS CONCERNED FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, FINANCE COST OF RS 15.01 CR IS THE DIRECT COST ATTRIBUTABLE FOR ACQUIRING THE INVENTORY WHICH HAS TO BE CAPITALISED BY THE APPELLANT. BUT THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED IT IN THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, IT CANNOT BE HELD THAT THE PRO FIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT PREPARED BY THE APPELLANT GIVES THE TRUE PROFIT FOR THE YEAR UN DER CONSIDERATION. FURTHER, I FIND MERIT IN THE AO'S CONTENTION THAT THE TRANSACTION B ETWEEN THE GROUP CONCERNS IS A COLOURABLE TRANSACTION. IT IS SEEN THAT ESSAR OIL L IMITED IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO TRANSFER THE SALES TAX LIABILITY. EARLIER, THE SALES TAX LIABILI TY WAS ACQUIRED BY ONE OF THE GROUP ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 7 CONCERN CALLED INDIA SECURITIES LIMITED WHICH IS RE GISTERED AT ESSAR HOUSE' WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED THE SAME TO THE APPELLANT. IT IS SEEN THAT INVESTMENT IS MADE IN THE GROUP CONCERN, THE EOL CAN ALSO INVEST THIS AMOUNT IN THE GROUP CONCERN. SUCH TRANSACTIONS ENTERED INTO BY GROUP CO NCERNS IS DEFINITELY NOTHING BUT A 'COLOURABLE DEVICE' TO AVOID TAX. THEREFORE, THE EXPLANATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT COMPANY IS NOT WHOLLY ACCEPTABLE BUT AT T HE SAME TIME IT CAN NOT BE IGNORED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS INCURRED THE EXPENSE S TO EARN THE INCOME. THEREFORE/ KEEPING IN VIEW THE TOTALITY OF THE CIRC UMSTANCES, IT IS REASONABLE TO CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF RS 15 CR. THEREFORE, AO IS DIRECTED TO DELETE THE BALANCE ADDITION OF RS 281,29,00,0007-. HENCE THE GROUND NO 3 OF THE APPEAL IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE APPELL ANT PARTLY ALLOWED. 12. THE LD. D.R. RELIED HEAVILY ON THE ORDER OF AO AND SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID TRANSACTION WAS DELIBERATEL Y ENTERED INTO BETWEEN TWO GROUP CONCERNS IN ORDER TO CIRCUMVENT T HE TAX LIABILITY. THE LD. D.R. DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PARA 5 OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER WHEREIN IT IS STATED THAT ESSAR OI L LTD. WAS ENTITLED TO COLLECT SALES TAX AND DEFER THE PAYMENT OF THE SAID SALES TAX UP TO 14.08.2020. THE SAID DEFERRED TAX LIABILITY WAS PAYABLE IN SIX INSTALLMENTS STARTING FROM 2021-22. ESSAR OIL LTD. DESIRED TO ASSIGN THE ABOVE SALES TAX LIABILI TY IN FAVOUR OF ANY OTHER ENTITY BY PAYING THE PRESENT VALUE OF SUC H LIABILITY AND THE PRESENT VALUE WAS TO BE WORKED OUT BY DISCOUNTI NG THE SALES TAX LIABILITY AS PER THE DISCOUNTING RATE BASED ON THE YIELD OF GOVERNMENT SECURITIES AND RATE OF INTEREST OFFERED BY THE SCHEDULE BANKS ON THE FIXED DEPOSITS. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO FORCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE LD. A.R. THAT ASSESSEE DESIRED TO HAVE DEFEASANCE OF THE ABOVE T AX LIABILITY. THE LD. D.R. RELIED HEAVILY ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT VS. GOPINATHAN 248 ITR 449 SC AS HAS BEEN RELIED UPON B Y THE AO. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS THE TRANSACTI ON BETWEEN THE TWO GROUP CONCERNS TO EVADE THE TAX LIABILITY A ND IS A COLOURABLE TRANSACTION ESPECIALLY IN VIEW OF THE HO NBLE SUPREME ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 8 COURT DECISION AND THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A) MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE AO MAY BE R ESTORED. 12. THE LD. A.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, SUBMITTED THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A VERY REASONED AND SPEAKING ORDE R. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE SALE TAX SCHEME GRAN TED BY GUJARAT GOVERNMENT, ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS ENTITLED TO COLLECT SALES TAX/VAT AND DEFER THE PAYMENT OF SUCH SALES TAX/VAT WHICH WAS COLLECTED UPTO 14.08.2020. SUBSEQUENT TO 14.08 .2020, THIS DEFERRED TAX LIABILITY WAS PAYABLE TO THE GOVERNMEN T IN SIX EQUAL INSTALLMENTS. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ESSAR OI L LTD. DECIDED TO ASSIGN THE SAID TAX LIABILITY IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE BY PAYING THE PRESENT VALUE OF SUCH LIABILITY WHICH WA S CALCULATED BY DISCOUNTING THE VALUE OF THE LIABILITY. ACCORDI NGLY, THE ASSESSEE VIDE AGREEMENT DATED 31.03.2009 AGREED TO TAKE OVER THE SALES TAX LIABILITY OF ESSAR OIL LTD. FOR A CON SIDERATION OF RS.1805.52 CRORES WHICH WAS DETERMINED TO BE PRESEN T VALUE OF THE LIABILITY AND HAS AGREED THAT THE PAYMENT OF TH E SAID AMOUNT WAS MADE BY THE ESSAR OIL LTD. TO THE ASSESSEE FROM TIME TO TIME. THE ASSESSEE IN ORDER TO MEET THE LIABILITY ON ACCOUNT OF SALES TAX WHICH WOULD ENTAIL UNDER THE SCHEME AND ALSO TO EARN MARGIN ON THE SAID AMOUNT RECEIVED INVESTED T HE AMOUNT RECEIVED OF RS.1805.52 CRORES FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. I N ZERO COUPON BONDS OF IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT. L TD. IN THE MEANTIME THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT DELIVERED A JUDG MENT IN THE CASE FILED BY GUJARAT SALES TAX DEPARTMENT AGAI NST ESSAR OIL LTD. WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS NO T ENTITLED TO THE ABOVE SALES TAX INCENTIVE SCHEME. AS A RESULT OF SAID JUDGMENT, ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS NO LONGER ENTITLED TO THE DEFERMENT ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 9 OF THE SALES TAX LIABILITY AND AS A RESULT THE PA YMENT FOR THE SAME HAD TO BE MADE IMMEDIATELY TO THE GOVERNMENT. THUS AS PER THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 31.3.20019 , E SSAR OIL LTD. DEMANDED RS.1805.52 CRORES BEING MONEY PAID BY IT T O THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH INTEREST. IN ORDER TO MAKE PAYM ENT TO ESSAR OIL LTD, THE ASSESSEE ENCASHED THE ZERO COUPON BOND S OF IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT. LTD. THE A SSESSEE RECEIVED INTEREST INCOME FROM ZERO COUPON BONDS OF RS.296.90 CRORES AND SAME WAS CREDITED TO P&L ACCOUNT. SIMIL ARLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO PAY INTEREST OF RS.296.19 CRORES TO THE ESSAR OIL LTD. WHICH WAS DEBITED TO THE P & L ACCOUNT. IN TH E COMPUTATION OF INCOME THE INCOME WAS OFFERED AS INC OME FROM OTHER SOURCES AND INTEREST EXPENDITURE WAS CLAIMED AGAINST THE SAID INCOME UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT. THE LD. A.R. ARGUED THAT SINCE THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS INVESTED IN THE ZERO COUPON BONDS OF IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AN D SECURITIES PVT. LTD., ANY INTEREST PAYABLE ON THE MONEY RECEI VED FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. IS ALLOWABLE AS DEDUCTION UNDER SECT ION 57(III) OF THE ACT AGAINST THE INTEREST INCOME RECEIVED FROM T HE ZERO COUPON BONDS AS THERE IS A DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN THE AMOUNT RECEIVED FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. AND AMOUNT INVESTED IN ZERO COUPON BONDS OF IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT. L TD. HENCE, INTEREST PAID ON THE SALE TAX LIABILITY TO ESSAR OI L LTD. IS ALLOWABLE AS DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT AGAINST THE INTEREST EARNED FROM THE ZERO COUPON BONDS. TH E LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE RELIANCE OF THE AO ON THE DECISI ON OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GOPINATHAN 248 ITR 449 IS WRONG AS IN THE SAID CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD SURPLUS FUNDS WHICH ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 10 WERE INVESTED IN FIXED DEPOSITS. ON THE SECURITY O F THESE FIXED DEPOSITS, THE ASSESSEE TOOK A LOAN FROM BANK AND PA ID INTEREST. IT WAS UNDER THESE FACTS, THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT INTEREST PAID ON MONEY BORROWED FROM BANK IS NOT AL LOWABLE UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE AC AGAINST THE INTERES T INCOME ON FIXED DEPOSITS. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BORROWE D THE MONEY AND INVESTED IN THE FIXED DEPOSITS, THE LD. A.R. SU BMITTED THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE THERE IS A DIRECT NEXUS BETWEEN TH E AMOUNT OF RS.1805.52 CRORES RECEIVED FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. ON W HICH INTEREST IS PAID TO THE TUNE OF RS.296.19 CRORES AND THE SAI D AMOUNT OF RS.1805.52 CRORES WAS GIVEN TO IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES PVT. LTD. ON WHICH INTEREST TO THE TUNE OF RS.296.19 CRORES WAS EARNED AND HENCE THE INTEREST PAID IS AL LOWABLE DEDUCTION AGAINST THE INTEREST INCOME AS IT IS NOT A CASE WHERE SURPLUS FUNDS WERE LYING WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE SAME WERE INVESTED FOR EARNING INTEREST INCOME. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT DETAILED SUBMISSIONS WERE ALSO MADE BEFORE THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 27.03.2015 WHICH IS FILED AT PAPER BOO K PAGE NO.124 AND LD. CIT(A) HAS REPRODUCED THE SAME IN THE APPEL LATE ORDER AT PAGE NO.3 TO 10. THE LD AR ARGUED THAT IT IS ONLY AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAID SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE, L D. CIT(A) HAS DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST MADE BY THE AO . THE LD. A.R. CONTENDED THAT PRACTICALLY THERE IS NO REAL IN COME IN THAT ENTIRE TRANSACTION AS IS CLEAR FROM THE FACT THAT W HATEVER INCOME WAS EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE HAS A CORRESPONDING LIAB ILITY ATTACHED TO IT AND HENCE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GAINED A NYTHING FROM THE SAID TRANSACTION. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT INCOME RECEIVED FROM IMPERIAL CONSULTANTS AND SECURITIES P VT. LTD. CAN ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 11 NOT BE TAXED WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE EXPENDITURE IN THE FORM OF INTEREST PAYMENT TO ESSAR OIL LTD. THEREFORE, THE CONCLUSION OF THE AO THAT THIS IS A COLOURABLE DEVISE WAS TOTALL Y WRONG AND CAN NOT BE ACCEPTED. THE LD. A.R. FURTHER ARGUED T HAT THE SAID TRANSACTION WAS TREATED AS COLOURABLE DEVISE BY THE AO IN THE LIGHT OF SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COU RT WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS NEVER ENTITLED TO SALES TAX INCENTIVE SCHEME. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT ON T HE DATE OF ENTERING INTO THE TRANSACTION BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND ESSAR OIL LTD., THE LATER WAS VERY MUCH ENTITLED TO THE SAID SCHEME AND SUCH TRANSACTION WAS ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE TWO E NTITIES PRIOR TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS A COMMERCIAL TRANSACTION ENTE RED INTO BY BOTH THE PARTIES AND ONLY SUBSEQUENTLY , ESSAR OIL LTD. BECAME INELIGIBLE FOR THE SAID SCHEME BY A SUBSEQUENT JUDG MENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THE LD. A.R. THEREFORE SUBM ITTED THAT THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COUR T HOLDING THAT ESSAR OIL LTD. IS NOT ENTITLED TO THE SCHEME W OULD NOT MAKE THE TRANSACTION A COLOURABLE DEVISE MORE SO MERELY BECAUSE TRANSACTION WAS BETWEEN GROUP CONCERNS AND THUS THE CONCLUSION OF THE AO IS BASED ON PRESUMPTIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS WITHOUT ANY MATERIAL ON RECORD. 13. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ACCORDING TO T HE ASSESSEE , ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS ENTITLED TO COLLECT THE SALES TA X/VAT AND DEFER THE SAME UP TO 14.08.2020 AND THEREAFTER THE SAID D EFERRED SALES TAX LIABILITY WAS TO BE PAID IN SIX ANNUAL INSTALLM ENTS. ESSAR OIL ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 12 LTD. DECIDED TO ASSIGN THE SALES TAX LIABILITY TO A NOTHER ENTITY AT THE PRESENT VALUE WHICH WAS WORKED OUT AT RS.1805. 52 CRORES. THE SALES TAX LIABILITY WAS ASSIGNED IN FAVOUR OF T HE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED RS. 1,805.52 CR FROM ESSAR O IL LTD. FROM TIME TO TIME. THE SAID MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSES SEE WAS INVESTED IN ZERO COUPON BONDS OF IMPERIAL CONSULTAN TS AND SECURITIES PVT. LTD. IN THE MEANTIME THE HONBLE S UPREME COURT DELIVERED A JUDGMENT IN A CASE FILED BY THE SALES T AX DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT WHEREIN THE HONB LE SUPREME COURT HELD THAT ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS NOT ENTI TLED TO SALES TAX INCENTIVE SCHEME FOLLOWING WHICH THE ESSAR OIL LTD. WAS ASKED TO MAKE THE PAYMENT TO THE GOVERNMENT EXCHEQU ER. AS PER THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN ESSAR OIL LTD. AND THE AS SESSEE THE MONEY WAS TO BE PAID ALONG WITH INTEREST, THUS ASSE SSEE HAD TO PAY INTEREST OF RS.296.19 CRORES TO ESSAR OIL LTD. THE ASSESSEE ENASHED THE BONDS AND RECEIVED INTEREST INCOME ON THE SAID ZERO COUPON BONDS OF RS.296.90 CRORES. THE ASSESSE E CREDITED THE INCOME BY WAY OF INTEREST ON ZERO COUPON BONDS IN THE P&L ACCOUNT WHILE INTEREST PAID WAS CHARGED IN THE P&L ACCOUNT. WHILE MAKING THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME, THE ASSESSE E OFFERED THE SAID INCOME UNDER THE HEAD OF OTHER SOURCES BY CLAIMING INTEREST PAID TO ESSAR OIL LTD. OF RS.296.19 CRORES UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT. AFTER THE EXAMINING THE FACTS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THERE IS A DIRECT NEXUS B ETWEEN THE MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM ESSAR OIL LTD. UPON THE ASSIGNMENT OF SALES TAX LIABILITY AND THEREFORE THE RE IS A NEXUS BETWEEN THE INTEREST RECEIVED FROM THE ZERO COUPON BONDS AND INTEREST LIABILITY WHICH THE ASSESSEE WAS LIABLE T O PAY AS PER THE ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 13 AGREEMENT ON THE SAID ASSIGNED AMOUNT ACCORDINGLY T HE SAME IS ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT. WE HAV E CAREFULLY PERUSED THE DECISION PASSED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GOPINATHAN (SUPRA) AND OBSERVED THAT THE FACTS IN THE CASE AR E DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE. IN THE SAID CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD SURPLUS FUNDS WHICH WERE INVE STED IN FIXED DEPOSITS AND THE ASSESSEE EARNED INTEREST ON SUCH FIXED DEPOSITS. THEREFORE, HONBLE SUPREME COURT HELD TH AT INTEREST PAID ON MONEY BORROWED FROM THE BANK AGAINST THE SE CURITY THE FIXED DEPOSITS IS NOT ALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 57(II I) OF THE ACT. SINCE THE INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF I NTEREST FROM ZERO COUPON BONDS HAD A CORRESPONDING LIABILITY ATT ACHED TO IT. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GAINED ANYTHING FROM THE SAID TRANSACTION AND THUS IT IS INCORRECT TO SAY THAT INTEREST HAS T O BE TAXED WITHOUT ALLOWING DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 57(III). IN OUR OPINION, THE SAID TRANSACTION IS NOT A SHAM TRANSACTION IN V IEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSIGNMENT OF LIABILITY ON ACCOUNT OF SALE S TAX AND VAT HAS TAKEN PLACE AT PRESENT VALUE HAS TAKEN PLACE ON A DATE WHICH WAS PRIOR TO THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPR EME COURT. IT WAS CLEARLY A COMMERCIAL TRANSACTION ENTERED INT O BETWEEN TWO ENTITIES THOUGH RELATED AND THEREFORE NOT COLOURAB LE TRANSACTIONS TO CIRCUMVENT TAX LIABILITY. ACCORDIN GLY, WE HOLD THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED A VERY REASONED AND SPEA KING ORDER WHICH DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY INTERFERENCE AT OUR END. 14. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIS MISSED. ITA NO.7332/M/2016 (ASSESSEES APPEAL) ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 14 15. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINS T THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE AMOUNTING TO RS.15,01,02,963/- ON THE GROUND THAT SAME IS CAPITA L IN NATURE AS THE MONEY WAS UTILIZED FOR PURCHASE OF INVENTORI ES AND THEREFORE REQUIRED TO BE CAPITALIZED DURING THE YEA R. 16. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE TOTAL INVENTO RIES AS ON 31.03.2012 WERE RS.155,12,01,450/-. THE TOTAL FINA NCIAL COST CHARGED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT WAS RS.311,2 0,00,841/- OUT OF WHICH RS.296,18,97,878/- WAS CLAIMED AS EXPE NSE UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT UNDER THE HEAD OTHER SOU RCES AND THE BALANCE OF RS.15,01,02,963/- WAS CLAIMED AS BUSINES S EXPENSES. THE INVENTORIES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPRI SED OF DEBENTURE AND DEEP DISCOUNT BONDS WHICH REMAINED UN SOLD AT THE YEAR END AND THUS ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED HUGE BUS INESS LOSS. IN THE PRECEDING PREVIOUS YEAR THE ASSESSEE HAS SOL D SHARE AND SECURITIES OF RS.31.66 CRORE AND THERE WAS A TOTAL FINANCE COST OF RS.1.30 CRORE ONLY. THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE APPELL ATE PROCEEDINGS, CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT SINCE RS.15,01,02,963/- RELATED TO PURCHASE OF ACQUISITIO N OF INVENTORIES AND THEREFORE HAS TO BE CAPITALIZED AND DIRECTED THE ADDITION TO THIS EXTENT OUT OF TOTAL INTEREST COST CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE P&L ACCOUNT. 17. THE LD. A.R. VEHEMENTLY SUBMITTED BEFORE US THA T THE LD. CIT(A) DISALLOWED THE INTEREST EXPENDITURE OF RS.15 ,01,02,963/- ON THE GROUND THAT SAME WAS REQUIRED TO BE CAPITALI ZED AS THE MONEY WAS UTILISED FOR ACQUIRING STOCKS/INVENTORIES . ACCORDING ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 15 TO THE COUNSEL OF THE ASSESSEE, THE SAID EXPENDITUR E IS ALLOWABLE EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. T HE LD. A.R. POINTED OUT THAT LD. CIT(A) RECORDED A FINDING OF F ACTS THAT SAID INTEREST WAS INCURRED ON BORROWINGS USED FOR ACQUIR ING INVENTORIES WHICH CAN BE VERIFIED FROM THE SCHEDULE OF LONG TERM BORROWINGS IN THE BALANCE SHEET WHEREIN IT IS EVIDE NT THAT ASSESSEE HAS BORROWED RS.145.25 CRORE FROM INDIABUL LS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. DURING THE YEAR AND HAS INV ESTED THE SAME IN THE INVENTORIES. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED TH AT THE MONEY BORROWED WAS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INVENTORIES AND INT EREST PAID ON SUCH BORROWINGS CAN NOT BE CAPITALIZED BUT ALLOWABL E AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. T HE LD. A.R. RELIED ON THE DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF A CIT VS. ADITYA PROPCON (P) LTD. IN ITA NO.762/JP/2012 DATED 30.01. 2014 WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT AMOUNT BORROWED FOR T HE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING INVENTORIES, THEN INTEREST PAID ON THE SAID AMOUNT IS ALLOWABLE AS DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL HAS BEEN UPHELD BY THE RAJASTAN HIGH COURT IN DB ITA NO.82/2 014 & ORS DATED 10.10.2017. THE LD. A.R. THUS PRAYED THAT IN VIEW OF THE SAID RATIO LAID DOWN, THE DISALLOWANCE OF EXPENDIT URE MADE BY THE LD. CIT(A) MAY KINDLY BE DELETED. 18. THE LD. D.R., ON THE OTHER HAND, RELIED HEAVILY ON THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE BY SUBMITTING THAT THE MONEY HAS BEEN BORROWED FROM INDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES LT D. AND WAS USED FOR PURCHASE OF INVENTORIES COMPRISING DEBENT URES AND DEEP DISCOUNT BONDS. THUS, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RIGH TLY CAME TO ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 16 THE CONCLUSION THAT INTEREST TO THAT EXTENT HAS TO BE ADDED TO THAT INVENTORIES AND COULD NOT BE WRITTEN OFF DURI NG THE YEAR. 19. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD INCLUDING THE DE CISIONS CITED BY THE LD. A.R. THE UNDISPUTED FACTS ARE THAT DURI NG THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED INTEREST TO THE TUNE OF RS.311,20,00,841/- WHICH COMPRISED OF RS.296,18,97, 878/- CLAIMED UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT AND BALANC E OF RS.15,01,02,963/- WAS CLAIMED AS BUSINESS EXPENDITU RE. DURING THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE BORROWED MONEY FROM I NDIABULLS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. OF RS.145.25 CRORES WHICH WAS USED FOR PURCHASE OF INVENTORIES IN THE FORM OF DEBENTURES A ND DEEP DISCOUNT BONDS AND THUS INTEREST PERTAINING ON THE LOAN RELATING TO ACQUISITION OF INVENTORY AND STOCKS WAS CHARGED TO THE P&L ACCOUNT AS BUSINESS EXPENDITURE. DURING THE YEAR A SSESSEE ACQUIRED INVENTORIES OF RS.153,59,95,449/- AND THUS TOTAL INVENTORY AT THE YEAR END CAME TO RS.155,12,01,450/ -. THE LD. CIT(A) RECORDED A FINDING OF FACT IN THE ORDER THAT THE SAID LOAN WAS USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ACQUIRING INVENTORIES A ND INTEREST HAS TO BE CAPITALIZED AND THUS CONFIRMED THE DISALL OWANCE TO THE TUNE OF RS.15,01,02,963/- WHICH IN OUR OPINION IS I NCORRECT AS IN THE PRESENT CASE THE LOAN WAS UTILISED FOR PURCH ASE OF INVENTORIES. THERE ARE MERITS IN THE CONTENTIONS O F THE ASSESSEE THAT SAME HAS TO BE ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 36(1)(III ) OF THE ACT AS REVENUE IN NATURE. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS SUP PORTED BY THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL I N THE CASE OF ACIT VS. ADITYA PROPCON (P) LTD. (SUPRA) WHICH HAS BEEN ITA NO.6980/M/2016 ITA NO.7332/M/2016 M/S. ESSAR HOUSE PVT. LTD. 17 CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE RAJASTAN HIGH COURT VIDE O RDER DATED 10.10.2017. WE, THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECT ION 36(1)(III) OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 20. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.04.2019. SD/- SD/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) (RAJESH KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 04.04.2019. * 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.