DCIT CIR 18(2), MUMBAI V. FABWEAR GARMENTS, MUMBAI

ITA 7108/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: 710819914 RSA 2008
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 23-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2008
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: T T JACOB
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJIV M SHAH
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Revenue expenditure
• Section: 143(3); 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH F MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP (AM) AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYAR AGHAVAN (JM) ITA NO. 7108/MUM/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2005-06 THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 18(2), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI-400 012 VS. M/S. FABWEAR GARMENTS, 307, 3 RD FLOOR, TRADE WORLD, B-WING, KAMLA CITY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI-400 013 PAN-AAAEF 1768Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.6292/MUM/2008 ASSESSMENT YEAR- 2005-06 M/S. FABWEAR GARMENTS, 307, 3 RD FLOOR, TRADE WORLD, B-WING, KAMLA CITY, LOWER PAREL, MUMBAI-400 013 PAN-AAAEF 1768Q VS. THE DCIT, CIRCLE - 18(2), PIRAMAL CHAMBERS, PAREL, MUMBAI-400 012 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI SANJIV M. SHAH DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI T.T. JACOB O R D E R PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN (JM) THIS SET OF CROSS APPEAL ONE APPEAL FILED BY THE RE VENUE AND THE OTHER APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER DT. 11.9.2008 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-XVIII FOR THE AS SESSMENT YEAR 2005- 06. ITA NO. 7108/M/08- REVENUES APPEAL 2. THE ASSESSEE IS IN THE BUSINESS OF EXPORT OF MAN UFACTURING AND TRADING GOODS. RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL IN COME OF RS. FABWEAR GARMENTS 2 1,12,66,410/- WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 30.10.20 05. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT 1961. 3. GROUND NO. 1 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS GENERAL IN NATURE. 4. GROUND NO. 2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE READS AS FOLL OWS: IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD . CIT(A) ERRED IN HOLDING THE EXPORT INCENTIVES OF RS. 43468 7/- AND OTHER INCOME OF RS. 25012/- AGGREGATING TO RS. 4596 99/- AS INCOME DERIVED FROM INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80-IB OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 5. THIS ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE SUP REME COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA LTD. VS CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC) WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD AS FOLLOWS: DUTY DRAWBACK RECEIPTS AND DEPB BENEFITS DO NOT FO RM PART OF THE NET PROFITS OF ELIGIBLE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKI NGS FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE DEDUCTION U/S. 80-I/80IA/80 IB OF TH E I.T. ACT, 1961. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE, WE ALLOW THIS GR OUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 6. DURING THE YEAR ASSESSEE HAD DEBITED RS. 22,31,6 23/- FOR THE PAYMENT OF FREIGHT ON EXPORT SALE. DURING THE COUR SE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO RECONCILE THE PA YMENTS VIS--VIS TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THE DET AILS OF TOTAL FREIGHT AS FOLLOWS: SR. NO. NAME AMOUNT 1. AL-CARGO MOVERS INDIA PVT. LTD., 247704 2. AWARD SHIPPING AGENCY INDIA PVT. LTD., 364109 3. TRANS-CARGO SERVICES 1180430 FABWEAR GARMENTS 3 4. SEA BIRDS 181035 5. TRANS WORLD SHIPPING 5435 6. MODERN CARGO SERVICES PVT. LTD. 252910 TOTAL 2231623 7. THE AO HELD THAT OUT OF TOTAL PAYMENT, THE ASSES SEE HAS SUBMITTED THE DECLARATION IN THE CASE OF PARTIES AT S. NOS. 2 & 4 THAT THEY ARE AGENT TO FOREIGN PRINCIPLE AND IN THE CASE OF ITEM NO. 5 TRANS-WORLD SHIPPING THE PAYMENT IS BELOW THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT AND HENCE THE PROVISIONS OF TDS IS NOT APPLICABLE. THE AO FURTHER HELD THAT TH E ASSESSEE FAILED TO SUBMIT ANY EXPLANATION REGARDING NON-DEDUCTION OF T AXES AT SOURCE IN THE CASE OF PARTIES AT SR. NOS. 1,3 & 6 TOTAL PAYME NT TO THEM AT RS. 16,81,044/- IS TO BE ADDED BACK TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. AGGRIEVED ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE TH E LD. CIT(A). BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT THE CIRCULAR NO. 723 DATED 19/09/1995 WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS: THE PAYMENTS TO NON-RESIDENT SHIP OWNERS OR THEIR AGENTS WHO ARE GOVERNED BY PROVISIONS OF SEC. 172, IN THOS E CASES PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C AND 195 FOR DEDUCTION OF TDS DOES NOT APPLY. 9. IT WAS OBSERVED BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE AO HA D CALLED FOR SOME INFORMATION RELATABLE TO THIS ISSUE DURING THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE AR HAD SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE TIME AVAILABLE/OPPORTUNITY FOR FURNISHING THE INFORMATIO N WAS VERY LIMITED AND HENCE THE CONCERNED INFORMATION ON THE ISSUE OF ADD ITION U/S.40(IA) HAS BEEN FILED IN THE COURSE OF APPEAL PROCEEDINGS ONLY . THIS WAS AN ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE LD. C IT(A) IN VIEW OF INADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED BY THE AO TO THE AS SESSEE IN THE COURSE FABWEAR GARMENTS 4 OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. UNDER RULE 46A OF THE I. T. RULES, 1962, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE SO ADMITTED WAS FORWARDED TO TH E AO VIDE THIS OFFICE LETTER NO.CIT(A)XVIII/REM.REPORT/IT.140/07-08 DATED 14/3/2008. AGAINST THE SAME, THE AO SUBMITTED THE REMAND REPOR T ON 27/3/2008. IN THE SAID REPORT, THE AO HAS GIVEN THE FINDING THAT THE PROVISIONS OF TDS WERE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF FREIGHT EXPENSES WITH REFERENCE TO AL- CARGO MOVER INDIA PVT. LTD. THE LD. CIT(A) GAVE TH E RELIEF OF FREIGHT EXPENSES OF RS. 2,47,704/- FOR AL-CARGO MOVER INDIA PVT. LTD. 10. FURTHER THE LD. CIT(A) HELD AS FOLLOWS: REGARDING PAYMENTS TO TRANS-CARGO SERVICES, THE AO HAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PROVIDED NO DETAILS O F THE WORK DONE BY THE TRANS-CARGO SERVICES ON THEIR OWN OR ON BEHA LF OF ANY OTHER AGENCY. A SIMPLE LETTER WHICH ENCLOSES CERTIFICATE U/S.197 ISSUED TO PARTIES WHOSE RELATIONSHIP TO THE ASSESSEE OR TRANS -CARGO SERVICES IS NOT MENTIONED CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS A DECLARATIO N OF ANY SORT. THE AR HAS DRAWN MY ATTENTION THAT IN CASE OF DECLA RATION FILED BY AI CARGO MOVERS STATING THAT THEY ARE SHIPPING AGEN TS OF ECU LINE ABU DHABI LLC UAE WAS DULY ACCEPTED BY THE AO. AS A GAINST THIS, SIMILAR DECLARATION / LETTER BY TRANS INDIA CARGO S ERVICES (THAT THEY ARE ACTING AS CUSTOM CLEARING AGENTS AND BOOKING AG ENTS FOR THE AIR SPACE FOR VARIOUS EXPORT SHIPMENTS OF THE APPELLANT ) WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE AO. THE AR HAS POINTED OUT THAT THE AO HAS TAKEN ON RECORD THE COPIES OF CERTIFICATES OF SHIPPER DUR ING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ALSO AND HAS NOT ASKED FOR ANY FURTHER SUBMISSION IN RESPECT OF THE SAME. THE AR HAS ALSO POINTED OUT TH AT IN OTHER CASES, THE AO HAS ALLOWED THE EXPORT FREIGHT ON THE BASIS OF DECLARATION ALONE AND NO FURTHER DETAILS WERE SOUGHT AT THE TIM E OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. THE PHOTO COPIES IN THIS REGARD ARE SH OWN AND ENCLOSED BY THE AR. I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE ARGUMENTS OF THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE REMAND REPORT PLACED AGAIN ST THE SUBMISSION OF THE AR ON THIS GROUND. I OBSERVE THAT THE AO HAS NOT ADOPTED UNIFORM STAND IN THE MATTER OF ACCEPTANCE. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO ADOPT THE SAME CRITERIA AS HAS BEEN SHO WN IN CASE OF AI CARGO MOVERS AND MANY OTHER SIMILAR CASES IN THE CO URSE OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS / REMAND PROCEEDINGS. I UNDE RSTAND THAT WHEN THIS UNIFORM CRITERIA IS ADOPTED, THE APPELLAN T WOULD BE ENTITLED FOR THE DEDUCTION OF EXPORT FREIGHT PAYMEN T OF FABWEAR GARMENTS 5 RS.11,80,430/- TO TRANS CARGO. HOWEVER, THE ADDITIO N MADE BY THE AO IN RESPECT OF MODERN CARGO SERVICES IS SUSTAINED . THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS THUS PARTLY ALLOWED. 11. AGGRIEVED, REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND R AISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: III. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE TH E LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS. 1180430/- MAD E U/S. 40(A)(IA) IN RESPECT OF FREIGHT CHARGES PAID TO M/S . TRANS CARGO SERVICES IV. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT DOCUMENTS I SSUED DOES NOT BEAR THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AND FREIGHT EXPEN SES PAID AT RS. 1180430/- TO TRANS CARGO SERVICES ON WHICH N O TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. 12. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SHRI T.T. J ACOB RELIED ON THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE DEPARTMENT. 13. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SHRI SANJIV M. SHAH ON THE OTHER HAND TOOK US THROUGH THE PAPER BOOK AND POINTED OUT THAT WITH RESPECT TO TRANS CARGO SERVICES DETAILS OF FREIGHT ON EXPOR T SALES HAS BEEN PRODUCED AT PAGE 37 OF THE PAPER BOOK. AT PAGE 39 OF THE PAPER BOOK THE LETTER DT. 26.2.2008 FROM TRANS (I) CARGO SERVICES ADDRESSED TO FABWEAR GARMENTS WHICH IS AS FOLLOWS: TO: FABWEAR GARMENTS, MUMBAI DEAR SIR, AS REQUESTED BY YOU WE ARE ENCLOSING HEREWITH CERT IFICATE U/S. 197, ISSUED BY INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY IN FAVOUR OF VARIOUS AIR LINES FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TDS ON AIR FREIGHT. IN THIS REGARDS, WE WOULD LIKE TO INFORM YOU THAT W E ARE ACTING AS CUSTOM CLEARING AGENT AND BOOKING THE AIR SPACE FOR YOUR VARIOUS EXPORT SHIPMENTS. THE FREIGHT AMOUNT WHICH WE HAVE FABWEAR GARMENTS 6 RECOVERED BY YOU AND SAME AMOUNT PAID TO AIR LINES. THIS AMOUNT IS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT THE TDS. THANKING YOU, YOURS FAITHFULLY, (FOR TRANS (I) CARGO SERVICES) 15. IN SHORT, THE CERTIFICATE/DECLARATION FROM THE SHIPPING COMPANIES WHICH WAS SUBMITTED WITH RESPECT TO THE FREIGHT PAI D TO PARTIES AS APPEARING IN S. NOS. 2 TO 6 HAS ALSO BEEN GIVEN WIT H RESPECT TO TRANS(I) CARGO SERVICES AND HENCE RIGHTLY HELD BY THE LD. CI T(A), THE AO SHOULD HAVE TAKEN UNIFORM STAND AND ADOPTED THE SAME PRINC IPLE THAT IF THE PAYMENTS ARE MADE TO NON-RESIDENT SHIP OWNERS OR TH EIR SHIPPING AGENTS WHO ARE GOVERNED BY THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 172 AND ACCORDINGLY PROVISIONS OF SEC. 192C AND 195 FOR DEDUCTION OF TD S DOES NOT APPLY TO THEM. HENCE WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN ALLOWING THE EXPORT FREIGHT PAYMENT OF RS. 11,80,430/- TO TRANS CARGO SERVICES. THEREFORE THESE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT AR E DISMISSED. 16. GROUND NOS. 5 & 6 RAISED BY THE REVENUE READ AS FOLLOWS: V) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE SUNDRY BALANCES WRITTEN OFF AMOUNTING TO RS. 4,03,507/- AS NON-REVENUE EXPENDITURE BESIDES THE PROOF OF GENUINENESS OF THE CLAIM. VI) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING THE LOSS OF RS. 8,28,312/- AS REVENUE EXPENDITURE WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT T HAT FAULT IN SUPPLY OF GOODS TO AEPC AND CONSEQUENTIAL FORFEITURE OF EMD IS DUE TO ATTRIBUTABLE TO ASSESSE ES OWN NEGLIGENCE. 17. THE A.O. IN PARA 3 HAS GIVEN DETAILS AND ALSO R EASONS FOR DISALLOWING THE SAME BY HOLDING THAT THESE EXPENSES ARE NOT UNDER THE PURVIEW OF EXPENSES TO BE CLAIMED AS REVENUE EXPEND ITURE. THE ASSESSEE FABWEAR GARMENTS 7 HAS GIVEN ADVANCES TO FABRIC MANUFACTURERS AND SUPP LIERS FOR PROCURING FABRICS FOR MANUFACTURING GARMENTS. THEY HAVE ALSO GIVEN EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT TO APPAREL EXPORT PROMOTION COUNCIL WHICH W AS FORFEITED FOR NON- PERFORMANCE OF EXPORT OBLIGATIONS. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT ADVANCES AND EMD DEPOSITS WERE GIVEN FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND HENCE THEY ARE OF REVENUE NATURE, ALLOWABLE U/S.28. 18. BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEES REPRESENTA TIVE HAS REFERRED THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CASE: A.W. FIGGIS & CO. P. LTD. V CIT 254 ITR 63 (CAL) NANDAN MATHURADAS & CO. V. CIT 35 ITR 461 (BOM) CIT V. LAXMI MILLS CO. LTD. 135 ITR 203 (MAD) CIT V. SUGAR DEALER 100 ITR 424 (ALL) JWALAPRASAD RADHAKISHAN V. CIT 79 ITR 530 (ALL) 19. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD AS FOLLOWS: I FIND FORCE IN ASSESSEES SUBMISSIONS AND IN VIEW OF THE LEGAL DECISIONS, I HOLD THAT THE EXPENSES OF RS.12, 15,234/- ARE INCIDENTAL TO CARRYING ON BUSINESS AND DIRECT THE A .O. TO TREAT THESE EXPENSES AS REVENUE EXPENSES U/S. 28 OF THE I.T. AC T, 1961. 20. AGGRIEVED REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD. DR RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 21. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ITAT MUMBAI E BENCH IN THE CASE OF TEXPORT SYNDICATE ( I) LTD., VS JCIT IN ITA NO. 753/M/09 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 WHERE THE ITAT HAS CONSIDERED THE DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS AHMEDABAD COTTON MFG. CO. LTD. 205 ITR 163 AND THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SURYA MILLS LTD. 123 ITR 654 AND HELD AS FOLLOWS: WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AMOUNT PAID BY THE ASS ESSEE TO THE AEPC FOR NOT FULFILLING THE QUOTA CONDITIONS IS NOT IN THE NATURE OF PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF ANY LAW, BUT THE SAME IS T HE AMOUNT PAID AS COMPENSATORY FOR NOT FULFILLING THE QUOTA CONDITION S AND ALLOWABLE FABWEAR GARMENTS 8 U/S. 37 OF THE I.T. ACT. THE PAYMENT HAS DIRECT NE XUS WITH THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREFORE, INCURRED I N RELATION TO THE EXERCISE AND PERFORMANCE OF THE BUSINESS OBLIGATION OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT IN ANY VIOLATION OF STATUTE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ON THIS ISSUE AND AL LOW THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO ORDI NATE BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE ALLOW THE DEPOSIT FORFEITED BY AEPC DUE TO THE DEFAULT OF THE ASSESSEE AS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE AMOUNT PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE AEPC FOR NOT FULFILLING THE QUOTA CONDITIONS IS NOT IN THE NATURE OF PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF ANY LAW, BUT THE SAME IS T HE AMOUNT PAID AS COMPENSATORY FOR NOT FULFILLING THE QUOTA CONDITION S AND ALLOWABLE U/S. 37 OF THE I.T. ACT. 22. WITH RESPECT TO THE ADVANCE GIVEN TO THE SUPPLI ERS, WE ALLOW THE SAME RELYING ON THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF CIT VS LAKSHMI MILL CO. 135 ITR 203. THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN ADVANCES TO THE SU PPLIERS NAMELY MILLS WHO HAVE TO GIVE THE ASSESSEE RAW MATERIALS FOR MA NUFACTURING GARMENTS. THE NON SUPPLY OF MATERIAL IS IN THE COU RSE OF ASSESSEES BUSINESS AND IS TO BE TREATED AS A TRADING LOSS. HE NCE THESE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 23. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS PARTLY ALLOWED. ITA NO. 6292/MUM/2008- A.Y. 2005-06 24. THE LD. CIT(A) HAD ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION OF EX PORT FREIGHT PAYMENT WITH RESPECT TO S. NOS. 1 TO 5 OF THE CHAR T. THE LD. CIT(A) DISALLOWED AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE A O IN RESPECT OF MODERN CARGO SERVICES PVT. LTD. AMOUNTING TO RS. 2 ,52,910/-. 25. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AGGRIEVED HAS FILED BEFORE US AND SUBMITTED THAT DTA AGREEMENT HAS TO BE EXAMINED AND SUBMITTED THAT IT FABWEAR GARMENTS 9 WAS NOT TRADE AND PART OF SALE PRICE HENCE HE REQUE STED THAT THE MATTER SHOULD BE SENT BACK FOR VERIFICATION OF THE PLACE O F EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE DEDUCTION OF FREIGHT CHAR GES. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THE INVOICE WITH RESPECT TO MODERN CARGO SERVICES PVT. LTD AND THE AIRWAY BILL. HOWEVER, IN THE ABSENCE OF CE RTIFICATE U/S. 197 WHICH HAD BEEN PRODUCED IN ALL OTHER CASES THE REAS ONING GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE CERTIFICATE COULD HAVE BEEN G IVEN BY THE ASSESSEE AS HE HAD DONE WITH RESPECT TO OTHER FREIGHT CHARGES, APPEARS TO BE CORRECT. WE CONFIRM THE ADDITION OF RS.2,52,910 BEING PAYMEN T OF FREIGHT ON EXPORT SALES MADE TO MODERN CARGO PVT. LTD., FOR NO N DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE U/S. 40A(IA) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 26. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 30 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2011 SD/- SD/- (P.M. JAGTAP) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL M EMBER MUMBAI, DATED 30 TH JUNE, 2011 RJ COPY TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT-CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-CONCERNED 5. THE DR F BENCH TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, I.T.A.T, MUMBAI FABWEAR GARMENTS 10 DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON: . 0 6 . 201 1 SR. PS/PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR: .0 6 .2011 ______ SR. PS/PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER: _________ ______ JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK: _________ ______ SR. PS/PS 8. 9. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO AR _________ ______ 10 . DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER: _________ ______