LEHMAN BROTHERS ADVISORS P.LTD, MUMBAI V. ASST CIT CIR 6(3), MUMBAI

ITA 7722/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3114 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 9 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: K
• Next Hearing Date: 30-04-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K CHAND
• Keywords: Transfer pricing; International transaction; Initiation of penalty proceedings
• Section: 234B; 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL K BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 7722/M/2012 (AY: 2008 - 2009 ) LEHMAN BROTHERS ADVISERS PRIVATE LIMITED, C/O. KPMG INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, LODHA EXCELUS, 1 ST FLOOR, APOLLO MILLS COMPOUND, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI - 400011. / VS. ACIT CIRCLE 6(3), R.NO.522, 5 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI - 400 020. ./ PAN : AABCL2172N ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MS. KARISHMA PHATARPHEKAR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N.K. CHAND, CIT - DR / DATE OF HEARING : 16.09 .2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 .09.2015 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 28.2.2012 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL (DRP) - I, MUMBAI DATED 28.9.2012 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008 - 2009 READ WITH ORDER S OF THE TPO DATED 27.10.2011 AND 17.10.2012. IN THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS WHICH READ AS UNDER: GROUND 1 - TRANSFER PRICING AD JUSTMENT RELATING TO INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTION OF PROVISION OF NON BINDING ADVISORY AND SUPPORT SERVICES OF RS. 207,049,505/ - 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LEARNED TRANSFER PRICING OFFICER ( ' TPO ' ) AND THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER ( ' AO ' ) UNDER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON'BLE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PANEL ('DRP') ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS. 207 , 049,505 IN RELATION TO PROVISION OF ADVISORY AND SUPPORT SERVICES BY THE APPELLANT BASED ON THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER X OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 ( ' THE ACT'). 2. THE LEARNED AOITPO UNDER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON ' BLE DRP ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN DISREGARDING THE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE APPELLANT REJECTED THE BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS AND COMPARABLE COMPANIES SELECTED BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT SUCH SELECTION WAS BASED ON CONTEMPORANEOUS DATA AND THE TRANSFER PRICING STUDY REPORT PREPARED AND MAINTAINED AS PER SECTION 920 OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 100 OF THE INCOME - TAX RULES , 1962 ( ' THE RULES ' ). 2 3. THE LEARNED AO/TPO UNDER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON ' BLE DRP ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN CONDUCTING A FRESH BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS USING NON CONTEMPORANEOUS DATA . 4. THE LEARNED AO/TPO UNDER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON ' BLE DRP ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LA W IN SELECTING MOTILAL OSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED AS ONE OF THE COMPARABLE COMPANIES , WHICH IS FUNCTIONALLY NOT COMPARABLE TO THE APPELLANT AND THEREFORE CANNOT BE CONSIDERED IN THE COMPARABLE SET . 5. THE LEARNED AO / TPO UNDER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON ' BLE DRP ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN REJECTING THE USE OF MULTIPLE YEAR DATA BY THE APPELLANT . 6. THE LEARNED TPO ERRED AND THE HON ' BLE DRP FURTHER ERRED IN UPHOLDING IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE TPO OF REJECTING THE WITHOUT PREJUDIC E CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT TO PROVIDE THE BENEFIT / REDUCTION OF 5 PERCENT FROM THE ARITHMETIC MEAN AS PROVIDED IN PROVISO TO SECTION 92C(2) OF THE ACT , WHILE DETERMINING THE ARM 'S LENGTH PRICE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. GROUND 2: SHORT GRANT OF CREDIT FOR TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE ('TDS') ON THE FACT S AND IN THE CIRCUM S T A NCE S OF THE C A S E AND IN LAW , THE LEARNED AO HAS ERRED IN GRANTING T DS CREDIT OF RS 6 , 804 , 785 AS AGAINST THE TOS CREDIT OF RS 6 , 846 , 105 AS CLAIMED IN THE RETURN OF INC O ME BY THE APPELL A NT . GROUND 3: LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234A OF THE ACT CONSEQUENT TO THE GROUNDS MENTIONED ABOVE , THE APPELLANT PRAYS BEFORE THE HON ' BLE ITAT TO DIRECT THE AO TO DELETE THE INTEREST LEVIED UNDER S ECTION 234A OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS . 2,199 , 068 . GROUND 4: LEVY OF EXCESS INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT CON S EQUENT TO THE GROUNDS MENT I ONED ABOVE , THE APPELLANT PRAYS BEFORE THE HON ' BLE ITAT TO D I RECT THE AO TO DELETE THE INTEREST LEVIED UNDER S ECTION 234B OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 6 , 719 , 375 . GROUND 5: LEVY OF EXCESS INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234D OF THE ACT CONSEQUENT TO THE GROUNDS MENTIONED A BOVE, THE APPELLANT PRAYS BEFORE THE HON ' BLE IT AT TO DIRECT TH E AO TO DELETE THE INTEREST LEVIED UNDER S ECTION 2340 OF THE ACT OF RS . 5 , 979 , 965 GROUND 6 - INITIATION OF PENALTY PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) THE LEARNED AO ERRED I N INITIATING PENALT Y PROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 271(1)( C) OF THE ACT . 2. BRIEFLY STATED RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING NON - BINDING ADVISORY AND SUPPORT SERVICES TO THE ASSOCIATED ENTERPRISE (AE) NAMED LEHMAN BROTHERS GROUP ENTITIES. THE OP/TC FOR THE ASSESSEE IS 20.93 AT THE ENTITY LEVEL. IN THIS REGARD, AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUB MITTED THAT THE CASE IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CARLYLE INDIA ADVISORS (P) LTD VS. DCIT [2014] 43 TAXMANN.COM 184 (MUMBAI - TRIB), DATED 7.2.2014. EXPLAINING HOW THE CASE IS COVERED, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT TPO SELECTED MOTILAL OSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PRIVATE LTD (MOIAPL) AS ONE OF THE COMPARABLES IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE SAID COMPANY IS FINANCIAL DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF THE ASSESSEE. THE TPO REJECTED ALL THE COMPARABLES SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE T P STUDY AND SELECTED 3 DIFFERENT COMPARABLES TO BENCH MARK THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS MOIAPL WITH OP/TC MARGIN AT 72.33%. EXPLAINING HOW MOIAPL IS DIFFERENT, LD COUNSEL FOR THE 3 ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF THE SAID MOIAPL AT PAGE 13 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME IS ENGAGED IN MULTIPLE BUSINESS FUNCTIONS SUCH AS CAPITAL MARKETING BUSINESS, STRUCTURED FINANCE TEAMS ETC., WHICH IS ENTIRE DISSIMILAR TO THE FUNCTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. BRINGING OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE 18 OF THE PAPER BOOK PERTAINING THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF MOIAPL, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE READ OUT PARA 1.13 RELATING TO THE SEGMENT REPORTING AND MENTIONED THAT ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN SINGLE SEGMENT AND THERE ARE NO SEPARATE REPORTABLE SEGMENTS AS DEFINED IN AS - 17 . FURTHER, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION THAT THE SAID COMPANY MOIAPL WAS ANALYSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN ADJUDICATING THE APPEALS OF THE CARLYLE INDIA ADVISORS (P) LTD (SUPRA). IN THIS REGARD, LD CO UNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE READ OUT PARA 12 OF THE SAID TRIBUNALS ORDER DATED 7.2.2014, WHICH IS RELEVANT FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS ANALYSED THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF THE MOIAPL AS WELL AS THE 23 ASSIGNMENTS REPORTED BY THE SAID COMPANY, AND HELD THAT THE MOIAPL IS ENGAGED IN THE MULTIPLE AND DIVERSIFIED ACTIVITIES, THEREFORE, THE SAID COMPANY IS DISSIMILAR WITH THAT OF THE COMPANY IS HAVING FUNCTION OF NON - BINDING SERVICES OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE SAME IS DISQUALIFIED FOR BENCHM ARKING THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD CIT FOR THE REVENUE BROUGHT OUR ATTENTION TO PAGES 15 TO 17 OF THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS OF THE MOIAPL, LD DR SUBMITTED THAT DESPITE THE DIVERSIFIED FUNCTIONS, THE SAID COMPANY CATEGORISED THE REC EIPTS UNDER THE HEAD ADVISORY FEES AS EVIDENT FROM THE SCHEDULE - J TO ANNUAL ACCOUNTS. THEREFORE, THE FACT OF DIVERSIFIED ACTIVITIES IS NOT EVIDENT FROM THE DATA AVAILABLE IN THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS. IN REPLY TO THE SAME, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DEMONST RATED THAT THOUGH THE RECEIPTS ARE CATEGORIZED UNDER THE HEAD ADVISORY FEES THE SAID FEES IS EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM DIVERSIFIED ACTIVITIES AS MENTIONED ABOVE. THEREFORE, THE SAID MOIAPL IS FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT AS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CARLYLE INDIA ADVISORS (P) LTD (SUPRA). CONSEQUENTLY, THE SAID MOIAPL IS DISQUALIFIED TO BE CONSIDERED FOR BENCHMARKING THE IMPUGNED INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES ON THE LIMITED ISSUE OF IF THE MOIAPL IS A GOOD COMPARAB LE AND WHETHER IT PASSED THE FUNCTIONAL TEST. IN THIS REGARD, WE EXAMINED THE DIRECTORS REPORT PLACED ON PAGE 13 OF THE PAPER BOOK AND THE 4 FOLLOWING IS REPORTED BY THE DIRECTORS UNDER THE HEADING REVIEW OF OPERATIONS AND FUTURE OUTLOOK, WHICH READS AS UNDER: TH E MARKET FOR THE SE R V I CES OF THE COMPANY I S BUOYANT AND TH E COMP A NY MAD E A QU ANTUM J UMP I N BU SI NE SS DURING THE YEAR 2007 - 08 . ON THE W H OLE, 23 ASS IG NMENTS W ERE COMPLET E D SUCCE S S F U L LY IN TH E YE A R AS AGAINS T 14 C O M P LE T E D I N THE PREVIOUS YEAR . INCOM E FROM CROSS BORD E R M&A A : T I V I T Y AND THE RELATED F I N ANCI NG SO LU TI ON S HA S BEEN TH E L AR G ES T C ONTR I BUTO R TO THE REVENUE M I X DURING THE YEAR . TH E TEAM SIZ E HAS N O W I N C R E AS E D TO 3 0 AND T HE R E IS A GOO D BL E ND O F RELATIONSH I P MANAGERS , PRODU C TS S PEC I A LI ST A ND SE C TOR E X PERT . SPEC I F I CALL Y, THE KNOW LE DG E A N D E XPERT I SE IN THE I NDUSTRY AREAS OF REAL ESTATE , OIL & GAS, I NFORMATION TECHNOLOGY , ST EE L AND POWER HA V E BEEN S TR E N G TH E N ED . - .. THE CAP I TAL MARKETS BU S IN E SS G A I NED MOM E NTUM DUR I NG THE Y E A R D E R IV I NG ITS SYNERGY F ROM DIS T RI BUT IO N T EA M AT MOTILAL OSWAL SECURITIES L I M I TED . THE COMPAN Y ' WAS RANK E D AS NUMB E R O N E I N BLOOMB ER G R ANK ING FO R Q L P BU SI NE SS DUR I NG THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH , 2008 . THE COMPANY HAS BEEN AB LE T O O R IG I NATE AND ST R UCTUR E H I GH QUAL I TY DEALS IN PRIVATE EQUITY BUS I NESS AND , I S HOPEFUL THAT THE SAME TREND WOULD CONT I NU E I N TH E COM IN G Y EAR . C L I EN T S HA VE APP R EC I ATED THE CAPABIL I TY OF THE STRUCTURED FINANCE TEAM AND I T R E MAINS A ST R ONG S E LLING PROPOSITION F O R T HE COMPANY TO S TRENGTH E N I TS POS I T I ON IN THE MA R KET P LA CE AND TO BE AB LE TO CR O S S S ELL ITS S ERVI CES ACROS S THE CL IE NT S AND IND U S T R Y S EC TO R S . TH E F I NANCIAL MARKET S HAVE SEEN AN UNPREC E D E NT E D TURM OIL OVE R TH E L AS T T H R EE M ONTHS WITH B O TH E QU I T Y AND C R EDI T MA R KETS BEING UNSTABLE A ND I N A STAT E OF UNCERTAINTY . THE M A RK E T S ITUATION WOULD H AV E IMPAC T ON T HE CA PITAL MA R K E T S BUSINESS OF TH E COMPANY I N THE COM I NG YEA R . AT TH E SA M E T I M E , T HE L I Q UI D I T Y CRUN CH AND RE - V A LUATION OF A SSETS A C R OS S THE BOARD GLOBALLY HAS OPENED UP OPPORTUN IS T I C BU YI NG AND S EL LI NG P OSSI B I LITIES FOR O U R C L IENTE L E IN T HE IN D U STRY AND FINANCIAL MARKETS. THE TEAM HA S A GOOD COMBINAT I ON OF SK I LL S E T AND K N O W LE DGE TO AD DRESS T HE C HAN G E IN THE MARK E T CONDIT I ONS . THE COMPANY E X P E CTS A LARGER FLOW OF TRAN SAC TI O N S IN TH E PRODUCT A REAS OF BUSINESS A N D FINANCIAL RE S TRU C T U R I NG , PRIVATE EQUI TY HAV E - OFFS SH ARE H O LD ER VA LU E C R EATIO N TH RO UGH BUY - BACK/SELL - OUTS AND MERGERS. 5. FROM THE ABOVE IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE SAID COMPANY MOIAPL HAS UNDERTAKEN 23 ASSIGNMENTS SUCCESSFULLY IN THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. MAJOR PORTION OF THE INCOME IS EARNED BY MOIAPL OUT OF CROSS BORDER ACTIVITY SERVICES AND RELATED FINANCIAL SERVICES. THE CAPITAL MARKET BUSINESS IS ONE OF THE SOURCE3S OF THE ADVISORY FEES EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE. ASSESSEE HAS ALSO EARNED FEES OUT OF ASSESSEES CAPABILITY OF THE STRUCTURED FINANCE TEAMS, FINANCIAL MARKETS, IE BOTH EQUITY AND CREDIT MARKET, IS ANOTHER SOURCE OF INCOME FOR T HE ASSESSEE. THESE FUNCTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE ANALYZED BY THE TRIBUNAL DURING THE PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF CARLYLE INDIA ADVISORS (P) LTD (SUPRA). THE DETAILS OF THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THIS REGARD ARE MENTIONED IN PARA 12 OF THE SAID TRIBU NALS ORDER (SUPRA) AND THE SAME IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 5 12. .......... THE ONLY DISPUTE IS WHETHER MOTILAL OSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PVT LTD CAN BE CONSIDERED AS A COMPARABLE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF ALP. A PERUSAL OF THREE COMPARABLES CONSIDERED BY THE TPO SHOWS THAT M/S. FUTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS LTD HAS OPERATIVE PROFIT AT 21.79% WHEREAS OPM OF MOTILAL LSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PVT LTD IS 72.33%. THE COMPARABLES USED BY THE TPO THEMSELVES ARE SHOWING EXTREME OPM. A PERUSAL OF THE DIRECTORS REPORT OF MOTILAL OSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PVT LTD SHOWS THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE SAID COMPANY HAS COMPLETED 23 ASSIGNMENTS SUCCESSFULLY AS AGAINST 14 COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING YEAR. A CLOSE LOOK AT THE FINANCIAL STATEM ENTS OF THE SAID COMPANY SHOW THAT THE INCOME FROM OPERATIONS HAVE BEEN SHOWN ONLY AS ADVISORY FEES WHEREAS IT IS ADMITTEDLY AN UNDISPUTED FACTS THAT THE SAID COMPANY IS ENGAGED IN DIVERSIFIED ACTIVITIES. SEGMENTAL REPORTING IS NOT AVAILABLE. PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT APPEARS TO BE ONLY OF CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNTS. THE SAID COMPANY IS REGISTERED WITH SEBI AS A MERCHANT BANKER AND THE DIRECTORS REPORT SHOW THAT IT IS INTO TAKEOVER ACQUISITIONS, DISINVESTMENTS ETC. IN THE ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC DATA IT IS NOT PO SSIBLE TO MAKE COMPARISON. IT CAN THEREFORE BE SAFELY SAID THAT THE SAID COMPANY BEING INTO MERCHANT BANKING AND CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS A COMPARABLE. WE, ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THE AO NOT TO CONSIDER MOTILAL OSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PVT LTD AS A COMPARABL E FOR THE DETERMINATION O F ALP AND RE - DETERMINE THE ARMS LENGTH PRICE EXCLUDING MOTILAL OSWAL INVESTMENT ADVISORS PVT LTD [ AS PER THE FINDINGS] AND INCLUDING M/S. IDC [AS PER THE DIRECTIONS OF THE DRP] I THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 92C(2) R.W. S 92C(2A) OF THE ACT. GROUND NO.4.1 AND GROUND NO.9 ARE ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 6. THE CONTENTS OF ABOVE EXTRACTED PARA HIGHLIGHTS THE FACT THAT THE MOIAPL IS INTO MERCHANT BANKING, AND THEREFORE, IS FUNCTIONALLY DIFFERENT TO THAT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF NON - BINDING ADVISORY SERVICES. THEREFORE, IN OUR OPINION, THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE FUNCTION OF NON - BINDING ADVISORY SERVICES WHEREAS MOIAPL IS INTO THE MERCHANT BANKING, CAPITAL MARKETS, FINANCE MARKETS ETC. THEREFORE, WE FIND THE MOIAPL IS FUNCTIONALLY DISSIMILAR AND THEREFORE, THE SAME SHOULD BE EXCLUDED FOR BENCHMARKING THE INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS. ACCORDINGLY, AO / TPO IS DIRECTED TO EXCLUDE THE SAME. THUS, GROUND NO. 1 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED IN FAVOU R OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. RE GARDING THE CORPORATE AND OTHER ISSUES RAISED IN GROUND NOS. 2 TO 6 , LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT THE SAME CAN BE DISMISSED EITHER AS GENERAL OR A DIRECTION IS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN TO THE AO / TPO FOR ATTENDING TO THE APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ACCORDINGLY, DIRECT THE AO TO ATTEND TO THE SAID RECTIFICATION APPLICATION IN A TIME BOUND MANNER AND DISPOSE IT OF AS PER THE LAW. ACCORDINGLY, THE CORPORATE ISSUES RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE REMAN DED TO THE FILE OF THE AO ALONG WITH THE SAID RECTIFICATION APPLICAT ION. THUS, THE GROUND NOS.2 TO 6 ARE ADJUDICATED PROTANTO. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 6 ORDER PRONOUNC ED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 0 T H SEPTEMBER, 2015. S D / - S D / - (SAKTIJIT D EY) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 3 0 .9 .2015 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / 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 . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI