JAIKISHAN S. VASWANI, MUMBAI V. DCIT CIR 12(2), MUMBAI

ITA 9052/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87944 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Next Hearing Date: 01-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SACHIDANAND DUBEY
• Assessee Lawyers: HARI S RAHEJA
• Keywords: Business income; Rule of consistency
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL I , BENCH MUMBAI , BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA , A M & SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO , J M ITA NO. 9052 / MUM/20 1 0 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 7 - 0 8 ) MR. JAIKISHAN S. VASWANI, 71, MAKER TOWERS, L BLOCK, CUFFE PARADE, MUMBAI - 400 005 VS. DCIT, CIR.12(2), MUMBAI PAN/GIR NO. : A DZPV 0486 F ( APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARI S. RAHEJA /REVENUE BY : SHRI SACHIDANAND DUBEY DATE OF HEARING : 1 ST JANUARY , 201 5 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7 TH JANUARY , 201 5 O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA ( A .M.) : THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), DATED 11 - 11 - 2010 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 0 8 , IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE I.T. A CT. 2 . THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF ASSESSEE RELATES TO CIT(A)S ACTION IN CONFIRMING THE AOS ACTION OF TREATING SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS AS BUSINESS INCOME. 3 . RIVAL CONTENTIONS HAVE BEEN HEARD AND RECORD PERUSED. FROM THE RECORD, WE FOUND THAT ASSESSEE IS AN I NDIVIDUAL NON - RESIDENT INDIAN SETTLED IN JEDDAH SINCE MORE THAN 30 YEARS. THE ASSESSEE WAS HAVING ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 2 INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, DIVIDEND INCOME, PERQUISITES FROM PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY AND CAPITAL GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES IN INDIA. ASSESSEE WAS INVESTING IN SHARES SINCE LAST 5 - 6 - YEARS AND WAS CLAIMING DIVIDEND INCOME AND CAPITAL GAIN THEREON. IN ALL THE EARLIER YEARS, THE CAPITAL GAIN DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED, HOWEVER, IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. 2007 - 08, THE AO HELD THAT AS SESSEE HAS NO OTHER BUSINESS IN INDIA, THEREFORE, FULLY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PURCHASE AND SALE OF SHARES, THEREFORE, GAIN ARISING ON SALE OF SUCH SHARES WAS LIABLE TO BE TAXED AS BUSINESS INCOME. HE ALSO STATED THAT DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE WAS INDULGED IN AN AVERAGE OF ONE TRANSACTION IN EVERY THREE DAYS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALLEGED TO HAVE EARNED LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 30,06,635/ - AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS.1,07,47,320/ - . ACCORDI NGLY HE HELD THAT SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN ARISING OUT OF SALE OF SHARES WAS ADVENTURE IN NATURE OF TRADE, LIABLE TO BE TAXED AS BUSINESS INCOME. BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO AND ASSESSEE IS IN FURTHER APPEAL BEFORE US. 4 . WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL CONTENTIONS, GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND FOUND FROM THE RECORD THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND NON - RESIDENT INDIAN SETTLED IN JEDDAH SINCE MORE THAN 30 YEARS AND DOING BUSINESS AT JEDDAH. NOT ONLY THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE VARIOUS INVESTMENTS IN HOUSE PROPERTY AND BANK FDR BUT ALSO INVESTED IN SHARES AND EARNING INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, INTEREST AND DIVIDEND AND CAPITAL GAINS. WE FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS CONSISTENTLY INVESTING IN SHARES SINCE MANY YEA RS WHICH HAVE RESULTED INTO DIVIDEND INCOME, LONG ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 3 TERM CAPITAL GAIN S AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN S . ASSESSEES CLAIM OF INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND THEREBY EARNING CAPITAL GAIN AS ALL ALONG BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE DEPARTMENT AND GAIN ON SALE OF SHARES WERE ASSES SED AS LONG TERM CAPITAL AND SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN S DEPENDING UPON HOLDING PERIOD OF SHARES . FOR THE FIRST TIME DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, THE AO HAS SOUGHT TO TAX SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AS BUSINESS INCOME WHEREAS HE HAS ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEE S CLAIM ON LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN S . NOT ONLY IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS BUT ALSO IN THE SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11 ASSESSEES CLAIM HAVE BEEN ACCEPTED WHILE FRAMING SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT U/S.143(3) . I N RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 2010 ADDIT ION MADE BY THE AO BY TREATING CAPITAL GAIN AS BUSINESS INCOME WAS DELETED BY THE CIT(A) AND THE REVENUE HAS NOT FILED ANY APPEAL AGAINST THE SAID ORDER, MEANING THEREBY DEPARTMENT HAD ACCEPTED CIT(A)S ACTION FOR TREATING SAME AS CAPITAL GAINS. THERE IS N O CHANGE IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AS WELL AS STYLE AND METHOD OF EARNING INCOME DURING THE YEAR AS COMPARED TO EARLIER AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS. ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED STT WHILE COMPUTING CAPITAL GAIN S . NEITHER IT IS THE CASE OF THE AO THAT ASSESSEE HA S VALUED THE INVESTMENT AT THE YEAR END AT COST OR MARKET PRICE, WHICHEVER IS LOWER. IT IS ALSO NOT THE CASE OF AO THAT THERE WAS ANY REPETITIVE INVESTMENT IN ANY SCRIPT. IN RESPECT OF THE SHARES HELD AS AT THE END OF THE YEAR, THE SAME WERE REFLECTED AS I NVESTMENTS IN THE AUDITED ACCOUNTS. THE AVERAGE HOLDING PERIOD VARIES FROM ONE MONTH TO ELEVEN MONTHS. DURING THE YEAR ASSESSEE HAS EARNED DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS. 41,13,545/ - AS AGAINST SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN OF RS. 1,07,47,320/ - . THUS, THE DIVIDEND INCOME I TSELF CONSTITUTE 4 0% OF SHORT ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 4 TERM CAPITAL GAIN SO EARNED, THUS, SHOWING THE NATURE AS THAT OF INVESTMENT. THE INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ALWAYS BEEN TO MAKE INVESTMENT AND NOT TRADE, HENCE, THE HOLDING PERIOD AND INVESTMENT HAS GONE FROM YEAR TO YEAR F ROM RS.6 CRORES TO RS. 22 CRORES AND CAPITAL OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE YEAR WAS RS. 22.38 CRORES. THE FUNDS INVESTMENT IN SHARES WERE OWN FUNDS AND NO BORROWING HAS BEEN TAKEN EITHER INTEREST BEARING OR INTEREST FREE. 5 . LD. AR HAS PLACED RELIANCE ON THE D ECISION OF COORDINATE BENCH IN THE CASE OF MRS. VINEET SETHI, ITA NO.4324/MUM/2010, DATED 24 - 1 - 2014, SHRI RAJESH C. SHAH, ITA NO. 4135/MUM/2012, DATED 7 - 3 - 2014 , SMT. POONAM ISHWARDAS KIRPALANI, ITA NO. 3225/MUM/2012, DATED 27 - 9 - 2013 AND IN THE CASE OF SHRI R AMESH T.VALA, ITA NO.5157/MUM/2011, DATED 7 - 6 - 2013. IN ALL THESE DECISIONS, PROPOSITION HAS BEEN DEALT WITH REGARD TO THE PRINCIPLE OF CONSISTENCY AND THE INTENTION OF ASSESSEE TO HOLD INVESTMENT, THE FREQUENCY OF TRANSACTION , ETC . 6 . MERELY BECAUSE THE A SSESSEE LIQUIDATES ITS INVESTMENT WITHIN A SHORT SPAN OF TIME, WHICH HAD GIVEN BETTER OVERALL EARNING TO THE ASSESSEE, WOULD NOT LEAD TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NO INTENTION TO KEEP ON THE FUNDS AS INVESTOR IN EQUITY SHARES, BUT WAS ACTUALLY I NTENDED TO TRADE IN SHARES. 7 . HERE, IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THE INTENTION OF GOVERNMENT FOR INTRODUCING THE SECURITY TRANSACTION TAX AND EXEMPT THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN EARNED FROM SALE OF SHARES AND LEVYING 10 % TAX ON SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN EARNED ON SALE OF SHARES. IT IS NOTED THAT UNDER THE OLD PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, PROFITS OR GAINS ARISING TO AN INVESTOR ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 5 FROM THE TRANSFER OF SECURITIES WERE CHARGED TO TAX EITHER AS LONG TERM CAPITAL GAINS OR SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAINS DEPENDING ON THE PERIOD OF HOLDING OF THE SAID SECURITIES; SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAINS ARISING FROM TRANSFER OF SECURITIES WERE TAXED AT THE APPLICABLE RATES (NORMAL RATE) AND LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS WERE TAXED @ 20%, AFTER ADJUSTING FOR INFLATION BY INDEXING THE COST OF ACQU ISITION. FOR LISTED SECURITIES, THE TAXPAYER HAD AN OPTION TO PAY TAX ON LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS @ 10% BUT WITHOUT INDEXATION. FOR FOREIGN INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS (FIIS), THE LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS AND SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAINS WERE TAXED AT THE RATE OF 10 % (WITHOUT INDEXATION) AND 30% RESPECTIVELY. IN CASE OF A TRADER IN SECURITIES, HOWEVER, THE GAINS WERE TAXED AS ANY OTHER NORMAL BUSINESS INCOME. THUS TAX LIABILITY ON THE INCOME FROM PURCHASE & SALE OF SHARES AS REGARDS TO THE STCG & BUSINESS INCOME WAS AT PAR. HOWEVER, THE ISSUE OF TREATMENT OF INCOME FROM SHARE TRANSACTION AS CAPITAL GAIN OR BUSINESS INCOME HAS IN - FACT ARISEN AFTER THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT WITH FINANCE ACT - 2004 BY INSERTION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 111A AND 10(38) AS REGARDS TO LEVY OF T RANSACTION TAX AND EXEMPTION / CONCESSION ON CAPITAL GAIN ARISING FROM SECURITIES ENTERED IN A RECOGNIZED STOCK EXCHANGE. WITH A VIEW TO SIMPLIFY THE TAX REGIME ON SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS, A TAX AT THE RATE OF 0.015 PER CENT. IS LEVIED ON THE VALUE OF ALL THE TRANSACTIONS OF PURCHASE OF SECURITIES THAT TAKE PLACE IN A RECOGNIZED STOCK EXCHANGE IN INDIA. THIS TAX IS COLLECTED BY THE STOCK EXCHANGE FROM THE PURCHASER OF SUCH SECURITIES AND PAID TO THE EXCHEQUER. THE PROVISIONS RELATING TO THE SECURITIES TRANS ACTIONS TAX ARE CONTAINED IN CHAPTER VII OF THE FINANCE (NO.2) BILL, 2004, AND CAME INTO EFFECT FROM 01.10.2004. FURTHER, CLAUSE ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 6 (38) HAS BEEN INSERTED IN SECTION 10 OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, SO AS TO PROVIDE EXEMPTION FROM LONG - TERM CAPITAL GAINS ARISING OUT OF SECURITIES SOLD ON THE STOCK EXCHANGE. A NEW SECTION 111A HAS ALSO BEEN INSERTED AND SECTION L15AD IS AMENDED, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAINS ARISING FROM SALE OF SUCH SECURITIES TO AN INVESTOR INCLUDING FIIS SHALL BE CHARGED AT THE RAT E OF TEN PER CENT. THESE AMENDMENTS APPLY TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005 - 2006 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS. THROUGH FINANCE ACT, 2008, SECTIONS 111A AND 115AD HAVE FURTHER BEEN AMENDED WHEREBY THE RATE OF TAX ON SUCH SHORT - TERM CAPITAL GAIN HAS BEEN RAISED TO FIFTEEN PER CENT. THUS, W.E.F. 01.10.2004; ON THE SHARE TRANSACTIONS SUBJECTED TO STT; CONCESSIONAL TAX RATE OF 10% (WHICH HAS BEEN INCREASED TO 15% FROM AY 2009 - 10) ARE APPLICABLE IN RESPECT OF STCG WHEREAS NO TAX IS CHARGEABLE IN RESPECT OF LTCG. THUS, GOVERNMENT E NVISAGES WIN - WIN POSITION BOTH FOR INVESTOR AND REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 8 . EVEN THE HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF K.P. VERGHESE VS TO, 131 ITR 597 (SC) OBSERVED AS UNDER: - THE TASK OF INTERPRETATION OF A STATUTORY ENACTMENT IS NOT MECHANICAL TASK. IT IS MORE THAN A MERE READING OF MATHEMATICAL FORMULAE BECAUSE FEW WORD POSSESSES THE PRECISION OF MATHEMATICAL SYMBOLS. IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO DISCOVER THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATURE FROM THE LANGUAGE USED BY IT AND IT MUST ALWAYS BE REMEMBERED THAT LANGUAGE IS AT BEST AN IMPERFECT INSTRUMENT FOR THE EXPRESSION OF HUMAN THOUGHT AND, AS POINTED OUT BY LORD DENNING, IT WOULD BE IDLE TO EXPECT EVE RY STATUTORY PROVISIONS TO BE DRAFTED WITH DIVINE PRESCIENCE AND PERFECT CLARITY. 9 . THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS OF HON'BLE JUDGES OF THE APEX COURT WAS REITERATED BY HON'BLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF KERALA STATE INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, 259 ITR 51 (SC) HOL DING AS UNDER: - THAT THE FINANCE MINISTERS SPEECH CAN BE RELIED UPON TO THROW LIGHT ON THE OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THE PARTICULAR PROVISIONS ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 7 INTRODUCTION BY THE FINANCE BILL HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED BY THIS COURT IN K.P. VERGHESE VS ITO 1981), 131 ITR 597 (S C), AT 609. AGAIN IN THE CASE OF R & B FALCON (A) PVT. LTD VS CIT (2008) 301 ITR 309 (SC), IT WAS HELD THAT (PAGE 323): - RULES OF EXECUTIVE CONSTRUCTION IN A SITUATION OF THIS NATURE MAY ALSO BE APPLIED. WHERE A REPRESENTATION IS MADE BY THE MAKERS OF LE GISLATION AT THE TIME OF INTRODUCTION OF BILL OR CONSTRUCTION THEREUPON IS PUT BY THE EXECUTIVE UPON ITS COMING INTO FORCE, THE CARRIES GREAT WEIGHT. 10 . THE HON'BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN ARJ SECURITY PRINTERS, 264 ITR 276 AND NEO POLLYPACK PVT LTD. 245 I TR 492 (DEL.) HELD THAT EVEN WHEN THE DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA DOES NOT APPLY TO INCOME TAX PROCEEDINGS, WHERE A ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED CONSISTENTLY IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS IN PARTICULAR MANNER, THE SAME VIEW SHOULD PREVAIL IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS UNLESS THERE IS A MATERIAL CHANGE IN FACTS, MEANING THEREBY, THERE MUST BE MATERIAL CHANGE IN THE FACTS. 11 . THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHANTILAL M JAIN VS ACIT VIDE ORDER DATED 27 - 04 - 2011 (ITA NO. 269/MUM/2010) HELD THAT DESPITE LARGE VOLUM E OF SHARES TRANSACTIONS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CANNOT IGNORE THE RULE OF CONSISTENCY TO TREAT THE GAINS ON SALE OF SHARES AS STCG. IN THAT CASE, THE ASSESSEE WAS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRADING OF INVESTMENT IN SHARES AND SECURITIES OFFERED RS. 1.54 CR ORES AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND RS. 2.91 CRORES FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. THE LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN WAS ACCEPTED WHEREAS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN WAS HELD TO BE BUSINESS PROFIT. SINCE IN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS CONSIST ENTLY ACCEPTED AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN, IT WAS HELD THAT THE RULE OF CONSISTENCY AS PROPOUNDED BY HON'BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GOPAL PUROHIT (SUPRA), IT IS FAIRLY APPLICABLE AND THE ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 8 INCOME HAS TO BE TREATED AS SHORT TERM CAPITAL GAIN. IDENT ICALLY IN THE CASE OF NAGINDAS P SETH (ITA NO.961/MUM/2010) IT WAS HELD THAT DESPITE LARGE NUMBER OF TRANSACTIONS IN SHARES, THE PROFIT CAN BE ASSESSED AS CAPITAL GAINS UNDER THE FACTS OF THE CASE. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS FURTHER FORTIFIED BY THESE DECISIONS MORE SPECIFICALLY WHEN THE ASSESSEE IS HOL DING THE SHARES IN HIS BOOKS AS INVESTOR . THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF JANAK S RANAWALA, 11 SOT 627 (MUM.) FURTHER SUPPORTS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. LIKEWISE, THE DECISION FROM HON'BLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN CIT VS N.S.S. INVESTMENT PVT LTD. 227 ITR 149 (MAD), CIT VS. ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, 82 ITR 526 (SC) SUPPORTS THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE PRESENT APPEAL, WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSEE MADE INVESTMENT IN SHARES WITH INTENTION TO EARN DIVIDEND INCOME ON APPRECIATION OF PRICE OF SHARES. THEREFORE, IT CANNOT BE SAID THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DOING BUSINESS. 12 . WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS CITED AT BAR BY THE LD. AR WHICH ARE FULLY APPLICABLE TO THE FACTS OF THE INSTANT CASE. IT IS ALSO PERTINENT TO MENTION HERE THAT CAPITAL GAIN WAS EARNED ONLY ON DELIVERY BASIS TRANSACTIONS AND THERE WAS NO INCOME BY WAY OF SPECULATION OR FURTHER AND OPTIONS . THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ONLY EARNED NOT ONLY DIVIDEND INCOME BUT ALSO SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN S IN RESPECT OF INVESTMENTS IN SHARES HELD BY IT SINCE LAST 7 - 8 YEARS. THE AO HAS NOT SHOWN ANY REASON TO DEVIATE FROM THE CONCLUSIONS DRAWN IN EARLIER YEAR AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS VIS - A - VIS TREATMENT OF INVESTMENT SHOWN BY ASSESSE E IN ITS AUDITED ACCOUNT. THE FACT THAT ASSESSEE HAS EARNED SUBSTANTIAL LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AMOUNTING TO RS. 30,06,635/ - AND ITA NO. 9052 /20 1 0 9 ALSO DIVIDEND INCOME OF RS. 41,13,545/ - CLEARLY ESTABLISHES INTENTION OF ASSESSEE REGARDING HOLDING OF SHARES AS INVESTMENT. SINCE INTENTION OF ASSESSEE WAS ALWAYS TO MAKE INVESTMENTS AND NOT TRADE, HENCE, THE HOLDING PERIOD AND INVESTMENT GONE FROM YEAR TO YEAR FROM 6 CRORES TO 22 CRORES. WITHOUT ANY COGENT MATERIAL THE AO HAS REACHED TO THE CONCLUSION THAT ASSESSEE HAS TRADED IN SH ARES SINCE HE WAS NOT HAVING ANY BUSINESS IN INDIA, WHEREAS THE FACT IS THAT ASSESSEE IS AN NRI, ENGAGED IN HIS BUSINESS AT JEDDAH SINCE MORE THAN 30 YEARS. 13 . IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE ACTION OF THE LOWER AUTHORITI ES FOR TREATING CAPITAL GAIN AS BUSINESS INCOME. 1 4 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 7 TH JANUARY . 201 5 . 7 TH JAN,201 5 SD/ - SD/ - ( ) ( VIJAY PAL RAO ) ( ) ( R.C.SHARMA ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED 7 / 01/201 5 /PKM , PS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : / BY ORDER, ( ASSTT. REGISTRAR) / ITAT, MUMBAI 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. / THE CIT(A) , MUMBAI. 4. / CIT 5. / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COP Y//