DCIT CIR - 8(1), MUMBAI v. M/s. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES (P) LTD., NANDED

ITA 1293/MUM/2007 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2010 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 129319914 RSA 2007
Assessee PAN AABCG2330D
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1293/MUM/2007
Duration Of Justice 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 25 day(s)
Appellant DCIT CIR - 8(1), MUMBAI
Respondent M/s. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES (P) LTD., NANDED
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 04-02-2010
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted G
Tribunal Order Date 04-02-2010
Date Of Final Hearing 02-02-2010
Next Hearing Date 02-02-2010
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 09-02-2007
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL G BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. K. AGARWAL JM & SHRI R.K. PANDA AM I.T.A. NO. 1109/MUM/2007 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04) M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. PLOT NO B-13 MIDC NANDED-431 603 PAN: AABCG2330D VS. ASST. CIT RANGE VIII-1 AAYAKAR BHAVAN 2 ND FLOOR MUMBAI-400 020 APPELLANT RESPONDENT I.T.A. NO. 1293/MUM/2007 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04) DY. CIT RANGE 8(1) ROOM NO. 210 AAYAKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI-400 020 VS. M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. PLOT NO B-13 MIDC NANDED-431 603 PAN: AABCG2330D APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY: MR. K.M. KAPADIA RESPONDENT BY: MR. RAJNEESH ARVIND O R D E R DATE OF HEARING: 02.02.2010 DATE OF ORDER: 04.02.2010 PER R.K. PANDA AM: THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS THE FIRST ONE FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE AND THE SECOND ONE FILED BY THE REVENUE AND ARE DIR ECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.11.200 OF THE CIT(A)-VIII MUMBA I RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIEN CE BOTH THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRESS GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 1 WHICH RELATES TO THE LEGALITY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S. 143(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 (THE ACT) FOR WHICH THE LEARNED DR HAS NO OBJECTION. ACCORDI NGLY THIS GROUND BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 2 3. GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 2 BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE ONL Y GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE RELATE TO THE PART RELIEF GIVE N BY THE CIT(A) BY SUSTAINING ADDITION OF RS.10 LAKHS OUT OF RS.40 LAK HS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY DISALLOWING MANUFACTURING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES. 4. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS VIDE QU ESTIONNAIRE DATED 24 TH AUGUST 2005 ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE VAR IOUS DETAILS SUCH AS NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF TOP 20 PARTI ES FROM WHOM PURCHASES WERE MADE DURING THE YEAR TOP 20 PARTIES TO WHOM VARIOUS PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF EXPENSES HAVE BEEN C LAIMED TO BE MADE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE PARTIES TO WHOM CO MMISSION WAS PAID EXACT SERVICES RENDERED BY THEM AND LIST OF S UNDRY DEBTORS AND SUNDRY CREDITORS WITH THEIR FULL ADDRESSES. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE TOP 20 PARTI ES FROM WHOM IT HAS MADE PURCHASES OR TO WHOM SALES WERE MADE AND D ID NOT GIVE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE PARTIES TO WHOM COMMISSI ON HAD BEEN PAID AND SINCE NEITHER BOOKS OF ACCOUNT WERE PRODUC ED NOR ANY DOCUMENTS LIKE BANK STATEMENT WERE FURNISHED THE A SSESSING OFFICER MADE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.40 LAKHS OUT OF MAN UFACTURING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES ON ESTIMATE BASIS. WHILE D OING SO HE RELIED ON A COUPLE OF DECISIONS. 5. BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT SOME OF THE RECORDS WERE MISSING SINCE 14.1.2004 A SUIT WAS FILED BY V IJAYA BANK SOME OF THE BOOKS WERE TAKEN BY THE TAX CONSULTANT SHRI SANDEEPKUMAR KABRA FOR PRODUCTION BEFORE THE SALES TAX AUTHORITI ES AND THE REMAINING BOOKS WERE SEIZED BY CBI DURING THE SEARC H CARRIED OUT ON 17 TH FEBRUARY 2004. FURTHER A DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSE E COMPANY HAD EXPIRED ON 27 TH JULY 2004. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MORE THAN A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR N ON PRODUCTION OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. IT WAS SUBMITTED I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 3 THAT THE ENTIRE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT HAD UNDERGONE STAT UTORY AUDIT AND THE AUDIT REPORT WAS DULY ENCLOSED WITH THE RETURN OF INCOME FURNISHED ON 24.11.2003. THE COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF MANUFACTURING EXPENSES AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES WAS FILED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE WAS NO ABNORMAL INCREASE IN THE VARIOUS HEADS OF EXPENDITURE DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDER ATION. ACCORDINGLY IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT NO ESTIMATED ADDI TION SHOULD BE MADE AND THEREFORE THE ADDITION OF RS. 40 LAKHS S HOULD BE DELETED. 6. HOWEVER THE CIT(A) WAS NOT FULLY SATISFIED WITH TH E ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE. HE OBSERVED THAT TAX AUDIT REPORT CANNOT BECOME THE BA SE FOR ACCEPTING THE INCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCO ME. THE INCOME IS ASSESSED AS PER THE INCOME-TAX ACT AND IT IS NOT ON THE AUDITOR TO EXAMINE AND INVESTIGATE INTO THE ACCOUNTS OF THE AS SESSEE. HOWEVER CONSIDERING THE VARIOUS PARAMETERS OF THE BOOK RESU LTS AND THE HISTORY OF THE CASE HE HELD THAT DISALLOWANCE OF R S.10 LAKHS IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WILL BE REASONA BLE. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH PART RELIEF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE R EVENUE ARE IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BO TH THE SIDES PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS DECISIONS CITED BEFORE US. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE D ID NOT PRODUCE THE RELEVANT BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND OTHER DOCUMENTS AS DE MANDED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT P ROCEEDINGS ON THE GROUND THAT THEY WERE SEIZED BY THE CBI. TO A POINTED QUERY BY THE BENCH AS TO THE PREVAILING POSITION AS ON TODAY REGARDING THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO CHANGE IN THE POSITION AND THE ASS ESSEE IS NOT IN A POSITION TO PRODUCE THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT BEFORE THE ASSESSING I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 4 OFFICER EVEN NOW. IT IS THE SETTLED POSITION OF LA W THAT FOR CLAIMING ANY EXPENDITURE AS GENUINE THE ONUS IS ALWAYS ON TH E ASSESSEE TO SUBSTANTIATE WITH EVIDENCE TO THE SATISFACTION OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER REGARDING THE GENUINENESS OF THE EXPENDITUR E. IN THE PRESENT CASE UNDISPUTEDLY THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DISCHARGED T HE ONUS CAST ON IT. MERELY BECAUSE THE ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN AUDITED AND THE AUDITORS POINTED OUT NO MISTAKE CANNOT ABSOLVE THE ASSESSEE FROM THE ONUS CAST ON IT. FURTHER THE SEARCH BY CBI IS A POINTER TOWARDS SOME MANIPULATION BY THE ASSESSEE SOMEWHERE. THEREFORE THE BOOK RESULTS CANNOT BE FULLY ACCEPTED ESPECIALLY IN ABSE NCE OF PRODUCTION OF THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE ALSO DO NOT FIND MUCH FORCE IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE EXPENDITURE UNDER THE HEAD MANUFACTURING EXPEN SES HAS GONE DOWN DURING THE Y EAR FROM RS.45.76 LAKHS TO RS.28. 32 LAKHS SINCE THE TURNOVER HAS ALSO GONE DOWN FROM RS.22.98 CRORE S TO RS.10.41 CRORES. WE FURTHER FIND THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERI NG ALL THESE FACTORS HAD SUSTAINED AN AMOUNT OF RS.10 LAKHS AS AGAINST R S. 40 LAKHS BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH IN OUR OPINION IS JUS T AND REASONABLE UNDER THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE. WE THEREFORE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER O F THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND UPHOLD THE SAME. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY T HE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS BY THE REVENUE ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 8. IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 3 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLE NGED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.24 84 226 BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 9. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES WE FIND THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE SUM OF RS.24 84 226 CLAIMED BY THE A SSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF BAD DEBTS ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSE E HAS MADE CONTRADICTORY STATEMENTS IN RESPECT OF ITS CLAIM OF BAD DEBTS. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE FIR ST STATED THAT IT WAS NOT WRITTEN OFF IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND SUB SEQUENTLY IT WAS I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 5 STATED THAT SINCE IT WAS OLD IT WAS WRITTEN OFF. T HEREFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WHI CH STATEMENT IS CORRECT IS NOT VERIFIABLE IN ABSENCE OF RECORDS. A CCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO FURNIS H ANY EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM THAT THE DEBTS WRITTEN OFF DUR ING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IT WAS OFFERED TO TAX IN THE PAST YE AR AND STEPS WERE TAKEN TO RECOVER THE DEBTS. RELYING ON A COUPLE OF DECISIONS THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF BAD DEBTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 10. BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE BUSINES S ACTIVITIES WERE TOTALLY STOPPED AND IT BECAME VERY DIFFICULT TO RECOVER ANY AMOUNT FROM THE DEBTORS. RELYING ON TH E DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF OMAN I NTERNATIONAL BANK REPORTED IN 102 TTJ (MUM) (SB) 207 IT WAS SUBM ITTED THAT THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER THE HEAD BAD DEBTS HAS T O BE ALLOWED. 11. HOWEVER THE LEARNED CIT(A) WAS NOT CONVINCED WITH THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSEE. RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SOUTH INDI A SURGICAL COMPANY LTD. VS. ACIT 201 CTR 289 WHEREIN IT HAS B EEN HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO ESTABLISH THAT THE DEBTS WHICH HAVE BEEN WRITTEN OFF HAVE BECOME BAD THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTIO N OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF TH E CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 12. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES WE FIND THE ASSESSEE IN ITS PROFIT AND LOSS A/C. HAS WRITTEN OFF AN AMOUNT OF RS.24 84 225.77 AS BAD AND DOUBTFUL DEBTS. WE FIND THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIG H COURT IN THE CASE OF DIT VS. OMAN INTERNATIONAL BANK 313 ITR 12 8 AND CIT VS. STAR CHEMICALS (BOMBAY) P. LTD. 313 ITR 126 HAS H ELD THAT MERE WRITING OFF OF A DEBT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT IS A SUFFICIENT COMPLIANCE FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S. 36(1)(VII) O F THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE NEED NOT PROVE THAT THE DEBT HAS BECOME BA D OR THAT STEPS I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 6 HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO RECOVER THE DEBTS. SINCE IN THE INSTANT CASE ADMITTEDLY THE ASSESSEE HAS WRITTEN OFF THE DEBT AS BAD IN ITS PROFIT AND LOSS A/C. THEREFORE FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT CITED ABOVE WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM THE DEDUCTION OF BAD DEBTS. WE ACCORDINGLY SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND D IRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF BAD DEBT MA DE BY THE ASSESSEE. THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDING LY ALLOWED. 13. IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL NO. 4 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLE NGED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF R S.13 31 981 OUT OF RS.15 74 580 MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 41( 1) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF TRADE CREDITORS. 14. FACTS OF THE CASE IN BRIEF ARE THAT IN ABSENCE OF FURNISHING OF ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE AGE OF THE CREDITORS AND CONFIRMATIONS FROM THE CREDITORS REGARDING THE LIABILITY OF RS.15 74 580 THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE AN ADDITION OF RS.15 74 580 U/S. 41(1) OF THE ACT. WHILE DOING SO HE OBSERVED THAT IN RESPECT OF CREDITOR M/S. JAMNADAS BHIMJI & CO. RECOVERY SUIT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE AFORESAID PARTY FOR THE RECOVERY OF RS.13.31 LAKHS. HOWEVER AS PER THE ASSESSEE COMPANY THERE WAS NO LIABILITY TO PAY M/S. JAMNADAS BHIMJI & CO. SIMILARLY FOR THE REMAINING CREDITORS OF RS.2 42 598 THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE CO ULD NOT FILE ANY EVIDENCE REGARDING THE LIABILITY. 15. BEFORE THE CIT(A) IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESS ING OFFICER CANNOT DICTATE THE ASSESSEE TO WRITE OFF THE CREDIT BALANCE AND TREAT THE SAME AS ITS INCOME WHEN A RECOVERY SUIT HAS BEE N FILED BY THE CREDITOR. AS REGARDS THE OTHER CREDITORS IT WAS SU BMITTED THAT THIS IS A LIABILITY TO BE DISCHARGED AND COULD NOT BE SHOWN AS INCOME AS PER THE ORDER OF THE DRT. I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 7 15.1 BASED ON THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE ASSESSE E THE CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE LIABILITY WHICH HAS BEEN S HOWN IN THE BOOKS AND IN THE BALANCE SHEET DOES NOT REFLECT THE TRUE AFFAIRS OF THE BUSINESS. FURTHER THOUGH THE THIRD PARTY HAS GONE TO THE COURT FOR RECOVERY OF A SUM OF RS.13 31 981 THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A STATUTORY LEGAL CLAIM THAT IT HAD NOTHING TO PAY TO THE AFORESAID PARTY. HE THEREFORE UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE ASS ESSING OFFICER IN TREATING THE SUM OF RS.13 31 981 AS INCOME U/S. 41( 1) OF THE ACT. HOWEVER HE DELETED THE BALANCE SUM OF RS.2 42 598. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN AP PEAL BEFORE US. 16. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS MADE BY BO TH THE SIDES PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS DECISIONS CITED BEFORE US. THERE IS NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADDE D AN AMOUNT OF RS.15 74 580 ON ACCOUNT OF UNVERIFIABLE TRADE CREDI TORS ON THE GROUND THAT SUCH LIABILITY IS NOT PAYABLE BY THE AS SESSEE. WE FIND THE CIT(A) SUSTAINED AN AMOUNT OF RS.13 31 981 PAYABLE TO M/S. JAMNADAS BHIMJI & CO. AS THE ABOVE PARTY HAS FILED A SUIT AGAINST THE ASSESSEE FOR RECOVERY OF THE AMOUNT AND THE ASSESSE E HAS MADE A STATUTORY LEGAL CLAIM THAT IT HAD NOTHING TO PAY TO THE AFORESAID PARTY. WE FIND THE ASSESSEE IN ITS BALANCE SHEET H AD SHOWN AN AMOUNT OF RS.13 31 981.51 UNDER THE HEAD CURRENT L IABILITIES AND PROVISION AS SUNDRY CREDITORS FOR GOODS (DISPUTED) . THERE IS ALSO NO DISPUTE TO THE FACT THAT THE AFORESAID PARTY HAS FI LED A SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF THE AMOUNT FROM THE ASSESSEE. WE THER EFORE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFICATION AS TO HOW THE LIABILITY HAS CEASED TO EXIST. MERELY BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A LEGAL CLAIM THAT NO AMOUNT IS PAYABLE BY IT TO THE PARTY THE FACT REMAINS THA T IN THE BALANCE SHEET IT APPEARS AS LIABILITY AND THE OTHER PARTY H AS FILED A CASE FOR RECOVERY OF THE AMOUNT. THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF SUGALI SUGAR MILLS PVT. LTD. REPORTED IN 236 ITR 51 8 HAS HELD THAT NO I.T.A. NOS. 1109 &1293/MUM/2007 M/S. GOLDEN OIL INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. ======================== 8 ADDITION U/S. 41(1) CAN BE MADE EVEN WHERE THE AMOU NT STANDING TO THE CREDIT OF THE CREDITORS IS WRITTEN BACK BY A UN ILATERAL ACT OF THE ASSESSEE. IN THE INSTANT CASE THERE IS NEITHER WRI TE OFF OF THE AMOUNT BY THE ASSESSEE NOR THE OTHER PARTY HAS GIVEN UP IT S CLAIM. WE THEREFORE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS .13 31 981 CANNOT BE ADDED U/S. 41(1) OF THE ACT. WE THEREFORE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELE TE THE ADDITION. THIS GROUND BY THE ASSESSEE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 17. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED AND THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 4 TH FEBRUARY 2010 SD/- (D.K. AGARWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (R.K. PANDA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI DATED 4 TH FEBRUARY 2010 COPY TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) THE CIT(A)-VIII MUMBAI (4) THE CIT MC-VIII MUMBAI (5) THE DR G BENCH ITAT MUMBAI. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI TPRAO