9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowability of the depreciation. Therefore, at present, the findings of the learned assessing officer are premature. Accordingly, ground number 19 of the appeal is allowed. Disallowance of bad debt - Assessee did not submit any detail and therefore the claim of the bad debt was disallowed - HELD THAT:- Before the lower authorities, the assessee did not submit any information. Therefore, the addition was confirmed. Even in the form of additional evidences before us, the assessee has merely submitted the name of the parties, the amount, and the permanent account number of some of the parties. For the claim of the bad debt, the assessee should have shown that these amounts have been included in income of the assessee in earlier years. The assessee has failed to show the same. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the orders of the lower authorities in confirming the disallowance of the bad debt. Accordingly, ground number 20 of the appeal is dismissed. Mismatch in annual information return - AO asked the assessee to reconcile the AR information as per 26 AS with the books of accounts - HELD THAT:- We find that merely because there are difference between the AIR and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer is directed to delete the interest charged under that Section. Ground number 27 of the appeal is allowed. - ITA No. 1002/Mum/2016 And ITA No. 2858/Mum/2016 - - - Dated:- 25-8-2022 - Shri Prashant Maharishi, AM And Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, JM For the Assessee : Shri Nishant Thakkar And Shri Hiten Chande, ARs For the Revenue : Ms. Vatsalaa Jha, CIT DR O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. ITA No. 1002/Mum/2016 is filed by Diageo India Private Limited (The Assessee/ Appellant) for A.Y. 201112 against the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (The Act) dated 23rd February, 2016 by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(2)(2), Mumbai (The learned AO) in pursuance of direction issued by the learned Dispute Resolution Panel-1 dated 31st December, 2015 raising following grounds of appeal:- Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, Diageo India Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the Assessee) respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal against the final order dated 23 February 2016 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax6(2)(2) (AO) under section 143(3) read wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rred in rejecting Grover Vineyards Ltd on the basis that the company is incurring persistent operating losses 9. erred in rejecting comparables (in the remand report) which were initially accepted by the TPO while analyzing the benchmarking of international transactions for the manufacturing segment under Transactional Net Margin Method 10. erred in not considering the following additional comparables i. Bacardi Martini India Ltd, and ii. Pemod Ricard India Private Limited +/-5 percent benefit 11. Benefit given as per section 92C of the Act for adjustment of +/- 5% to international transactions, if the same is within the range, should be allowed. 12. without prejudice to the above, erred in computing transfer pricing adjustment on total transactions pertaining to manufacturing segment without appreciating that the adjustment should be restricted to international transactions entered into with Associated Enterprises only Distribution segment 13. erred in rejecting following comparables, while computing adjustment for distribution segment i. Rajasthan State Ganganagar Sugar Mills Ltd ii. Alna Trading and Exports Ltd iii. Chhotabh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion on account of AIR Mismatch 24.. erred in making addition of Rs 53,13,704/-on account of AIR Mismatch. Disallowance of royalty 25. erred in making disallowance of royalty of Rs 8,47,42,952/- paid to Diageo North America without appreciating that the same is incurred for business purposes of Assessee. Disallowance of expenses incurred for Liaison office ('LO') in Srilanka 26. erred in disallowing expenses of Rs 8,03,090/- incurred for LO in Srilanka without appreciating that the same was incurred for business purposes of the Assessee and allowable under section 37(1) of the Act. Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act 27. erred in levying interest under section 234A of the Act without appreciating that the return of income was filed before due date of filing of return of income as per section 139(1) of the Act Levy of Interest under section 234B of the Act 28. erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act Initiation of penalty proceedings 29. erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for various proposed disallowances / additions. The above grounds of appeal are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of a packaged transaction particularly when the assesses failed to lead the primary information in this regard as provided for under Rule 10D of the IT Rules to substantiate that such transactions are closely linked as mandated in Rule. 10A(d). 5. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP was not justified in holding that the Bright Line Test was not mandated in law and hence impermissible without considering the fact that BLT was not used as a method to determine the price but only as an economic tool to arrive at the cost of services rendered to the foreign enterprise by the Indian entity and the TPO has the mandate to determine such cost as a primary step in ALP determination as provided under the Rules. 6. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP was not justified in giving a finding that economic ownership of an intangible can be accepted, if pleaded, disregarding the fact that Indian tax laws have not so far recognized economic ownership as forming the basis of taxation. 7. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble DRP was not justified in not appreciating the distinction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Applicant in manufacturing and distribution segment. 35.Without prejudice to the other grounds, erred in not reducing the amount of selling expenses from total AMP expenditure as per ratio laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High court in case of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India Pvt. Ltd (374 ITR 118) and to only consider advertisement expenses for computing Amp expenditure and distribution segment. 36. without prejudice to the other grounds, erred in not reducing the amount of brand contribution from total AMP expenditure, while determining AMP/ Sales ratio of Assessee for benchmarking manufacturing and distribution segment. 37. Without prejudice to the other grounds, the Appellant relies on the alternate set of comparable companies for the distribution segment, furnished before Hon'ble ITAT vide additional evidence dated 23 September, 2016. 05. The assessee also submitted an application for admission of additional evidences starting from page nos. 3084 to 3120. The assessee also filed the additional evidences by letter dated 31st may, 2017 containing page nos. 3015A to 3123, the assessee submits that these are supporting evidences. Assessee subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment whose [ AMP expenses to sales ] PLI was 0.23%. Accordingly, he found that there are excess advertisement expenditure in manufacturing and distribution segment of ₹ 65,84,63,406/- and ₹ 8,62,14,944/- distribution segments. Accordingly, he determined the excess of AMP expenditure of ₹ 74,46,78,350/-. He further computed the margin at the rate of 1.66% by selecting seven comparable companies and reached at margin of ₹7,86,35,595/-. Thus, the total Transfer Pricing Adjustment of ₹ 82,33,13,945/- was made as per order dated 22nd January, 2015 under Section 92CA(3) of the Act. 08. The draft assessment order was passed by making above transfer pricing adjustment. The learned Assessing Officer a. made an addition of capital work in progress of ₹ 28,06,80,061/- with respect to SAP implementation expenses . b. disallowed of debts of ₹1,02,41,42,000/- and c. Disallowed penalties and fines of ₹12,50,000/-, d. Disallowed seminar and conference expenses of ₹21,76,897/-, e. Disallowed rent of ₹62,72,836/-, f. Addition on account of AIR mismatch of ₹53,13,704/- g. disallowance of royalty expenditure of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidered the decision of co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2010-11 in ITA Nos. 1228 and 1813/Mum/2015 dated 19th December, 2019. Both the parties have confirmed that there is no change in the facts and circumstances. The co-ordinate Bench has held in paragraph no. 13-42 as under:- 13. On this issue learned DRP observed that majority of assessee‟s objection on this are covered by the previous learned DRP order. Hence, it held that there can be no dispute that excessive India AMP expenses is incurred to benefit the AE brands on global basis. 14. Learned DRP further held that the TPO has rejected the segmental data on the ground that the assessee has not been able to submit supporting documents and vouchers and hence, allocation is without any basis. It also observed that as noted by the TPO that segmental results have been audited three years after the close of relevant financial year and that the auditors have merely done arithmetical verifications to confirm the allocations. Hence, it did not find any infirmity in the action of the TPO. Learned DRP further directed the TPO to verify the actual working provided by the assessee and delete the double d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IPL has incurred AMP expenses on its own business for increasing sales. He submitted that the same is not an international transaction. He further submitted that even if some benefit occurs to others, no adverse inference against the assessee can be taken . He further submitted that amendment to the agreement dated 29/11/2010 was made between assessee and Diego Brand PV whereby the assessee receives a contribution which is in the nature of payment from the brand owners, not as a consideration for rendering the service but the consideration is made to ensure that assessee earns arm‟s-length return for its activities. The learned counsel of the assessee contended that the contribution by the AE was aimed at ensuring that the assessee achieves arm‟s-length margin of 5% in the manufacturing segment and 3% margin in the distribution segment. In this regard the learned counsel of the assessee placed reliance upon ITAT decision in assessee‟s own case for assessment year 2008 09 and assessment year 2009 10. Furthermore, learned counsel of the assessee referred to the decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Ltd supra. Learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat to construe the AMP expenditure as an international transaction at least there should be one enterprise who is a non-resident and there should be a mutual agreement between the parties for allocation apportionment or to contribute any cost or expenses incurred in connection with benefit or services or facility. 24. Learned departmental representative submitted that the mutual agreement as required in the provision of the act does exist in the present case he referred to the amendment dated 29.11 .2010 with effect from 1 April 2009 to the agreement dated 19.9 .2016 between DIPL and overseas associated enterprises under:- 9A. The licensee will incurred various AMP expenses on its own account in relation to its sales of the licensed products within the territory, and the licensor may bear by way of contribution a portion of the AMP expenditure. Such contribution shall be made in such form and quantum as may be agreed by the parties each year. Each of the licensee and licensor will contribute to AMP expenditure in the manner aforementioned for the anticipated benefits that such expenditure will bring to each of their businesses. 25. Referring to the above learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h Court. 27. The learned departmental representative further submitted that even though the BLT was negated the ALP of AMP expenses has to be computed as per the principle as enumerated by the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India private limited, Luxottica India Eyewear Private Limited and Heinz India private limited as the facts are similar to this case. 28. As regards the assessee‟s argument that no separate ALP has to be determined for AMP expenses under aggregation of TNMM as profit margin of the assessee is more than the comparables, he referred to ITAT decision in the case of M/s. BMW India Ltd vide para 15 of the said order. Referring to the above he submitted that the argument of the assessee cannot be accepted. 29. As regards the AMP expenses incurred by the assessee towards its own brand, the learned departmental representative submitted that the same may be allowed subject to the quantum computed by the TPO. As regards the sales related expenses learned DR submitted that the principal as narrated by the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of MS Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications India pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rform/incur AMP expenses on behalf of the AE. Learned counsel submitted that to qualify as an international transaction within the scope of section 92(B) following essential ingredients are required that the transaction should be between 2 or more associated enterprises either or both of home are non-residents. 33. That the transaction should be in the nature of purchase, sale or lease of tangible or intangible property or provision of services or lending or borrowing money or any other transaction having a bearing on the profits, income, loss on of the associated enterprises. 34. He submitted that the AMP expenses therefore enhancing sale of alcoholic beverages products manufactured distributed by DIPL in the domestic market was in the business interest of the DIPL to the same. 35. Learned counsel of the assessee further submitted that decision of BMW India is not applicable to the present case. Referring to the same he submitted that there is neither any binding obligation on DIPL to incur AMP expenses not does it render any service to the AE. 36. The learned counsel of the assessee further more submitted reliance upon the Delhi High Court decision in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oducts within the territory and the company shall bear by way of contribution at least 50% of the AMP expenditure incurred by the distributor. Such contribution may be made in such for and quantum as may be agreed by the parties. The distributor and each of the company will contribute to the AMP expenditure in the manner aforementioned for the anticipated benefits such expenditure will bring to each of their businesses. 40. From the above it is amply clear that in the present case there is a mutual agreement in existence between the assessee and its AE to incur AMP expenses and further that agreement is also existing to allocate or apportion or to contribute the AMP cost or expense. The agreement also clarifies that the level of AMP expense allocation or apportionment contribution is based on the benefit received. Thus when there is an agreement that the overseas associated enterprise will share the AMP expense of the assessee when benefitted, undoubtedly the AMP expense becomes an international transaction and the TPO cannot be debarred from examining the said international transaction with respect to the arms length price. This becomes amply clear from the fact that the over ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 381 ITR 117 (Del). The learned Sr. AR submitted that the TPO considered only the higher amount of expenditure incurred by the assessee vis-avis other comparable companies for drawing an adverse inference of there being an international transaction of brand promotion by the assessee for its AE. This was countered by the ld. DR, who strongly refuted the assertion of there being no international transaction of AMP expenses and the consequential determination of its ALP. 4. We have gone through the relevant material on record and are not convinced with the submission advanced on behalf of the assessee that the treatment of AMP expense as an international transaction by the TPO is based only on excessive expenditure. It is found that the TPO has referred to other materials to support his conclusion of the existence of an international transaction of AMP expenses. He referred to the agreement dated 1.1.2006 between the assessee and BMW Germany and also reproduced relevant clauses of the same on page 13 of his order. Clause 2.2 of the Agreement deciphers the responsibility of the assessee in the Contract Territory Contract (India). Relevant parts of the clause are as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... marketing and promotion of the brand owned by its AE. In fact, it was the `responsibility' of the assessee and it `undertook' the function of `performance of an adequate advertisement and sales promotion' pursuant to the Agreement dated 1.1.2006 with BMW AG. Thus it is apparent that the assessee was under a binding obligation to advertise and promote the brand of its AE. 7. The assessee's Transfer pricing study report, as referred on page 13 and 14 of the TPO's order, also mentions that BMW India ensures that it follows the global guidelines provided by BMW Group in terms of the usages of BMW banners, specifications for release of print advertisement in terms of font size, page layout etc.' It is thus clear that not only the Agreement between the assessee and BMW AG but also the assessee's own acknowledgment in the TP study report are flawless pointers to the fact that it carried out AMP functions as a duty assigned by its AE, to be discharged strictly in accordance with the global guidelines provided by the BMW Group. 8. There is another interesting aspect of the matter. One of the reported international transactions is Reimbursement of exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... could not demonstrate any international transactions of ALP expenses except for showing higher amount of AMP expenses incurred by that assessee vis- -vis other independent parties. Adverting to the facts of the instant case, we find that apart from such higher AMP expenses, the TPO has elaborately referred to the relevant clauses of the Agreement between the assessee and its AE along with the TP Study report, showing the responsibility of the assessee to perform adequate advertisement and sales promotion in accordance with the global guidelines of the BMW Group for the use of BMW brand and further the AE also acknowledging such service of the assessee but reimbursing a minuscule part of expenses incurred by the assessee on advertisement marketing and promotion. It is further relevant to note that the judgment in the case of Maruti Suzuki (Supra) is based on a manufacturing company performing advertisement and promotion. In contrast, the assessee is engaged not only in the sale of manufactured goods but also the traded goods. Profit and loss accounts of the assessee shows Sale of manufactured goods at Rs. 624.66/- crore and those of traded goods of Rs.611.87 crore. Thus, it is ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vations of the Hon'ble High Court, which is crucial for our purpose, can be summarized as under :- Inter-connected international transactions can be aggregated and section 92(3) does not prohibit the set-off [Paras 80 81]; AMP is a separate function. An external comparable should perform similar AMP functions. [Paras 165 166] ; Bright line test cannot be applied to work out non-routine AMP expenses for benchmarking [Para 194(x)]; ALP of AMP expenses should be determined preferably in a bundled manner with the distribution activity [Paras 91, 121 others] ; For determining the ALP of these transactions in a bundled manner, suitable comparables having undertaken similar activities of distribution of the products and also incurring of AMP expenses, should be chosen [Paras 194(i), (ii), (viii) others]; If no comparables having performed both the functions in a similar manner are available, then, suitable adjustment should be made to bring international transactions and comparable transactions at par [Para 194 (iii)] ; If adjustment is not possible or comparable is not available, then, the TNMM on entity level should not be applied [Paras 100, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctions undertaken by the assessee as well as probable comparables. It is vital to highlight the difference between AMP expenses and AMP functions. Whereas AMP functions are the means by which AMP activity is performed, AMP expenses is the amount spent on the performance of such means (functions). To put it simply, an examination of AMP functions carried out by the assessee and the probable comparables is sine qua non in the process of determination of the ALP of the international transaction of AMP spend, either in a segregate or an aggregate manner. What Their Lordships have held is to bundle the distribution activity with the AMP activity, being two separate but connected international transactions, for the purposes of determination of the ALP of both these international transactions in a combined manner. The argument of the assessee that since the profit margin of the comparables is much less than the assessee and hence no separate addition should be made for AMP functions, if taken to a logical conclusion, will make the AMP spend as a non-international transaction, which, in our considered opinion, is not appropriate in the given facts. Once AMP expense has been held to be an i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by a probable comparable. If both are found out to be similar, then the matter ends and a comparable is found and one can go ahead with determining the ALP of such a transaction. If the AMP functions performed by the two entities are found to be different, then adjustment is required to be made in the case of a probable comparable, so as to make it uniform with the assessee. The assessee may have possibly done, say, four different AMP functions as against the probable comparable having done, say, only three. In such a scenario, again the adjustment will be warranted. In another situation, the AMP functions performed by the assessee and probable comparable may be similar but with varying standards, which will also call for an adjustment. Crux of the matter is that the AMP functions performed by the assessee must be similar to those done by the comparables, in the same manner as such functions are compared in any other international transaction. However, in computing ALP of AMP spend, the adjustment or set off, if any, available from the distribution function, should be made. Essence of the judgment in the case of Sony Ericson Mobile (supra) is that the two international transactio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heds its character of a separate international transaction and hence the AMP functions should not be matched with the AMP functions carried out by probable comparables. If suitable comparables can be found having performed both distribution and AMP functions, then, their ALP should be determined on aggregate basis. If, however, there is some difference in the distribution or AMP functions performed by the assessee vis- -vis the probable comparables, then an attempt should first be made to iron out such difference by making a suitable adjustment to the profit margin of comparables. If such an adjustment is not possible, then such probable comparable should be eliminated. If, by making a comparative analysis of the distribution and AMP functions jointly, there remains no comparable case performing such distribution and AMP functions, then, the international transaction of AMP should be segregated and their ALP be determined separately by applying a suitable method. However, in so determining the ALP of such an international transaction of AMP expenses on separate basis, a proper set off, if any, available from the distribution activity, should be allowed. 17. Adverting to the fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justment in this regard being claimed by the assessee, the same are consequential. The AO shall consider the same afresh and decide as per law. The ld. Counsel of the assessee claimed that the TPO should not be given second innings. We find the same is not tenable in light of facts and case laws referred hereinabove. 015. As it is submitted that there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case , this decision should be applied to the facts of the present case. In that decision coordinate bench has held that there exists and international transaction on account of excess spending of AMP expenses , agreement and reimbursement received from AE . Therefore such international transaction needs to be benchmarked, hence, the matter was restored to the file of the ld AO/ TPO. Hence, we set aside the whole issue back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer/ Transfer Pricing Officer for determination of Arm s Length Price of international transition of excess AMP spend of the assessee. Accordingly, ground no. 2 to 18 and 30 to 37 are allowed with above direction. 016. On the other issues, the learned Authorized Representative submitted that assessee would like to co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee and the same was proscribed and depreciation and or any other expenses in this regard would be disallowed in the any of the future years in which assessee claims that. Precisely ld AO held that in future claim of depreciation on this sum should be disallowed. 019. The learned authorised representative submitted that as per ground number 19 the assessee has challenged the above finding of the learned assessing officer. He submitted that agreement is placed at page number 1630 of the paper book. He further stated that as assessee has not claimed any deduction or allowance during the year , observation of the learned assessing officer are incorrect/ unwarranted. 020. The learned departmental representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. 021. We have carefully considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The fact shows that in this year the assessee has shown a capital work in progress and has not claimed any deduction. Therefore, the question of making any disallowance or addition on that account does not arise in this year. However when the assessee makes capitalization of the capital work in progress into fixed as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee in earlier years. The assessee has failed to show the same. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the orders of the lower authorities in confirming the disallowance of the bad debt. Accordingly, ground number 20 of the appeal is dismissed. 027. Ground number 24 is with respect to mismatch in annual information return. During the assessment proceedings the learned AO asked the assessee to reconcile the AR information as per 26 AS with the books of accounts. The assessee furnished reply wherein no specific reconciliation was given. The learned AO further held that the information furnished by the assessee is incomplete and does not contain entry wise explanation of the amount credited in the books of accounts therefore the learned assessing officer presumed that assessee has nothing to offer in this regard. The AO further noted that transaction to the extent of ₹ 28 lakhs is being an unexplained term deposit with the Standard Chartered bank under different transactions IDs between 6/8/2010 to 31/3/2011 and further an amount of ₹ 2,513,704/ is being payment made to hotels and restaurants. Therefore, in the draft assessment order the same was added. 028. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned assessing officer with a direction to the assessee to satisfy the learned assessing officer by producing the relevant details that there is no mismatch between income offered by the assessee as well as items reported in AIR. If the learned assessing officer is satisfied with the same, the addition deserves to be deleted. Therefore, the learned assessing officer may verify the information furnished by the assessee and decide afresh in accordance with the law. Accordingly, ground number 24 of the appeal is allowed with above direction. 032. Ground number 25 is with respect to the disallowance of royalty u/s 37 (1) of the act amounting to ₹ 84,742,952/ . The brief facts of the case shows that the learned assessing officer asked the assessee to furnish the information about the royalty paid to Diageo North America and why shame should not be disallowed u/s 37 (1) of the act. The assessee did not furnish the information to the AO. However, the learned assessing officer found that royalty in the earlier year was also paid to the same party under intellectual property license agreement for use in commercial exploitation of the trademark, copyrights and expertise in respec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntion and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The identical issue arose in case of the assessee for assessment year 2010 11 before the coordinate bench and it was decided in ITA number 1228/2015 dated 19/12/2019 para number 43 wherein the issue was set aside to the file of the learned assessing officer. Therefore with similar direction we also set-aside ground number 25 of the appeal. Accordingly, this ground is allowed with above direction. 037. Ground number 27 of the appeal is with respect to the charging of interest u/s 234A of the income tax act. Assessee submits that the return of income was filed by the assessee on 22/11/2011 whereas the due date for filing of the return of income was 30/11/2011 and therefore no interest u/s 234A of the act should have been charged, as there is no delay in filing of return of income. Apparently, if the assessee has filed the return of income within the due date prescribed u/s 139 (1) of the act, interest u/s 234A cannot be levied. Therefore, the learned assessing officer is directed to delete the interest charged under that Section. Ground number 27 of the appeal is allowed. 038. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
