CIT v. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd.

Ultratech Cement Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(4), Mumbai

In the result appeals and Cross Objection of the assessee for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012, 2013-14 and 2014-15 are partly allowed as indicated above

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOs.1412, 1413 2461 & 2462/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2012-13, 2011-12, 2013-14 & 2014-15) UltraTech Cement Ltd., v. DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) Ahura Centre, “B" Wing Pratishtha Bhavan, Old. C.G.O. Bldg., 2nd Floor, Mahakali Caves Road M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai Andheri (E), Mumbai - 400093 PAN: AAACL6442L (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA NOs. 2871, 2872 &2873/MUM/2018 (A.Ys: 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14) DCIT, Central Circle -1(4) v. UltraTech Cement Lt…

Greatship (India ) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stand partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.7151/Mum/2017 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Greatship (India) Ltd. Dcit-5(1)(1) बिाम/ Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp Esplande House, 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan/Gir No. Aabcg-8542-K (अपीलाथी/Appellant) : (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Ms. Ritu Kamal Kishore- Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sunil Deshpande- Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 31/08/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 05/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14 Assails Final Assessment Order Dated 17/10/2017 Passed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144C(13) Pursuant To The Directions Of Ld. Dispute Resolution Panel-I, Mumbai U/S 144C(5) Dated 28/09/2017. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Read As Under: -

…rities as well as before us: Particulars Guarantee Commission rate 1. Everest Kento Cylinder Ltd. Vs. ACIT (201 2) 34 CCH 0528 (Mum) 0.5% [Note : Order of Tribunal upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay : CIT Vs. Everest Kento Cylinder Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 57 (Bom). 2. Reliance Industries Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (ITA No. 4475/Mum/2007) 0.38% 3. Asian Paints Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (2014)149 ITD 511(Mumbai) 0.20% 4. Aditya Birla Minacs Worldwide Ltd. Vs. JCIT (2016) 47 CCH 760 0.5% p.a (Mum) 5. Godrej Household Products Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT 41 taxmann.com 386 0.5 % p.a (Mum) 6. Nimbus Communications Limited Vs. Ad…

ACIT-7(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Network18 Media & Investment Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Saktijit Dey ()

…I.T.A. No.7501/Mum/2018 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR (VICE PRESIDENT) AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.7501/Mum/2018 (Assessment year 2013-14) ACIT, Circle-7(2)(2), Mumbai vs M/s Network 18 Media & Investment Ltd, 414, 1stFloor,Empire Complex Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013 PAN :AABCS2472G APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Vijaykumar Subramanyam, DR Respondent by Shri Nimesh Vora, AR Date of hearing 25-06-2021 Date of pronouncement 22-09-2021 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey (JM): This is an appeal by the revenue against o…

Il & Fs Technologies Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 14(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आमकय अऩीर िं./ It (Tp)A No. 2819/Mum/2017 (ननधाायण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2012-13) M/S Il&Fs Technologies Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of The Il&Fs Financial Centre, Plot Income Tax, Circle- 14(2)(1), Room No.474, 4 Th No.C-22, G-Block, Bandra Kurla फनाभ/ Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai- Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, 400 051 M.K. Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020 (अऩीराथी / Appellant) (प्रत्मथी/ Respondent) स्थामी रेखा िं./Pan No. Aaacd2042C अऩीराथी की ओय े/ Appellant By : Shri. Atul Nirawat, Ar प्रत्मथी की ओय े/ Respondent By : Shri. Sushil Kumar Mishra, Dr ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing: 16.09.2021 घोर्णा की तायीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 16.09.2021 आदेश / O R D E R भहावीय स िंह, उऩाध्मक्ष के द्वाया / Per Mahavir Singh, Vp: This Appeal Of Assessee Is Arising Out Of The Order Of Dispute Resolution Panel-I, Mumbai [In Short ‘Drp’], In Objection No. 70 Vide Direction Dated 08.12.2016. The Assessment Was Framed By The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circe 14(2)(1), Mumbai (In Short ‘Acit/Ao’) For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Vide Order Dated 30.01.2017 Under Section 143(3) Read With Section 144C(13) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As 'Act')..

…n made for the number of days in which these guarantees were enforce during the period under the proceedings. Secondly, he stated that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. (2015) 378 ITR 57 (Bom.), wherein it is held that corporate guarantee is a international transaction and while computing compensation for arms length price it should be considered as international transactions. But in Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. (supra) Hon’ble Bombay High Court has considered the rate at 0.5% by observing as under:- “In the matter of guarantee c…

Siro Clinpharm P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO RG 3(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

…ITA No. 847/Mum/2016 Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 1 of 9 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI J BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Amarjit Singh (Judicial Member)] Assessment year: 2011-12 Siro Clinpharm Pvt Ltd ……………….………Appellant 63, Lady Ratan Tata Medical and Research Centre M K Marg, Cooperage, Mumbai 400 021 [PAN: AAECS8588A] Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(2)(2), Mumbai ……………………Respondent Appearances by P J Pardiwala, Senior Advocate, along with Madhur Agarwal and Jas Sanghavi for the appellant Bharat Andhale for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : June 10, 2021 Dat…

Dorf Ketal Chemicals India Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT CC 8 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

…ITA No. 7183/Mum/19 Assessment year: 2015-16 Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘K’ BENCH, MUMBAI [Coram: Pramod Kumar (Vice President), and Ravish Sood (Judicial Member)] ITA No. 7183/Mum/19 Assessment year: 2015-16 Dorf Ketal Chemicals India Pvt Ltd ……………….………Appellant #3, Dorf Ketal Towers, Ramchandra Lane, Kanchpada, Malad West, Mumbai 400 064 [PAN: AAACD3819P] Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 8(2), Mumbai ……………………Respondent Appearances by Nirmala Solanki for the appellant Anand Mohan for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : June 2, 2021 Date of pronounc…

ACIT Circle-16 (1), Mumbai vs. M/S Utv Software Communicatin Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Sood

…ssessing Officer followed the recommendations of the Transfer Pricing Officer. 12. The learned CIT(A) was of the view that the assessee’s case is similar to the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd., [2015] 378 ITR 57 (Bom.) and restricted the transfer pricing adjustment of corporate guarantee fee to 0.5%. 13. The learned Departmental Representative submitted that application of 3% as adjustment of corporate guarantee fee by the Transfer Pricing Officer is justified. 14. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the…

Greatship (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed on account of Low Tax

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआअसं. 1457/मुं/2016 (िन.व.2011-12) Greatship (India) Ltd. C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Army & Nevy Building, 3Rd Floor, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Pan: Aabcg8542K बनाम Vs. Dcit-5(1)(1), Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-4000120 ..... "ितवाद"/Respondent आअसं. 1563/मुं/2016 (िन.व.2011-12) Dcit-5(1)(1), Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant Mumbai-4000120 बनाम Vs. Greatship (India) Ltd. C/O Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Army & Nevy Building, 3Rd Floor, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort, Mumbai-400001 Pan: Aabcg8542K ..... "ितवाद"/Respondent

…ommission that was paid by the assessee to a bank for standing guarantee on its behalf for a third party. Further, the Tribunal after drawing support from the order of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. (2015) 378 ITR 57 (Bom), had approved the determination of ALP of the corporate guarantee given by the assessee to the bank in order to facilitate raising of loan by its AE i.e on the basis of the aforesaid Internal CUP applied by the assessee. In its aforesaid order the Tribunal had observed as under: “17. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In the…

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 46 (Now DCIT - CC -8(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘J‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Deputy Commissioner of 1068/09, Prasad Chambers Income Tax Opera House, Central Circle-8(3) Mumbai – 400 004 Mumbai- 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AACCR2413B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nitesh Joshi & Shri P.P. Bhandari Revenue by Shri Manpreet S. Duggal Date of Hearing 15/07/2021 Date of Pronouncement 23/07/2021 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.308/Mum/2019 for A.Y.2013-14 arises out of the order b…

Greatship (India ) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Ita No.6083/Mum/2018 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15) Greatship (India) Ltd., Dy. Commissioner Of Income- C/O. Kalyaniwalla & Mistry, Vs. Tax-5(1)(1), Army & Navy Building, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 568, 5Th Floor, 148, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 Mumbai – 400 020

…bank for standing guarantee on its behalf for a third party. It was submitted by the ld. A.R that the Tribunal in its aforesaid order had after relying on the order of the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. (2015) 378 ITR 57 (Bom), had upheld the ALP of the financial guarantee that was given by the assessee to the bank for facilitating raising of loan by its AE. It was submitted by the ld. A.R that as the assessee by rightly adopting an Internal CUP had taken the ALP of guarantee fees at 0.43% of the loan amount thus, the substitution of the same on an ad hoc basis by…

J.B. Chemicals and Pharmaceutical Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Vikas Awasthy & Shri N.K.Pradhanआअसं. 7389/मुं/2016 ("न.व. 2010-11) J.B.Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd., B Wing, 4Th Floor, Hind Cycle Road, Worli, Mumbai 400 030 Pan: Aaacj1482G ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. The Dy. Cit, Central Circle -2(1), Cgo Building, 8Th Floor, Mumbai 400 020 ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

…assessee has pointed that the issue of guarantee fee was decided by the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2009-10. We find that the Co-ordinate Bench after placing reliance on the decision rendered in the case of Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. 378 ITR 57(Bom.) held that Corporate Guarantee fee paid @ 0.5% would be at arm’s length. Respectfully following the decision of Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.6317/Mum/2014 for assessment year 2009-10, the ground No.2.1 of the appeal is partly allowed in the same terms. 8. In ground No.2.2 of the appeal the assessee has assailed charging of inter…

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kec International Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri N.K. Pradhan ()

…the said amendment is stated to be clarificatory, corporate guarantee provided by the assessee is an international transaction. The Ld. DR argues that following the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Everest Kento Cylinders (2015) 378 ITR 57 (Bom), guarantee commission be charged at 0.5%. 24. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel submits that the above issue is covered by the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y 2012-13, wherein the Tribunal has stated that arm’s length guarantee commission should be 0.20%. The other arguments advanced by the Ld. counsel are well discuss…

M/S Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Central Circle-8(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “J” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1724/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2014–15) M/s. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd. 1608/09, Prasad Chambers ……………. Appellant Opera House, Mumbai 400004 PAN – AACCR2413B v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–8(3), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Nitesh Joshi Revenue by : Shri Chandra Vijay Date of Hearing – 10.02.2021 Date of Order – 16.02.2021 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY. J.M. The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging order dated 14th…

Il & Fs Transportation Networks Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax - Range - 14(2)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodil & Fs Transportation Networks Asstt. Commissioner Of Limited, The Il & Fs Financial Income-Tax, Range -14(2)(1), Center, Plot No.C-22, Room No. Aaykar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Vs. 460, 4Th Floor, G Block, Bandra- Road, Marine Lines, Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 051 Pan – Aabcc5460A (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit -14(2)(1), M/S Il & Fs Transportation Network 432, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., Il & Fs Financial Centre, 8Th Vs. Mumbai – 400 020 Floor, C-22, G Block, B.K.C. Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051

…for benchmarking the transaction of providing of corporate guarantee by the assessee to its AEs. At the same time, it was observed by the TPO that the Hon‟ble High Court of Bombay in its order passed in the case of CIT Vs. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. (2015) 378 ITR 57 (Bom) had observed that though the bank guarantees were the contracts of guarantee but the same were required to be reasonably adjusted for the reason that the corporate guarantees were not as liquid as the banker‟s guarantee, and hence, a discounting over the bank guarantee would be required. After considering the various factors, viz. risk profi…

DCIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Voltas Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, these appeals are partly allowed

…arantee commission of 2.25 per cent - Accordingly, certain addition was made to assessee's ALP - Commissioner (Appeals) following order passed by Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT v. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. [2015] 58 taxmann.com 254/232 Taxman 307/378 ITR 57 (Bom), held that guarantee commission at rate of 0.5 per cent had to be charged - He thus deleted a part of addition made by TPO - Whether since impugned order of Commissioner (Appeals) was in consonance with view expressed by Jurisdictional High Court (supra), same did not require any interference - Held, yes [Para 6] [In favour of assessee] The…

Kec International Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.17/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Kec International Ltd. Dcit-5(1)(1) बनाम/ 463, Ceat Mahal Room No.568 Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 030. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacck-5599-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.115/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-5(1)(1) Kec International Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.568 463, Ceat Mahal Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Annie Besant Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Worli, Mumbai-400 030. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacck-5599-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…as a corporate guarantee for which no fees was paid by the assessee and going by the ratio of the decision of coordinate bench of the Tribunal in Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. Vs. DCIT [34 Taxmann.com 19] as affirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 08/05/2015 [58 Taxmann.com 254], we estimate the TP adjustments against both these transactions @0.20%. The Ld. TPO / Ld. AO is directed to recompute the same in terms of our above order. The grounds stand partly allowed. 7.12 Ground Nos. (xiii) & (xiv) are related with mark-to-market losses arising on the foreign exchange contracts which were outstanding at the year-en…

DCIT 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Kec International Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal stands partly allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.17/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Kec International Ltd. Dcit-5(1)(1) बनाम/ 463, Ceat Mahal Room No.568 Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Mumbai-400 030. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacck-5599-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.115/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Dcit-5(1)(1) Kec International Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.568 463, Ceat Mahal Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Dr. Annie Besant Road, Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Worli, Mumbai-400 030. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacck-5599-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

…as a corporate guarantee for which no fees was paid by the assessee and going by the ratio of the decision of coordinate bench of the Tribunal in Everest Kanto Cylinders Ltd. Vs. DCIT [34 Taxmann.com 19] as affirmed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 08/05/2015 [58 Taxmann.com 254], we estimate the TP adjustments against both these transactions @0.20%. The Ld. TPO / Ld. AO is directed to recompute the same in terms of our above order. The grounds stand partly allowed. 7.12 Ground Nos. (xiii) & (xiv) are related with mark-to-market losses arising on the foreign exchange contracts which were outstanding at the year-en…

Associated Capsules P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 42, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं. 2750/मुं/2014 ("न.व. 2008-09) Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd. 1001, Dalamal House, 10Th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aaaca4769K ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant

…representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. The ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT vs. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. reported as 378 ITR 57, has held that Corporate Guarantee to an overseas AE is an international transaction. 4.1. In respect of ground no.3 assailing addition on account of unexplained paintings, the ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee has failed to bring on record cogent evidences to support date of purchase, cost of painting and from whom pain…