Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

284 ITR 323Supreme Court of India2006#13 most cited

What is Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

1,842

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Goetze (India) Ltd v CIT · new claim by assessee · additional ground · revised return of income · section 139(5) · Assessing Officer powers · CIT(A) powers · ITAT powers · assessment proceedings · fresh claim · 284 ITR 323

Also reported as

157 Taxmann 1204 CTR 182157 Taxmann.com 1

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 115JBSection 37(1)Section 147Section 153ASection 143(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 139(5)book profitssection 115jrevenue expendituresection 115jbcapital expendituredisallowance under section 14asection 32section 254section 37(1)transfer pricing adjustmentliable to tax

Judgments citing Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai vs. The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes, while the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2130/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, Ms. Akshaya IyerFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati
Section 234DSection 250Section 41(1)

…yed that ground No. 4 be treated as additional ground, and be admitted and adjudicated as per law. On the contrary, the learned Departmental Representative by placing reliance upon the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. Vs. CIT, [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC), submitted that such a claim cannot be made for the first time before the Tribunal as neither in its return nor in any of the proceedings before the lower authorities, the assessee sought to change the „head of income‟ under which the aforesaid receipts are to be taxed. 37. We find that Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. (supra) and…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 812/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.809 To 812/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 11Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 68

…come, the ld. A.R. submitted that it is settled law that a fresh claim can be made before the authorities during the proceedings pending before them for the relevant assessment year. The ld. A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in Goetze India 284 ITR 323 for the above proposition. ITA Nos.809 to 812/Bang/2022 M/s. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar Page 7 of 11 6.3 The ld. A.R. further submitted that it is the duty of the assessing officer to provide the deductions and exemptions to the assessees who are rightfully eligible for the same without considering the fact that such claim was ma…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 811/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.809 To 812/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 11Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 68

…come, the ld. A.R. submitted that it is settled law that a fresh claim can be made before the authorities during the proceedings pending before them for the relevant assessment year. The ld. A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in Goetze India 284 ITR 323 for the above proposition. ITA Nos.809 to 812/Bang/2022 M/s. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar Page 7 of 11 6.3 The ld. A.R. further submitted that it is the duty of the assessing officer to provide the deductions and exemptions to the assessees who are rightfully eligible for the same without considering the fact that such claim was ma…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 810/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.809 To 812/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 11Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 68

…come, the ld. A.R. submitted that it is settled law that a fresh claim can be made before the authorities during the proceedings pending before them for the relevant assessment year. The ld. A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in Goetze India 284 ITR 323 for the above proposition. ITA Nos.809 to 812/Bang/2022 M/s. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar Page 7 of 11 6.3 The ld. A.R. further submitted that it is the duty of the assessing officer to provide the deductions and exemptions to the assessees who are rightfully eligible for the same without considering the fact that such claim was ma…

M/S. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust for Backward Classes (Regd), Kolar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 809/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariita Nos.809 To 812/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 11Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 68

…come, the ld. A.R. submitted that it is settled law that a fresh claim can be made before the authorities during the proceedings pending before them for the relevant assessment year. The ld. A.R. relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in Goetze India 284 ITR 323 for the above proposition. ITA Nos.809 to 812/Bang/2022 M/s. Sri Devaraj Urs Educational Trust, Kolar Page 7 of 11 6.3 The ld. A.R. further submitted that it is the duty of the assessing officer to provide the deductions and exemptions to the assessees who are rightfully eligible for the same without considering the fact that such claim was ma…

Rahul Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-70(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 5841/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Ms. Preeti Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. K. K. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 80CSection 80TSection 90

…sed). 2. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has grossly erred in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law in ignoring the following: (i) the Judicial precedents cited on non-applicability of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd, 284 ITR 323 for considering the revised computation during assessment proceedings; (ii) The order suffers from non-observance of the principles of natural justice as the legal issue of non- applicability of the decision in the case of Goetze basis the several decisions in favour of appellant was neither raised nor any clarification sought on the same; (iii…

Ravinder Bansal, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle-70(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 5840/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumarsh. Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Ms. Preeti Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. K. K. Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 80CSection 80TSection 90

…sed). 2. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has grossly erred in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law in ignoring the following: (i) the Judicial precedents cited on non-applicability of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd, 284 ITR 323 for considering the revised computation during assessment proceedings; (ii) The order suffers from non-observance of the principles of natural justice as the legal issue of non- applicability of the decision in the case of Goetze basis the several decisions in favour of appellant was neither raised nor any clarification sought on the same; (iii…

ACIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad vs. Nsl Renewable Power Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 725/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri Pratik Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, DR
Section 148ASection 154

…sessee was not claimed by the assessee in the return of income nor during the assessment proceedings. In such situation, the learned Assessing Officer being bound by the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) rightly refused to consider the claims beyond the return of income either original or revised, as the case may be. 6. Per contra, it is the submission by the learned AR that when once the learned Assessing Officer considered the corresponding income for taxing the same, it is not open for the learned Assessing Officer to refuse to allow cre…

Acc Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6082/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…uction u/s 80IB which the assessee had neither claimed in the return of income nor through a revised return of income and whether the decision of the tribunal was contrary to the law as spelt out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323 (SC) and in Gurjargravures (P) Ltd. reported in 111ITR 1 (SC). However, in the present appeal, what is to be decided is whether the deduction u/s 80IA would be admissible when the accounts of the undertaking for the year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have audited as provided in sec. 80IA(7) at the time of fili…

Acc Ltd ( Formerly Known As the Associates Cement Companies Ltd), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4669/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…uction u/s 80IB which the assessee had neither claimed in the return of income nor through a revised return of income and whether the decision of the tribunal was contrary to the law as spelt out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323 (SC) and in Gurjargravures (P) Ltd. reported in 111ITR 1 (SC). However, in the present appeal, what is to be decided is whether the deduction u/s 80IA would be admissible when the accounts of the undertaking for the year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have audited as provided in sec. 80IA(7) at the time of fili…

Addl.C.I.T. Ltu, Mumbai vs. Acc Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4556/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon'Ble

Section 143(3)Section 145A

…uction u/s 80IB which the assessee had neither claimed in the return of income nor through a revised return of income and whether the decision of the tribunal was contrary to the law as spelt out by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323 (SC) and in Gurjargravures (P) Ltd. reported in 111ITR 1 (SC). However, in the present appeal, what is to be decided is whether the deduction u/s 80IA would be admissible when the accounts of the undertaking for the year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have audited as provided in sec. 80IA(7) at the time of fili…

Srf Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addl CIT, New Delhi

In the result, this ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 774/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Yogesh Kumar Ussrf Limited Vs. Acit Unitech Crest, Greenwood Range – 9, City Block – C, Sector – 45, Ltu, New Delhi Gurgaon – 122 003 Pan No. Aaacs 0206 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pradeep Dinodia, Shri R. K. Kapoor C.A. Shri Ravi Kumar Revenue By Shri Mahesh Shah, Cit (Dr) Shri Rajesh Kumar, Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 10/01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/02/2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Dated 27.09.2016 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-44, New Delhi [For Short, Cit(A)] Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 144C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [For Short, 'The Act'] For Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under:-

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 92C

…assessee made such additional claim vide letter dated 16.02.2016 before the AO. The AO did not entertain the additional claim of the assessee. The DRP did not admit the additional claim of the assessee relying on the judgment in Goetze (India) Limited vs CIT 284 ITR 323. 24. Going into the details, the Ld. Counsel argued that the Objective of the subsidy/incentive under TUF scheme was expansion of capacities, modernisation and up-gradation of facilities and hence nature of subsidy was capital in nature not revenue in nature. The assessee also placed reliance upon the following judgments wherein such subsidy was…

Tata Steel Limited, Mumbai vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -2(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for AY 2017-18 is partly allowed

ITA 2374/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri M Balaganeshvkvkla-1340@Eaqcbz@2021¼Fu-Oa- 2016&17½ Vkvkla-2374@Eaqcbz@2022 ¼Fu-Oa- 2017&18½ Tata Steel Limited Bombay House, 24, Homi Mody Street Fort Mumbai-400 001 ..... Vihykfkhz/Appellant Pan No. Aaact2803M Cuke Vs. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax/Income-Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, ..... Izfroknh/Respondent Delhi

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar &For Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 263Section 36(1)(iii)Section 80GSection 90

…Book Profits u/s 115JB of the Act. The claim was made for the first time in assessment proceedings before the AO. The AO rejected the claim of asssessee, by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Goetze India Limited 284 ITR 323. The learned AR fairly concedes that the AO cannot consider any claim not made in the return of income/revised return of income, however, there is no impediment for the Appellate Authorities to admit fresh claim of assessee. In support of his submissions, the learned AR placed reliance on the following decisions. 1) Banc Tec TPS India Pvt. Ltd.…

Ikp Trust, Mumbai vs. ITO 23(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3239/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234B

…income under section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act. 1961 (Act) 1.2. On the facts and in circumstances of the case, and in law the learned CIT(A) has erred in applying the ratio of the ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Limited vs CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC) while rejecting the aforesaid claim of the Assessee without appreciating the principle laid by various judicial fora's which provides that it is the duty of the appellate authorities to apply appropriate provisions of the Act and compute the income of the Assessee correctly and refrain from denying any claim merely because the Assessee had f…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1, Jalandhar vs. Measage Bhagwati Lacto Vegetarian Exports (P) Limited, Ferozepur Cantt

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1/ASR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: None (Written submission)For Respondent: Sh. Rohit Mehra, CIT DR
Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 01/Asr/2020 Assessment Year: 2016-17 The Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s Bhagwati Lacto Vegetarian Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Exports (P) Ltd., Shop No. 18- Jalandhar 1/2, Anaj Mandi, Ferozepur, Cantt [PAN: AADCB 4295Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : None (Written submission) Respondent by: Sh. Rohit Mehra, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 08.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 17.02.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, A.M.: This appeal is directed…

Paradeep Phosphates Limited, Bhubaneswar vs. Principal CIT-1, Bhubaneswar

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 76/CTK/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack15 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2016-17 Paradeep Paradeep Phosphates Phosphates Vs. Pcit, Bhubaneswar Pcit, Bhubaneswar-1 Limited, 5Th Th Floor, Bayan Bhawan, J.N.Road, Kharvel Bhawan, J.N.Road, Kharvel Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aabcp 3276 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri B.K.Mahapatra, Ca B.K.Mahapatra, Ca Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, M.K.Gautam, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/0 02/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 15/0 /02/2023 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mahapatra, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32ASection 35A

…going into the merits as to whether it is revised return that is to be considered or whether it is original return that is to be considered, nor going into the principles of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs CIT, 284 ITR 323 (SC), as it is noticed that the consequential order to the order passed u/s.263 has already been passed and the assessee is in appeal against the said order, we are of the view that our findings here could prejudice the mind of the ld CIT(A) and consequently, we decline to interfere with the order passed u/s.263 by the Pr. CIT. 6. In the result,…

Ravinder Kumar Goyal, Delhi vs. ITO Ward 46(2), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8319/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Her When She Is Empowered By Law To Do So.

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Princy Singla, Senior DR
Section 54F

…d that assessee did not claim the deduction u/s 54F of the Act in his ITR. He noted that it was only at the fag end of the assessment proceedings the same was claimed. Ld. CIT (A) referred to the decision 6 ITA No.8319/Del./2019 of Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC) and proceeded to hold that AO was right in not entertaining the claim of deduction u/s 54F. 6. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. 7. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has made a genuine claim and the same should have been considered by the author…

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 497/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…ss Account. Besides, the claim was not made through IT Return or Revised IT return and therefore fresh claim raised during the course of assessment proceedings was not accepted in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd, [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee relying upon various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Tribunal in DCIT v. South Asian Petrochem in ITA Nos. 1222 to 1241/Kol/2014 decided on May 3, 2017. 16.1. We observe that it is settled law that subsidy granted for the purpose/object of encouraging setting up of new…

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 496/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…ss Account. Besides, the claim was not made through IT Return or Revised IT return and therefore fresh claim raised during the course of assessment proceedings was not accepted in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd, [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee relying upon various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Tribunal in DCIT v. South Asian Petrochem in ITA Nos. 1222 to 1241/Kol/2014 decided on May 3, 2017. 16.1. We observe that it is settled law that subsidy granted for the purpose/object of encouraging setting up of new…

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 2143/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…ss Account. Besides, the claim was not made through IT Return or Revised IT return and therefore fresh claim raised during the course of assessment proceedings was not accepted in view of decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Goetze (India) Ltd, [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee relying upon various decisions including the decision of the Hon’ble Tribunal in DCIT v. South Asian Petrochem in ITA Nos. 1222 to 1241/Kol/2014 decided on May 3, 2017. 16.1. We observe that it is settled law that subsidy granted for the purpose/object of encouraging setting up of new…