United Commercial Bank v. CIT

240 ITR 355Supreme Court of India1999#245 most cited

What is United Commercial Bank v. CIT authority for?

Liabilities accrued on a notional basis are allowable as deductions under the mercantile system of accounting even if their exact quantification or discharge is deferred to a future date or if the demand itself is disputed.

314

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

United Commercial Bank v. CIT · Section 145 · Section 37(1) · mercantile system of accounting · accrual basis deduction · unascertained liability · provision for expenses · deferred quantification · disputed liability · business deductions

Also reported as

156 CTR 380

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 145Section 36(1)(viii)Section 10(34)

Issues it is cited on

section 36(2)(v)section 145(1)section 36(1)(viia)section 36(2)section 36(1)(vii)interest on securitiesmercantile system of accountingsection 10(34)profits and gains of business or professionsection 145section 36(1)disallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing United Commercial Bank v. CIT

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Sud Chemie India P. Ltd, Cochin

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 41/COCH/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari , Am & George George K., Jm

…to credit before it is actually received; it brings into debit an expenditure for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed, (judgment of this Court in the case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 : (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC)). Therefore, the accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time needs to be presumed to be correct till the AO comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits. As stated, there is no finding given by the AO on the correctness of the Accounting Standa…

The ACIT, Cochin vs. M/S.Sud Chemie India P. Ltd, Aluva

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical

ITA 3/COCH/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Feb 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari , Am & George George K., Jm

…to credit before it is actually received; it brings into debit an expenditure for which a legal liability has been incurred before it is actually disbursed, (judgment of this Court in the case of United Commercial Bank vs. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 : (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC)). Therefore, the accounting method followed by an assessee continuously for a given period of time needs to be presumed to be correct till the AO comes to the conclusion for reasons to be given that the system does not reflect true and correct profits. As stated, there is no finding given by the AO on the correctness of the Accounting Standa…

Kallakuruchi Co-Op Sugar Mills, Villupuram vs. DCIT Villuupram Circle, Villupuram

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2236/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2236/Mds/2017 %नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Mr.S.Venugopalan, CAFor Respondent: Mrs.S.Vijayaprabha, JCIT

…cannot be considered as component of cost of production for determining the value of closing stock. The ld. AR relied on the following judgments for the proposition that consistency to be followed in income-tax proceedings: 1. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (240 ITR 355)(SC) 2. CIT v. Woodward Governor India P. Ltd. (312 ITR 254)(SC) 3. Merck Ltd. v. DCIT (2 ITR (Trib)-OL 629 (Mumbai) 4. CIT v. Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (360 ITR 82) (Allahabad) In our opinion, each assessment year is an independent assessment of unit and the wrong method of accounting followed by the assessee cannot be appropriated. In our opini…

State Bank of India, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(2)

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4736/MUM/2010[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhstate Bank Of India Acit Circle (2)(2), Financial Reporting, Compliance & Mumbai. Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Circle (2)(2), State Bank Of India Mumbai. Financial Reporting, Compliance & Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR)
Section 14ASection 195Section 253Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 43D

…to the contention that the assessee cannot set up a claim in the return of income which is altogether different from the manner in which entries are made in its accounts, we may notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank in 240 ITR 355(SC). While reversing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in 200 ITR 68 (Cal), wherein it was held that the assessee cannot prepare the computation of its income from income tax purposes in a manner different form the method under which it keeps accounts. It was held by the Supreme Court that preparation of the balance sheet in accord…

ACIT Cir 2(2), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 4598/MUM/2010[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2018AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singhstate Bank Of India Acit Circle (2)(2), Financial Reporting, Compliance & Mumbai. Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit Circle (2)(2), State Bank Of India Mumbai. Financial Reporting, Compliance & Taxation Department, 19Th Floor, Vs. Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Mumbai-400021. Pan: Aaacs8577K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Meena (CIT-DR)
Section 14ASection 195Section 253Section 254(1)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40Section 43D

…to the contention that the assessee cannot set up a claim in the return of income which is altogether different from the manner in which entries are made in its accounts, we may notice the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank in 240 ITR 355(SC). While reversing the judgment of the Calcutta High Court reported in 200 ITR 68 (Cal), wherein it was held that the assessee cannot prepare the computation of its income from income tax purposes in a manner different form the method under which it keeps accounts. It was held by the Supreme Court that preparation of the balance sheet in accord…

Vijaya Bank, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax Large Tax Payer Unit, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is dismissed

ITA 915/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ananthan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar Singh, JCIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

…he action of the AO in disallowing loss claimed on treating investments as stock-in-trade by drawing the investment trading account of Rs.775,96,55,047. The Tribunal held “16. We have heard both sides and find that the Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank in 240 ITR 355 has held as under : "In our view, as stated above, consistently for 30 years, the assessee was valuing the stock-in- trade at cost for the purpose of statutory balance-sheet, and for the income-tax return, valuation was at cost or market value, whichever was lower. That practice was accepted by the Department and there was no justifiable reason f…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…ion in assessee’s own case decided in favour by CIT (A) for AY 2003-04 and by ITAT for AY 2007-08, and also the decisions reported in Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd.: 37 ITR 1 (SC), Metal Box India (P) Limited (1969): 73 ITR 53 (SC) , United Commercial Bank v. CIT 240 ITR 355 (SC), Bharat Earth Movers: 245 ITR 428 (SC) , CIT v Vinitec Corpn. (P) Ltd.: 278 ITR 337 (Delhi), National Mineral Development Corporation Ltd. v JCIT: 98 ITD 278 (Hyd. ITAT), Ld. AR argued that that liability which has arisen in the relevant accounting year is an allowable deduction even though its actual quantification and discharge is deferred…

DCIT Cir 3, Thane vs. The Thane District Central Co Operative Bank Ltd, Thane

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

ITA 5065/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 143(3)

…be the reason to treat stock-in-trade as capital investment and thereby alter intention of holding investment which has been held as stock-in-trade only. in this matter, we keep reliance on the decision given by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UCO Bank (240 ITR 355. Further, the learned A.O., merely looking to holding period till maturity, of investment held under HTM category adversely concluded this investment as Capital Investment in nature which is beyond reality and incorrect. We would like to bring your honor's kind notice that, the learned A.O. failed to understand that although the investments are c…

ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Central; Bank of India, Mumbai

Appeal stands dismissed

ITA 910/MUM/2011[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.8581/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Deputy Commissioner Of Central Bank Of India Income Tax 2(1) Central Office बनाम/ Central Accounts Deptt. Aaykar Bhavan Vs. Chandermukhi, 4Th Floor Room No. 575, 5Th Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-2498-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No. 153/2012 [Arising Out Of Ita No.8581/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) Central Bank Of India Deputy Commissioner Of Central Office Income Tax 2(1) बनाम/ Central Accounts Deptt. Aaykar Bhavan Chandermukhi, 4Th Floor Room No. 575, 5Th Floor Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacc-2498-P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : &

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147

…treated as capital gain as they are covered within the definition of Long term capital gain. Hence the A.O.is not justified in treating the Long term capital gain shown by the assessee as business income. Reliance is placed on the decision of UCO Bank vs CIT (240 ITR 355). Reliance is also placed on the decision of CIT Vs NSS Investment Pvt. Ltd. (277 ITR 149)(MAD) wherein it was held that a company can hold shares as the stock-in trade for the purpose of doing business of buying and selling such shares at the same time it can also hold some other shares as its capital for the purpose of earning dividend. The sha…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 931/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…method of accounting system, there is no justification in interfering with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue of amortization of premium on government securities. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 ; (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC) and South Indian Bank Ltd., (ITA No.126/Coch/2004, dated. Sept, 2005 followed." (ii) The Khanapur Co-op Bank Ltd v. ITO – ITA ITA Nos.979 & 1035/B/13 .......903/B/16 Canara Bank Page 15 of 59 No.141/PNJ/2011, dated.8.9.2011 : The Hon'ble Bench of Panaji Tribunal had recorded its findings that "6. Likewise, the premium amortized at Rs.1,78,0…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

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

ITA 1493/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…method of accounting system, there is no justification in interfering with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue of amortization of premium on government securities. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 ; (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC) and South Indian Bank Ltd., (ITA No.126/Coch/2004, dated. Sept, 2005 followed." (ii) The Khanapur Co-op Bank Ltd v. ITO – ITA ITA Nos.979 & 1035/B/13 .......903/B/16 Canara Bank Page 15 of 59 No.141/PNJ/2011, dated.8.9.2011 : The Hon'ble Bench of Panaji Tribunal had recorded its findings that "6. Likewise, the premium amortized at Rs.1,78,0…

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

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

ITA 1440/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…method of accounting system, there is no justification in interfering with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue of amortization of premium on government securities. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 ; (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC) and South Indian Bank Ltd., (ITA No.126/Coch/2004, dated. Sept, 2005 followed." (ii) The Khanapur Co-op Bank Ltd v. ITO – ITA ITA Nos.979 & 1035/B/13 .......903/B/16 Canara Bank Page 15 of 59 No.141/PNJ/2011, dated.8.9.2011 : The Hon'ble Bench of Panaji Tribunal had recorded its findings that "6. Likewise, the premium amortized at Rs.1,78,0…

Canara Bank vs. Addl.C.I, .T

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

ITA 979/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…method of accounting system, there is no justification in interfering with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue of amortization of premium on government securities. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 ; (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC) and South Indian Bank Ltd., (ITA No.126/Coch/2004, dated. Sept, 2005 followed." (ii) The Khanapur Co-op Bank Ltd v. ITO – ITA ITA Nos.979 & 1035/B/13 .......903/B/16 Canara Bank Page 15 of 59 No.141/PNJ/2011, dated.8.9.2011 : The Hon'ble Bench of Panaji Tribunal had recorded its findings that "6. Likewise, the premium amortized at Rs.1,78,0…

J.C.I.T vs. M/S Canara Bank

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

ITA 1035/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior Advocate and Shri S.Ananthan, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.R. Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

…method of accounting system, there is no justification in interfering with the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on this issue of amortization of premium on government securities. United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 156 CTR (SC) 380 ; (1999) 240 ITR 355 (SC) and South Indian Bank Ltd., (ITA No.126/Coch/2004, dated. Sept, 2005 followed." (ii) The Khanapur Co-op Bank Ltd v. ITO – ITA ITA Nos.979 & 1035/B/13 .......903/B/16 Canara Bank Page 15 of 59 No.141/PNJ/2011, dated.8.9.2011 : The Hon'ble Bench of Panaji Tribunal had recorded its findings that "6. Likewise, the premium amortized at Rs.1,78,0…

Baitarani Gramya Bank, Bhubaneswar vs. ACIT, Balasore

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 318/CTK/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Aug 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mohapatra, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…y were entitled to deductions and it could not be denied by the authorities under the pretext that they were shown as investment in the balance sheet. 30. He further relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of United Commercial Bank vs CIT, 240 ITR 355 (SC), wherein, it has been held as under: ” Where the assessee-bank had been valuing its stock-in-trade (investments) "at cost" in the balance sheet but it had been valuing the same investments "at cost or market value, whichever is lower", for income-tax purposes for over 30 years, the same could not be discarded by the Revenue on the ground th…

ACIT, Trichy vs. The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1527/CHNY/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1340 & 1341/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Sankaralingam, CIT

…ras High Court found that the expenses incurred or interest paid on purchase of shares was only revenue expenditure and not capital expenditure. The Madras High Court placed its reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 and found that interest paid by the assessee will not be capital expenditure. In view of this judgment of Madras High Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that both the authorities are not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. accordingly, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and disallowance made by the…

ACIT, Trichy vs. The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1496/CHNY/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1340 & 1341/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Sankaralingam, CIT

…ras High Court found that the expenses incurred or interest paid on purchase of shares was only revenue expenditure and not capital expenditure. The Madras High Court placed its reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 and found that interest paid by the assessee will not be capital expenditure. In view of this judgment of Madras High Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that both the authorities are not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. accordingly, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and disallowance made by the…

The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur vs. Addl. CIT, Trichy

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1341/CHNY/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1340 & 1341/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Sankaralingam, CIT

…ras High Court found that the expenses incurred or interest paid on purchase of shares was only revenue expenditure and not capital expenditure. The Madras High Court placed its reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 and found that interest paid by the assessee will not be capital expenditure. In view of this judgment of Madras High Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that both the authorities are not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. accordingly, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and disallowance made by the…

The Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., Karur vs. Addl. CIT, Trichy

In the result, I.T.A. Nos

ITA 1340/CHNY/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Apr 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. Georgeआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1340 & 1341/Mds/2013 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2003-04 & 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri N. Quadir Hoseyn, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Sankaralingam, CIT

…ras High Court found that the expenses incurred or interest paid on purchase of shares was only revenue expenditure and not capital expenditure. The Madras High Court placed its reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999) 240 ITR 355 and found that interest paid by the assessee will not be capital expenditure. In view of this judgment of Madras High Court, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that both the authorities are not justified in disallowing the claim of the assessee. accordingly, the orders of the authorities below are set aside and disallowance made by the…

Classic Shares & Stock Broking Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 40, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed

ITA 1617/MUM/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” Bench, Mumbai Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)& Sandeep Gosain (JM) I.T.A. No. 1617/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year 2003-04) I.T.A. No. 6876/Mum/2008 (Assessment Year 2005-06) Classic Shares & Stock ACIT CC-40 Broking Services Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan Radha Bhavan, 1st Floor M.K. Road 121, Nagindas Master Road Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400 023. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AACCC5745P Assessee by S/Shri Rajiv Khandelwal & Neelkanth Khandelwal Department by Dr.P. Naniel Date of Hearing 30.3.2017 Date of Pronouncement 12.4.2017 O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :- The appeals…