Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 617 - AT - Income TaxDeletion of addition made on various expenses Held that:- The assessee raises bills/invoices by estimating net realizable value (i.e. gross sales value in US minus US expenses) and under the relevant custom rules and ARE-1 was field by the assessee in respect of all goods leaving Indian custom boundaries and same detail was duly declared in ARE-I by the assessee and total amount for the same was amounting to Rs. 9.65 crores - The AO concluded the assessment on contradictory finding because on the one hand, the Assessing Officer has considered gross sales realized value in USA as sales of the assessee for the financial year under consideration and on the other hand the AO held that the export sale was completed when the consigned goods left the Indian Customs Border and all expenses incurred thereafter were post sale expenses thus, the first part of findings of the Assessing Officer are correct that the gross sales realized value in USA is the export sales of the assessee but export sales was not completed when the goods left the Indian Custom Borders because it was consignment which was intended to be sold through consignment agent of the assessee i.e. M/s Global Reliance In. in USA. All US expenses incurred by the consignment agent on behalf of the assessee were the responsibility of the assessee as per MOU dated 19.9.2002 and subsequent agreement dated 30.3.2004, which were also certified by CPA audit report, when actual export sale was effected at USA through consignment agent on behalf of the assessee, then expenses claimed by the assessee for the purpose of business cannot be treated as post sales expenses and observations and findings of the Assessing Officer are not correct and justified in this regard and we set aside the same to this extent only - The decision in GE India Technology Centre Private Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income Tax & Anr. [2010 (9) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] followed thus, Circular No. 715 dated 8.8.95 is not applicable. Principle of consistency - The CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee in the AY 2003-04 pertaining to the same claim of the assessee there is no reason to interfere with the same - the department does not have any valid reason to take a different stand on this issue which the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) has taken in favour of the assessee for AY 2003-04 thus, the CIT(A) has granted relief on reasonable, justified and cogent grounds Decided against Revenue. Partial disallowance of expenses Proper bills could not produce Held that:- The CIT (A) has given benefit to the assessee after detailed examination of the claim of the assessee but a minor part of the claim has been disallowed in absence of any details or evidence regarding the expenditure there was no cogent or relevant details or evidence which could substantiate or establish the claim of the assessee related to the part disallowance made by the CIT(A) thus, the order of the CIT(A) upheld pertaining to part disallowance - the assessee miserably failed to substantiate its claim with cogent and reliable evidence and the assessee could not discharge its onus in this regard Decided against Assessee.
|