Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 1090 - ITAT KOLKATADisallowance in respect of commission - commission was paid to ten individuals who procured orders and medicines from the retail medicine shops for the assessee, which was paid on weekly basis - Commission paid @ 1% or lesser on the orders procured by them - HELD THAT:- We note that the issue has already been dealt in appeal on similar set of facts in assessee’s own case in AY 2006-07 [2015 (11) TMI 1879 - ITAT KOLKATA] by deleting the disallowance and restricting it to 50% of the expenses claimed. Ld. CIT(A) did not pay heed to this finding of AY 2006-07 relating to disallowance of commission but relied on the same order of Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2006- 07 while dealing with the other issue of disallowance of carriage outward expenses. We do not find any justification in placing reliance on one issue and not on the other issue by the Ld. CIT(A) while dealing with identical issues. Considering this, we restrict the disallowance of commission in the present case before us to 50% of the claim of Rs.13,18,500/- and delete the balance. The assessee gets a relief accordingly. Disallowance of 70% made on expenses towards carriage outward for the reasons that proper supporting evidence for the expenses was not produced - HELD THAT:- We note that this issue was also dealt with by the then Ld. CIT(A)-XXXIV, Kolkata in the order in assessee’s own case wherein the disallowance was restricted to 50% of the carriage outward expenses as against 70%. Following the same, we give part relief to the assessee on this issue by restricting the disallowance to 50% instead of 70% made by the Ld. AO. The assessee gets part relief accordingly. Bogus purchases - Difference on account of opening balance in the details as furnished by the three parties - HELD THAT:- We fail to understand how the opening balance in respect of purchases made by the assessee can lead to disallowance from the purchases of the current year since the purchases for the current year from the three parties by the assessee are in reconciliation and have no differences as tabulated by the AO. CIT(A) confirmed this addition by observing that no reconciliation was furnished in this respect. However, we note from the tables reproduced that there is no differences in the purchases made during the year. The difference is only on account of opening balance in the details as furnished by the three parties. We do not find any merit and rationality in making such a disallowance by treating the opening balance as bogus purchases from the purchases of the current year. The opening balance would always relate to the purchases which were made in the preceding years and not the year under consideration and, therefore, there cannot be any disallowance on account of the opening balance from the current year’s purchases. In terms of this observation and finding, we are inclined to delete the addition made by the Ld. AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) towards bogus purchases. Appeals of assessee are partly allowed.
|