TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 114X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to show that these commissions have been paid to them on account of purchases. Thus, the primary onus cast upon the assessee, stood discharged and even if these persons could not be produced or did not appear inspite of summon u/s 131, that does not mean the material and evidence filed by the assessee was incorrect or has been found to be false. Assessee was able to substantiate its claim thou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is mainly aggrieved by levy of penalty of ₹ 3,09,000/- made on account of disallowance of commission /brokerage on purchases. 2. The facts in brief are that assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing of garments of various brands. During the year assessee has claimed brokerage/commission on purchase of ₹ 10,47,592/-. AO disallowed the entire brokerage. Before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he copy of confirmation, income tax return etc. filed by the parties directly before the AO in response to summon made u/s 131. The sole reason for disallowance in the quantum proceedings was that, none of these persons could be produced for a deposition when the assessee was asked to produce these persons. Hence solely on this reasoning it was held that assessee could not prove the claim to be ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubstantiate its claim though such a claim did not found favour only for the reason that these parties did not appear. There is no other material or evidence on record to show that such payment of brokerage / commission is bogus or is coloured transaction. Accordingly, under these facts and circumstances no penalty can be levied for furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income and same is directe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
