TMI Blog1987 (12) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ajasthan State Electricity Board and also Punjab State Electricity Board. The supplies made to Punjab State Electricity Board were 302 transformers of 63 kVA as against 240 transferors to Rajasthan State Electricity Board. The total turnover.was of the region of Rs. 53,25,000 as against Rs. 1,10,83,000 in the steep fall in turnover, the assessee claimed at the it had to pay a commission of Rs. 30,000 to one Shri Vineet Mehta to procure orders from Punjab State Electricity Board. The Claim of the assessee before the Inspecting Asstt. Commissioner was that the service of Vineet Mehta were utilised in procuring order fro Punjab State Electricity Board had given some contracts to the assessee for the supply of transformers, there was nothing to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as to the quality of the goods and capacity of the supplier and adherence to time schedules these things are more important if not as important as the price and other specifications mentioned in the tenders. It is, therefore, incorrect to state that it is only the tenders that would get the business for the assessee and not any personal effort. Payment of commission was made in the earlier years and was allowed to others. There was therefore nothing new in this. The assessee could not produce the receipt earlier. He has now produced some papers before us to show that by a letter issued on 16-10-1981 the assessee-company appointed Shri Vineet Mehta of Sarojini Marg, C' Scheme, Jaipur as their Liasion Officer agreeing to pay a total commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disqualified from producing this evidence merely on the ground that the evidence was not placed before the authorities below. The sole purpose of judiciary as well as of the revenue is to get at the truth. If the truth is that the payment of commission was genuine and was dictated by the business needs, such a payment should not be disallowed merely on the ground that the assessee was unable to lead proper evidence or on the ground that the evidence led was of such a nature as to create a very high degree of suspicion. There should be no objection to consider any evidence produced to test its authenticity relevance and then to act on it. If the evidence is genuine, reliable, proves the assessee's case, then the assessee should not be denied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
