9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 153X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing this appeal in time. Consequently, we condone the delay. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and is in the business of undertaking manning jobs as a sub-contractor from ONGC's main contractor. She operates in the name and style of M/s. Roopswaroop Shipping Management Co. The manning jobs include providing of manpower for shipping companies and also undertake to provide professionals with marine background such as Captain, Chief Officer, Radio Officer, etc., to Shipping Corporation of India, for their foreign going vessels. She also undertakes consultancy jobs of technical nature and assists in complying with all legal formalities for sale, running an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of giving the ample opportunity which is contrary to the fact as Your Appellant had given, submitted and explained the claim. (3) On the facts and circumstances Your Appellant prays that the supervision charges of Rs. 8,50,000/- may be allowed." 5. Learned Counsel, Mr. Haresh Purushottam Das, on behalf of the assessee, submitted that the Assessing Officer has passed order dated 5th October 2006, under section 154 of the Act, wherein the disallowance of supervision charges of Rs. 8,50,000, was reduced by an amount of Rs. 2,00,000, paid by Mr. Mishu Raja, and that the Commissioner (Appeals) ignored this fact. He further submitted that the details and confirmations were submitted in case of two other payments and these were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Rival contentions heard. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and on perusal of the papers on record, as well as the case laws cited before us, we hold as follows:- 8. As far as the rectification order under section 154 is concerned, as the Assessing Officer himself has reduced the figure of Rs. 2,00,000, from the total disallowance, the Commissioner (Appeals) should have also reduced the same. Coming to the supervision charges paid to Mr. Kiran Shah and Mr. P. Doshi, the assessee has submitted certain proof by way of confirmation letters from them as well as copies of return of income filed by both these persons. Both the Assessing Officer as well as Commissioner (Appeals) have not considered th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
