TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 213X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee has claimed a deduction twice - Revenue could not controvert the findings of the CIT(A) that the expenditure is different from the conference expenses - There is no double deduction claimed – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No. 2744/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 21-5-2014 - Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM And Shri Rajpal Yadav, JM,JJ. For the Appellant : Sh. Satpal Singh, Sr.D.R. For the Respondent : Sh. Paonam, Adv. ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member This is an appeal filed by the Revenue directed against the order dt. 29.3.2012 of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)-XII, New Delhi on the following grounds. 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance made by A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5-2006 entered into with World Wind Energy Association (WWEA) the assessee hosted the 5th World Wind Energy Conference and Exhibition from 6th to 8th November, 2006 at New Delhi. Under the terms and conditions of the said agreement, the WWEA was to be paid 60% of the net surplus of the total receipts from conference after meeting all the expenses incurred in organizing the event. Total receipts from hosting the said conference was in the sum of Rs. 1,58,45,445/ - and total expenditure incurred under different heads was Rs.1,09,12,363/- thereby leaving a net surplus of Rs. 49,33,082/ - to be shared by WWEA and the assessee in the ratio of 60% and 40% respectively. Thus, a sum of Rs.29,59,855/- representing 60% of the net surplus was payable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst their share in the net surplus of the conference income and the same had been paid by the assessee after deduction of tax u/s 195 of the I.T.Act. 4. After hearing rival contentions, we find that the A.O. is wrong in coming to a conclusion that the assessee has claimed a deduction twice. The findings of the Ld.CIT(Appeals) could not be controverted by the Ld.D.R. There is no double deduction claimed. Hence this ground of the Revenue is dismissed. 5. Ground no.2 is on the issue of travelling expenses. The Ld.D.R. could not controvert the findings of the Ld.CIT(Appeals) that this expenditure is different from the conference expenses. He held that separate set of books are being maintained by the assessee. This factual finding is uph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
