TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1044X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ltd., Pune - CIT(A) was of the opinion that the Assessing Officer was not justified in restricting the sales commission to 5% in place of 7.5% and accordingly, directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition - Held that:- The addition has been made u/s. 40A(2) of the Act. The Assessing Officer has restricted the payment of commission from 7.5% to 5%. However, we find that not even a single comparable case has been brought on record to justify this act of the Assessing Officer. Without bringing any comparable case, in our considered opinion, no disallowance can be made u/s. 40A(2) of the Act. Considering the disallowance from all the possible angles, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) - Decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n amount of ₹ 22,42,303/- against advertisement and sales promotions. The Assessing Officer found that in the immediately preceding financial year under the same head, the assessee has debited only an amount of ₹ 25,894/-. The assessee was asked to justify its claim. The assessee filed a detailed reply stating that amounts were spent for participation in exhibitions of EXCON 09 and CONSTRO-09. In support, the assessee filed an agreement made between the assessee and M/s. AEPL. The Assessing Officer was of the opinion that when the assessee is spending an amount of ₹ 2.02 Crores as commission exclusively for sales and sales promotion, then why assessee has spent an amount of ₹ 22,42,303/- for exhibitions. The Assessin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y this, Revenue is before us. 5. Learned DR supported the assessment order. Counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the Ld. CIT(A). 6. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the Assessing Officer has not disputed the genuineness of the expenses. It is also not a case where the expenses have not been incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of business. When the twin conditions having been fulfilled i.e. genuineness of the expenses and wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of the business, we decline to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A). Ground No.2 is, accordingly, dismissed. 7. Ground No.3 relates to the disallowance of sales ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ordingly, disallowance of ₹ 67,59,579/- was made u/s. 40A(2) of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has considered this issue at para 6 on page 10 of his order. Before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee once again reiterated what has been submitted before the Assessing Officer. It was pointed out to the Ld. CIT(A) that the sales in Goa taken by the Assessing Officer at ₹ 180 Lac is incorrect as the sales in Goa is only ₹ 5.06 Lac. It was also brought to the notice of the Ld. CIT(A) that as per the Industry norms, commission @ 7.5% of sales is reasonable. The Assessing Officer has not doubted the genuineness of the commission payment. The AEPL has disclosed the receipt of commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
