TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 497X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e disallowed in the subsequent year when the facts and circumstances are identical. In the case of Mobile Communication (India) (P)Ltd vs DCIT [2009 (11) TMI 81 - ITAT DELHI-E ] the Hon'ble ITAT Delhi Bench has also taken the same view. We are of the view that with the evidence on record the assessee ahs established that the commission paid to SFPL was for the purpose of services rendered by SFPL and therefore the same has to be allowed as deduction as the same is for the purpose of business of the assessee. We, therefore, direct the AO to allow the deduction as claimed by the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.592/Kol/2013 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2015 - Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM] For the Appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iness by SFPL for the assessee. The AO also further noticed that the bills were presented for the commission payable of the previous year on 31.03.2009. In the course of the statement recorded of SFPL it was explained by SFPL that there is no specific reason that bills were raised only on 31.03.2009 even though the business were procured by them during the period from 01.04.2008 to 31.03.2009. The AO for the following reasons disallowed the claim of the assessee for deduction of a sum of ₹ 67,62,207/-. 1.Both the commission giving and commission receiving company has transaction only with each other. The assessee company M/s. Dhoot Advisory Services (P)Ltd has given commission only to M/s. Speedfast Finco (P)Ltd and to no othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tap the investments from the retail customers at the root level right till the High Net Worth Individuals and the corporate. The assessee explained that it was also a part of such a chain as the distribution agent and registered with the Association of Mutual Fund in India (AMFI) having been assigned AMFI Registration No.ARN-54995. The assessee also pointed that the commission was paid to SFPL and Smt. Rashmi Agarwal as agents to procure major part of the business for the assessee. The assessee also pointed out that the total expenditure towards administration was ₹ 81,37,559/- including the commission paid to SFPL of ₹ 67,62,027/-. The assessee pointed out that addition has been made by the AO purely on assumption and surmises. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It has merely an expenditure on salary and Bonus of ₹ 1,50,000/- and general expenses of ₹ 23,182/-; Telephone expenses of ₹ 12,560/-; Books and periodicals of ₹ 500/-; no consultancy charges, accounting charges of ₹ 48,000/- etc. The activities of M/s. Speedfast Finco Pvt. Ltd. and their accounts do not show trat it has done any activity on behalf of the appellant assessee i.e. M/s. Dhoot Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. and it would have really received any service from a loss making company who has skeleton staff with no consultancy services providing infrastructure. The motive of the appellant is clear from this fact that it is avoiding payment of taxes by showing payment to a loss making company who has not to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Mutual Fund Schemes for which SFPL acted as sub-broker for which commission was paid to it by the assessee. This statement also gives the names of the clients for whom SFPL acted as sub-broker. None of these documents were disputed by the AO. If the AO had entertained doubts with regard to SFPL having acted as subbroker of the assessee he should have examined various clients whose names are given at page 52 of the assessee's paper book to find out as to whether SFPL acted as sub-broker in the matter of investments made by these parties in various Mutual Fund Schemes. This has not been done by the AO. In the absence of such examination by the AO it is not possible to disregard the evidence available on record for the reasons that ther ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
