TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1082X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or or infirmity in the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Both these appeals by the Revenue are accordingly dismissed. - ITA. Nos: 1708/AHD/12 & ITA No. 178/Ahd/2016 - - - Dated:- 25-7-2016 - SHRI S.K. YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri Roop Chand, D.R. For The Respondent : Shri Tushar P. Hemani, A.R. PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. ITA Nos. 1708/Ahd/2012 178/Ahd/2016 are appeals by the Revenue preferred against two separate orders of the Ld. CIT(A)- Valsad dated 23.05.2012 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10 and dated 24.11.2015 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13. 2. In both these appeals, the grievance of the revenue is the same and, therefore, both these appeals were hea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Total 69,14,768 For A.Y. 2012-13 S.No. Name of the foreign agent Amount of commission 1 Woo-Shin Medics Co. Ltd., Korea 8,06,381 2 Pharmavet International Ltd, Israel 9,726 3 Ramasey Veternity, Egypt 31,687 4 Laurel Business Inc, Panama 75,68,998 5 Representaciones Gaffet, Colombia 7,422 Total ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment order. There is no plausible reason to even doubt the genuineness of the commission paid to the seven foreign agents as the appellant has filed sufficient documentary evidences and expenditure on this front is inevitable and has been incurred year after year. Since the commission has been paid to these foreign agents through banking channel, their identity are proved and confirmations have been obtained from them, I am inclined to accept the said expense as a genuine business expenditure. Secondly I find that nothing has been brought- on record by the revenue to show that those seven foreign agents to whom commission aggregating to ₹ 69,14,768/- was paid, had any operation carried out in India as per the provisions of Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in appellant's own case for A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11 which was decided in appellant's favour. For the A.Y.2011-12 I also decided the issues by following the decision of my predecessor's decision given for A.Y.2009-10 and 2010-11. Now, I am also inclined to follow the decision taken by my predecessor keeping in view the principle of consistency and after; carefully going through the orders. The relevant portion of the decision given in A.Y. 2010-11 as given under para 5.3 of the order is reproduced below: I have considered the observation of the AO in the assessment order as well as the contention raised by the AR of the appellant in the written submission. There is no plausible reason to even doubt the genuineness of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y have rendered any services in India, no tax is deductible from the payment made to them and hence, the provisions of section 195 r.w.s.40(a)(ia) are not applicable. I therefore, delete this addition of ₹ 12,79,366/- made by the A.O. Thus, this ground of appeal is allowed. As is clear from the above the issue under consideration is the same which has been decided by my predecessor and followed by me in the appellant s own case for A.Y. 2012-13. Keeping in view the above, the addition of ₹ 84,24,214/- made by the assessing officer is deleted and the ground of appeal of the appellant is allowed. 12. Aggrieved by this, the revenue is before us. 13. The ld. D.R. strongly supported the findings of the A.O. Per contra, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
