New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (12) TMI 180 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (12) TMI 180 - ITAT MUMBAI - TMI - Disallowance of brokerage amount paid - Held that:- AO has not brought any evidence on record either to prove that the transaction is a colourable device to disallow the same or the brokerage paid by the assessee in the present case is excessive or unreasonable to apply the provisions of section 40(A)(2) of the Act. Similarly, the Ld. CIT(A) has not recorded the reasons for holding that the object behind making payment of the amount in question was tax avo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

our of assessee. - Disallowance of repairs and maintenance expenses - Held that:- We notice that the AO has disallowed 20% of expenses for want of evidence, however, the Ld. CIT(A) has taken altogether new ground and taken the view that the expenditure other than the society charges aforesaid, are capital in nature. We also notice that the CIT(A) did not seek any explanation from the assessee before arriving at such a conclusion. Accordingly, we are of the view that this issue requires fresh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rder dated 15/05/2012 passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-23 Mumbai for the Asst. Year 2008-09, whereby the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, against order dated 27/12/2010 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a partnership firm, engaged in the business of financing investments and hiring premises filed its return of income for the relevant Asst. year, declaring the total .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssee enhanced the disallowance claimed as brokerage from ₹ 14,25,020/-determined by the AO to ₹ 21,91,020/- and also confirmed the disallowance claimed as repairs and maintenance expenses. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has raised the following effective grounds of appeal:- 1) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in disallowing brokerage paid to the tune of ₹ 21,19,020/-. 2) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (App .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

g the disallowance of ₹ 3,14,322/- on account of repairs and maintenance. 6) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in giving findings which were irrelevant for deciding the issue of allowability of repairs expenditure. 7) The appellant submits the additions suggested by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on account of repairs be deleted. 8) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in assuming jurisdiction to make an enhancement on the issue of repairs. 4. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

₹ 7,66,000/-. The assessee also received security deposit of ₹ 7 crores. The appellant/assessee paid brokerage of ₹ 21,91,020/- in respect of the said leave and license agreement to Viwa Chem Pvt. Ltd. i.e. 2% security deposits of ₹ 7 crores plus 2% of license fees for the period of 36 months and service tax @ 12.36%. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that Viwa Chem Pvt. Ltd. has confirmed the payment. The AO has wrongly applied the provisions of section 40A(2)(b) of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ade by the AO is based on wrong assumption, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the same. But instead of delegating of disallowance the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly enhanced the disallowance to the total amount claimed exceeding the powers conferred on him u/s 251of the Act. 5. On the other hand the Ld. departmental representative (DR) relying upon the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that same has been passed in accordance with the provisions of law and as per the evidence on record. Therefo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the normal rate. On the other hand the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the ratio laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Macdowell & Co vs. CIT (1985) 154 ITR 148(SC), Hon ble High Court of Calcutta, in CIT vs Shekkawat Rajputana Trading Corporation(1999) 236 ITR 1950 Cal and Hon ble Bombay High Court in Twinstar Holding Ltd.vs DCIT (2003) 260 ITR 8 (Bom.), disallowed the entire amount claimed by the assessee holding that the company to whom the brokerage was paid has failed to establish tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sh the claim of the assessee that it has paid net brokerage of ₹ 19,42,777/-and deducted the tax of ₹ 2,48,243/- at source. In our considered opinion the said facts are sufficient to draw a presumption that the transaction in question is genuine and said presumption can only be rebutted by cogent and convincing evidence. The authorities below have held the transaction as colourable device on the basis of surmises and conjunctures without referring to any convincing evidence. AO has n .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e, therefore, not based on any evidence. Since, the Ld. CIT(A) has not referred any evidence to justify the disallowance made by the AO or to enhance the same, it can safely be presumed that the payment in question has been made by the assessee as brokerage. The impugned order is therefore not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, we set aside the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. Since, we have decided the first issue in favour of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

A) has wrongly confirmed the disallowance made by the AO. Per contra the Ld. DR relying on the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that since the assessee had incurred the expense of ₹ 11,83,241/- in connection with maintenance of assessee s office premises at 3rd floor, Liberty Building, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the disallowance. 9. During assessment proceedings the assessee produced copy of ledger account as per which the assessee had incurred the expense of ₹ 3,88,371 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version