TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1047X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perversity of a finding of fact, the test applicable is rather strict. The finding should be such which is arrived at without any material, or upon a view of the facts which could not reasonably be entertained or the facts found are such that no person acting judicially and properly instructed as to the relevant law would have come to that determination. This test and benchmark is to be satisfied. It is not possible to hold so in the present case, and interfere. We are not required to reappraise the facts as an appellate court and decide whether we could have arrived at a different factual finding and conclusion. No question of law - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 574/2005, ITA No.655/2005, ITA No.684/2005 - - - Dated:- 10-1-2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... findings recorded by the Tribunal are perverse and therefore, require interference in this appeal on substantial question under Section 260 A of the Act. 5. In order to appreciate the contention, we would like to reproduce the findings recorded by the ITAT in the order for the AY 1994-1995, which are as under: 14. The facts relating to ground No.3 as borne out from record are that the assessee claimed payment of commission to M/s. R A Exports at ₹ 19,73,396 and ₹ 67,171 to M/s. Sikand Farm. 18. Having carefully examined the records available along with the orders of the lower authorities in the light of the rival submissions, we find that the agreement for payment of commission was duly executed between th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are not allowed to blow hot and cold in the same breath. The assessee has clarified the nature of services rendered by the Commission Agents, and if the Revenue had doubts about the commission payments, the assessing officer could have very well summoned the parties to verify the correctness of the claim. By placing the relevant evidence, the assessee has discharged the onus which primarily lay upon it. We, therefore, do not find ourselves in agreement with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this point. Accordingly, we set aside his order and delete the addition made on this account. A reading of the aforesaid paragraphs would reveal that the assessee had entered into agreements with M/s Sikand Farm and M/s R A Exports for pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay commission. The AO has also not taken into consideration the confirmation letters, which were submitted by the respondent assessee, and referred to by the ITAT. The AO has recorded that vide order sheet entry 30.01.97, the respondent assessee was asked to justify the payment of commission and submit evidence on services rendered. It was also directed that the Managing Partner/proprietor of the concerns should appear before the AO. In response to the said directions, the assessee had filed a letter dated 12.02.1997, pointing out several facts justifying the expenditure and payment of commission, including returns filed by M/s Sikand Farm and M/s R A Exports. These firms were assessed tax in different circles and their incomes included the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
