TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1271X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the Assessing Officer. However, in the instant case the Assessing Officer had made certain observations which according to him could not be explained satisfactorily by assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to give one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the allowability of such commission and decide the issue as per fact and law. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA No.4275/Del/2018 - - - Dated:- 27-8-2019 - Sh. R. K. Panda, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Ms. Aakriti Dhawan, Advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : ₹ 407359/- Anuj Jain (HUF) : ₹ 388667/- 4. He issued notice u/s. 133(6) to which the parties confirmed that they have received commission. The Assessing Officer noted from the records that the assessee had not paid any such commission in the immediately preceding assessment year whereas assessee has paid substantial commission during this year to various parties. From the replies received, from various parties to whom commission was paid, the Assessing Officer noted the following : i) M/s Anuj Jain Anuj Jain (HUF) has claimed commission on a/c of sale effected to M/s Ambika Sales (wrongly written a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in his reply has stated that he has received commission for obtaining orders for Ketan Polymers and Shri Ram Traders. 5. In view of the above the Assessing Officer held that the letters received from the above parties are not reliable for which he issued letters to various parties to whom sales were claimed to have been effected. Most of the letters came back un-served However, replies were received from M/s. Ketan Polymers M/s. Multipac Industries. M/s. Ketan Polymers stated that the transactions with the assessee took place directly without involvement of any third party and M/s. Multipac Industries also stated that transaction was made with the assessee directly. The Assessing Officer, therefore, confronted the same t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant. 6.2 The Assessing Officer has disallowed the claim of commission by making an enquiry from parties to whom sales had purportedly been effected by the commission agents. Most of the letters issued by the Assessing Officer to the parties come back un-served and replies were received from M/s. Ketan Polymer, M/s. Multipac Industries both of whom stated that the transaction with the appellant did not involve any third party and they have made transaction directly with the appellant. 6.3 The Assessing Officer confronted the appellant during the course of assessment proceedings with his findings. The appellant replied in general, vague terms that the parties may have stated that they had direct deali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t been rebutted by the appellant either in assessment or in appellate proceedings, 1 find the appellant has not been able to establish the claim of commission for rendering services in furtherance of its business as claimed by it. I find there is no nexus between payment of commission and the business of the appellant in view of which I sustain the addition of ₹ 21,35,426/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing the claim of commission. In the result, the appeal grounds are dismissed and the addition made by the Assessing Office is sustained. 9. Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 10. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly challenged the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us parties during the year whereas no such commission was paid in the immediately preceding assessment year. Further commission has been claimed by more than 1 broker for obtaining orders from the same party. Some of the suppliers have denied to have any involvement of any third party. He accordingly submitted that the order of the CIT(A) being in accordance with law should be upheld. 12. I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. I find the Assessing Officer in the instant case disallowed the commission of ₹ 21,35,426/- paid by the assessee on the ground that such commission has been claimed by more than ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
