TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 1017X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upport of the order of the CIT(A) and does not raise any fresh issue. 3. Ld. DR is heard. 4. Since the cross-objection is only in support of the order of CIT(A), the same is infructuous and dismissed accordingly. 5. The Revenue s appeal raises following grounds: ( i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of commission paid amounting to ₹ 16,80,000/-. ( ii) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s 69A of the I.T. Act 1961 amounting to ₹ 7,81,585/-. The appellant craves the right to add or alter any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . CIT(A) deleted the addition by following observations: 4.2. I have carefully perused the evidences placed on record by the appellant and the submissions made by her. I have also carefully gone through the logic of the AO as evident from the assessment order. The facts are that the appellant ha earned commission income to the tune of ₹ 60 lacs and has paid commission to the tune of ₹ 16,80,0001-. She has given the complete names and addresses of all the persons to whom she has paid commission. She has also produced copies of ITR acknowledgements and copies of bank statements of all the persons to whom she has paid commission. These evidences cannot be brushed aside by the AO simply on the basis of susp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nces to the contrary. He has done nothing of the sort and has merely made the additions on the basis of pure suspicion. Reliance is placed in the order of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CI'I' Vs. Septu India Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 305 ITR 295 (P H). wherein the Hon'ble High Court upheld the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Bench D, New Delhi in the case of the respondent for A.Y. 1997-98. Aggrieved, Revenue is before us. 10. Ld. DR contends that filing of income-tax returns of the recipients does not suffice the requirement as merely book entries do not prove the rendering of service and genuineness of payment for the same. With incometax returns, no other statements have been fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he amount of ₹ 1,32,563/- stands included in the next year's audited books of accounts and hence, no revenue has been evaded for tax. I have carefully perused the submissions made by the appellant, who has stated that copies of service tax returns were duly filed vide para 9 of our letter dated 18.08.2011, which has not been taken into consideration by the Id. AO before making this addition. I have also gone through carefully the assessment order passed by the AO, wherein he has stated that no proof of service tax paid was filed by the assessee during the course of the assessment proceedings. This is not totally correct as copy of service tax returns had already been placed on record by the appellant and the AO could have called f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid by her to sub agents. All these details were incorporated in the books of a/c which are duly audited. The necessary confirmations are filed, therefore, the assessee discharged its burden on both issues in a reasonable manner by enough evidence. Merely because the assessee could not produce the recipients in person cannot be held against the assessee, overlooking and brushing aside the overwhelming evidence filed in support of payment of commission as a business expenditure incurred during the course of business. 14. Apropos ground no. 2 ld. Counsel contends that the service tax difference was clearly explained, reconciled along with the copy of service tax return and challan which is duly considered by CIT(A) in his deta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
