9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 689X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y evidence had been duly submitted before the CIT(A). 3. That the CIT(A) erred in taking a view that precedence available in the form of appellate / assessment orders in other cases could not be considered for the purpose of taking the rate of commission inspite of the fact that the Hon'ble Tribunal had directed to determine the rate of commission taking into consideration the precedence available in this regard. 4. That the CIT(A) also erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer determining commission @ 2% on the basis of rough notings in seized papers without appreciating that the notings under reference could not be relied upon as neither same were specifically in regard to rate of commission nor details were corroborated with other material and in any case the rates mentioned therein for a small amount could not be applied in all the cases of the Group for determining the rate of commission on total amount of accommodation entries and the notings under reference were also not relevant to all the assessment years. 5. That the CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 52,41,000/- being the cash deposits in the bank account of the appellant company without appre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT(A) erred in upholding the commission income @ 2% disregarding the directions of Hon'ble ITAT to apply the rate considering the precedence available in this regard, for which necessary evidence had been duly submitted before the CIT(A). 3. That the CIT(A) erred in taking a view that precedence available in the form of appellate / assessment orders in other cases could not be considered for the purpose of taking the rate of commission inspite of the fact that the Hon'ble Tribunal had directed to determine the rate of commission taking into consideration the precedence available in this regard. 4. That the CIT(A) also erred in upholding the order of Assessing Officer determining commission @ 2% on the basis of rough notings in seized papers without appreciating that the notings under reference could not be relied upon as neither same were specifically in regard to rate of commission nor details were corroborated with other material and in any case the rates mentioned therein for a small amount could not be applied in all the cases of the Group for determining the rate of commission on total amount of accommodation entries and the notings under reference were also not rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... managed by Mr. Tarun Goyal. It is an admitted position that during the relevant previous year Mr. Tarun Goyal was carrying on the business of providing accommodation entries through its various entities including the assessee. In the case of Tarun Goyal Group a search had taken place on 15.09.2008. Thereafter assessments were made in the case of entities including the assessee company under Section 153A of the Act. The submission of Mr. Tarun Goel has been that he had earned commission income in respect of accommodation entries provided by him and for this purpose he has been receiving cash from the parties and after layering the same through his various entities has been providing accommodation entries from one of his Group companies. In the year of search he had also offered commission income of Rs. 10lac calculated at 25 paisa per hundred rupees on estimated business of rupees 40 crores. The Assessing Officer while passing the order of assessment in the case of Appellant under section 153A of the Act had determined commission income in respect of all the entries given outside the Group @ 2.25% disregarding claim of Mr. Tarun Goel that commission income is to be taxed only in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reproduced in the order of the CIT(A) as well as the paper book filed by the assessee on earlier occasions. The Assessing Officer has passed the order under appeal. In the order the Assessing Officer has again determined the commission income @ 2% with respect to entries given to outside parties during the year. He has also included in the taxable income amount of cash deposits in the bank account. In view of the appellant addition on account of commission as well as cash deposits is contrary to each other. Admittedly, the cash was received during the course of carrying on the business of accommodation entries. Same had been deposited in the bank account. After layering the transactions, entries were given to the beneficiaries. Further, rate of commission ought to have been taken as per the directions of ITAT at the rate prevailing in the trade and considering the precedence. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer has not passed the order in compliance to the directions of ITAT. These were submissions set out in Form No. 35 of the appeal before the CIT(A). 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused all the relev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
