9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 820X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mounting to Rs. 4,23,51,335/-. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of hybrid seeds. The assessee has filed its return of income declaring total income at Rs. 1,73,11,840/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. In the assessment under section 143(3), the ld. AO in a very cryptic manner, without any discussion or deliberations on the subject issue, made additions of Rs. 4,23,51,535/-. His short finding recorded in the assessment order reads as under: "3. ...... In the assessment year 2010-10 to 2012-13 additions/disallowances were made on account of other expenses/trade disco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at claim of the assessee in this year as well may be allowed. 6. We have heard both the parties; we have also gone through earlier orders of the CIT(A) and also orders of the ITAT on this issues. Copies of respective orders of the ITAT are placed on record by the assessee. We have noticed that the assessee was consistently making the claim of discount and rate difference on the sale of seeds to its customers. Such claims though disallowed at the end of the AO, but the same were allowed by the CIT(A) and thereafter in appeal by the Revenue, order of the ld. CIT(A) was upheld by the Tribunal. Though the fate of earlier claim of the assessee was very much on record, the ld. AO has ritually rejected claim of the assessee year after year withou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19/05/2009 relied upon has no sanctity as same is without earmarking company's seal and signature. On the other hand, Appellant has argued that it has submitted ledger account along with complete details regarding discount and trade difference. Even comparative chart of discount visa-vis sales was also submitted which proves that expenditure incurred on account of discount/trade difference is business expenditure. It was also argued that discount has been allowed to various dealers as per trade practice, and even payments were made in earlier assessment years. On careful consideration of entire facts it is observed that Appellant has established its business to provide high value research and hybrid seeds to farmers as a brand name "W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... act, not received by dealers and made addition on hypothecation basis. Thus, on holistic consideration of entire facts, addition of Rs. 2,31,95,051/- made by the AO is deleted. The ground of appeal is allowed. Since the issue in hand for the year under appeal is similar to the one decided for the preceding assessment years and also for the fact that the AO has also relied on the assessment orders and the submission made by the appellant is also on similar lines, I find no reason to deviate from the decision taken for AY 2011-12 vide order dated 31/07/2014, reproduced above. Relying on the same, the disallowance made by the AO of Rs. 4,23,51,335/- is held not justified and is directed to be deleted. Ground no. 1 of appeal is allowed." 7. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
