2007 (10) TMI 296 - HC - Income Tax

Allowance of commission paid to trader allowed for subsequent years held that - the orders made by the Tribunal in respect of the assessee s case in the subsequent years to the effect that the claim of the assessee in regard to payment of commission to P. M. Traders deserves to be upheld, the further factual position as to the non-verification of the letter dated 13.12.1975 issued by P. M. Traders, who by that letter accepted the receipt of commission, we do not find any irregularity in the order of the Tribunal.

Summary

Issues:
Assessment of deduction claimed for commission payment to P. M. Traders.

Analysis:
The High Court of Madras addressed the issue of assessing the deduction claimed for commission payment to P. M. Traders. The assessee's assessment order for the year 1975-76 was revised multiple times to comply with orders from the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and Appellate Tribunal. The Assessing Officer disallowed a deduction of Rs.3,00,034/- claimed for commission paid to P. M. Traders, suspecting it to be a bogus claim. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld this disallowance. However, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal reversed this decision, citing that the commission receipt was acknowledged by the recipient and should be granted as a deduction. The revenue appealed this decision, raising substantial legal questions regarding the validity of the deduction.

The revenue contended that the Assessing Officer's reasoning, supported by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), was sound, especially considering the statement from National Rayon Corporation denying the engagement of middlemen. On the other hand, the respondent argued that the Tribunal's decision was based on the acknowledgment of commission receipt by the recipient, P. M. Traders, and the failure of the assessing officer to comply with the Tribunal's directive to investigate P. M. Traders specifically. The respondent also highlighted that similar views were accepted by the Department in subsequent assessment years.

The High Court considered the arguments from both sides and reviewed the case records. It noted that the assessing officer had not properly investigated the acknowledgment letter from P. M. Traders, as directed by the Tribunal. Instead, undue reliance was placed on the statement from an officer of National Rayon Corporation. The Court emphasized the importance of following Tribunal directives and ensuring proper verification of relevant documents. Ultimately, the Court found no irregularity in the Tribunal's decision to uphold the deduction based on the acknowledgment letter from P. M. Traders.

In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's order without modification, answering the legal questions against the revenue and dismissing the appeal. The judgment highlighted the necessity for thorough verification of evidence and adherence to Tribunal directives in such tax assessment cases.