2018 (2) TMI 1579 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of discount and commission - Held that - In the immediately preceding assessment year 2012-2013 5% of discount and commission was disallowed by the AO which was deleted by the CIT(A) on the ground that the disallowance of 5% was without any material or basis. However, as find that in the year under consideration the disallowance was not made on any estimate basis but was made for absence of evidence or details. Therefore, the facts of the instant year is distinguishable from the facts of the preceding years. The assessee submitted before us that after the invoice is raised further discount is allowed to buyers to keep them in good humour and such further discount are debited in the profit and loss account. Thus find force in the above submission of the assessee. But in absence of full details the entire payment of cash and discount cannot be accepted. It shall be in the interest of justice to estimate such cash discount @1% of the sale. - Decided partly in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against disallowance of discount & commission and non-disclosure of credit notes.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A) confirming the disallowance of discount & commission paid and non-disclosure of credit notes. The AO disallowed a specific amount for lack of evidence regarding separate payment of cash discount. The CIT(A) upheld this decision.

2. The AR of the assessee argued that similar deductions were allowed in previous assessment years and highlighted the consistency in net profit percentages. The AR contended that no change in facts warranted the disallowance in the current year. The AR emphasized that the discount and commission were accounted for in the profit and loss account, supporting the deduction claim.

3. The CIT(A) required the assessee to provide details on discount invoice-wise, but the assessee failed to furnish the same, leading to the confirmation of the disallowance. The AR presented the profit and loss account of the preceding assessment year to showcase the allowance of similar deductions, but the Tribunal noted the distinction in the basis of disallowance between the years.

4. The Tribunal acknowledged the AR's argument regarding further discounts given to buyers post-invoice, but stressed the importance of providing full details to support such claims. In the absence of complete evidence, the Tribunal estimated a 1% cash discount on sales to allow a partial deduction, ultimately confirming a balance disallowance.

5. The Tribunal partially allowed the appeal, permitting a deduction for estimated cash discount while confirming the disallowance of the remaining amount. The decision was based on the assessment of facts and circumstances, aiming to achieve a balance between the parties' contentions.

This comprehensive analysis outlines the key arguments, evidentiary considerations, and the Tribunal's decision-making process in addressing the issues raised in the appeal.