2013 (5) TMI 197 - AT - Income Tax

Addition on accommodation entries - search and seizure action at the business and residential premises of Sh. S.K. Gupta, along with various concerns in which he and his family members were interested - CIT deleted the addition - Held that - No infirmity in the order of CIT(A) as the main basis of the AO for making the disallowance is the statement of Shri S.K. Gupta. However, CIT(A) has recorded the finding that in his statement Shri S.K. Gupta has never mentioned that the bills issued by M/s ERA Advertising and Marketing Co.Pvt.Ltd. and M/s Hamara Samay T.V. News Network Pvt.Ltd. to Ajay Home Products Pvt.Ltd., i.e., the assessee, were in the nature of accommodation entries. The assessee has filed confirmation certificate from M/s Hamara Samay T.V. News Network Pvt.Ltd. in which the details of telecast of the advertisement of the appellant were given. The assessee had filed the confirmation of both the parties, copy of CD of the advertisement film, copy of the bills of advertisement, all the payments were made by cheque, copy of bank statement and complete vouchers relating to advertisement expenses were furnished. It was also stated by the learned counsel that on these payments of advertisement expenses, TDS was deducted at source and moreover, service tax was also paid. The CD containing the text of advertisement was also produced. Considering these facts, the CIT(A) rightly held that the assessee has discharged its onus of proving that the payment to M/s ERA Advertising and Marketing Co.Pvt.Ltd. and M/s Hamara Samay T.V. News Network Pvt.Ltd. was towards actual advertisement expenses and not accommodation entries. No nfirmity in the order of CIT(A). Revenue s appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Restriction of addition on account of accommodation bills
2. Reliance on CD containing text of advertisement
3. Ignoring non-production of rate card and TRP rating
4. Validity of CIT(A) order
5. Verification of genuineness of expenditure

Analysis:

Issue 1: Restriction of addition on account of accommodation bills
The Revenue challenged the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the addition of Rs.1,54,68,550 on account of accommodation bills issued by specific companies controlled by an entry provider. The Assessing Officer considered the expenditure claimed on advertisement as accommodation entries due to lack of corroborative evidence. However, the CIT(A) found that the appellant provided various details and certificates to support the genuineness of the expenditure. The CIT(A) emphasized that the appellant fulfilled the onus of proving the expenses were genuine by submitting necessary documents, including confirmation certificates and CD of the advertisement. The CIT(A) concluded that the bills were not accommodation entries but actual advertisement expenses, leading to the deletion of the addition.

Issue 2: Reliance on CD containing text of advertisement
The Revenue contended that the CIT(A) erred in relying on a CD containing the text of the advertisement instead of the actual telecast on a TV channel. However, the CIT(A) justified this reliance by stating that the appellant provided evidence, including certificates from the telecaster and confirmation of advertisement release. The CIT(A) emphasized that the appellant's submission of the CD and telecast certificates established the actual release of the advertisement, supporting the genuineness of the expenses claimed.

Issue 3: Ignoring non-production of rate card and TRP rating
The Revenue argued that the CIT(A) overlooked the non-production of the rate card and TRP rating of the telecaster. However, the CIT(A) clarified that the absence of the agreement with the telecaster alone cannot lead to the conclusion that the bills were not genuine. The CIT(A) highlighted that the appellant provided various other details and certificates to verify the genuineness of the expenditure, including confirmation from the companies issuing the bills and proof of payment through account payee cheques.

Issue 4: Validity of CIT(A) order
The Revenue raised concerns about the validity of the CIT(A) order, emphasizing the admission by the entry provider regarding accommodation entries through his companies. However, the CIT(A) found no adverse conclusion in the appellant's case, as the appellant presented substantial evidence to support the genuineness of the expenses claimed. The CIT(A) stressed that the appellant met the requirements to prove the expenditure as genuine, leading to the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

Issue 5: Verification of genuineness of expenditure
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the appellant successfully discharged the onus of proving the expenditure on advertisement as genuine. The Tribunal noted the appellant's submission of various documents and certificates, including bills, ledger accounts, confirmations, and bank statements. Additionally, the Tribunal highlighted that TDS was deducted, service tax was paid, and the appellant provided evidence of the advertisement release, supporting the authenticity of the expenses claimed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the addition of Rs.1,54,68,550 on account of advertisement expenses, as the appellant adequately proved the genuineness of the expenditure through substantial documentation and evidence.