9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (3) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eting the addition of Rs. 6,85,681 made by the AO on account of disallowance of commission under s. 40A(2)(b) despite the fact that the assessee failed to produce any evidence regarding services rendered by agent so as to qualify for the said commission." 2. The ground No 1 is with regard to the disallowance of Rs. 1,07,196 made by the AO under s. 40A(3). During the course of assessment proceedings it was noticed by the AO that the assessee's auditors in the tax audit report has pointed out that the assessee had made certain cash payment exceeding Rs. 10,000 to 9 parties aggregating Rs. 1,07,196. Since it was a violation of s. 40A(3), therefore, the AO disallowed the whole sum of Rs. 1,07,196. On first appeal, the CIT(A) has accepted the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the parties and we find that so far as the six payments made to truck drivers for freight arid octroi charges are concerned this Bench is of the consistent view that the payment in cash falls under the exceptional circumstances as mentioned in r. 6DD(j) r/w CBDT Circular, supra. We, therefore, upheld the order of the CIT(A) on this account. However, so far as the other three payments made in cash at Delhi amounting to Rs. 21,000 + 10,084 + 10,232 = 41,316 by the appellant firm, the only plea of the appellant is that since there was no operational bank account at Delhi, therefore, the payment in cash was made at Delhi. We find that at p. 67 of the paper book the assessee submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Saurav Marketing (P) Ltd., identity card issued by Maruti Udyog Ltd. to Shri Sushil Poddar, director of the company and copies of certain meetings with Maruti Udyog Ltd. indicating presence of Shri Sushil Poddar in those meetings and also the details of payments. 7. The AO found that the identity card was issued on 20th Sept., 1991, a date beyond the accounting period; the details filed were mostly correspondence between the assessee and the agent M/s Saurav Marketing (P) Ltd. The details do not reflect the quantum of services and nature of services rendered. Besides this, the AO also made enquiries from the agent and wrote a letter of Maruti Udyog Ltd. The AO in absence of any conclusive evidence of actual services rendered, disallowed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowable. It was also submitted that most of the objections raised by the learned Departmental Representative has already been taken into consideration by the CIT(A). As regards the letter dt 30th March, 1992, issued by Maruti Udyog Ltd., it was submitted by the learned authorised representative that it was not shown to the assessee. He, therefore, urged that the assessee has rightly made the payment to M/s Saurav Marketing (P) Ltd which was allowed by the CIT(A) and the same should be upheld. 10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the parties and we noticed that the appellant has filed a paper book which contained 150 pages and out of which, it was claimed that 73 pages represents this claim which is under consideratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
