9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 522X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty order under section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act dated March 31, 2008 were that the assessee-firm was subjected to concealment penalty levied in respect of following two additions : "1. Addition on expenses claimed out of export sales : The assessee had claimed expenses to the tune of Rs. 96,37,692 out of its total export sales on the ground that this amount had been paid to M/s. SDEC for rendering engineering work to the assessee's client M/s. Modecor. However, detailed investigation by the Assessing Officer revealed that no technical services had been rendered by M/s. SDEC and that the payment of Rs. 96,37,692 was merely an attempt by the assessee to reduce its taxable income by claiming false expenses. Accordingly, the expendit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /fabrication and supply/commissioning work for Medcore. In the present case also the lower authorities could not bring anything adverse on the expenditure incurred for sub-contractor, i.e., payment made to SDEC. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has also made disallowance just on the basis of estimates and on conjuncture and surmises. In view of the above discussion, facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the view that the entire expenditure incurred is for the purposes of business, hence, is allowable. We reverse the orders of the lower authorities. On this issue, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed." Since the respected co-ordinate Bench has already allowed the claim in its totality, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ales of Rs. 2,48,87,298. When the said defect came to the notice of the assessee, then the figure of total sales was revised to Rs. 7,90,02,366. The learned authorised representative has pointed out that though in the denominator the component of foreign consultancy of Rs. 1.44 crores were added corresponding addition was not made in the numerator of export sales of Rs. 3.93 crores. The learned authorised representative for the assessee has vehemently contested that from the above calculation it is evident that the corresponding addition in the figure of the numerator was not made. Had that also been done, then the claim of deduction under section 80HHC would not have reduced, instead it would have enhanced. Finally, he has vehemently conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
