9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT : MR SN SOPARKAR, SR.ADV. WITH MR B S SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI) Following substantial question of law has been proposed for our consideration in this Tax Appeal: Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in considering the consultancy charges of Rs.65 lacs as incurred for the purpose of business in absence of substantive evidences? The present Tax Appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( the Tribunal for short) dated 12th April 2013. We have heard learned counsel Mrs. Mauna Bhatt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rs.111.04 crores. Further, there is no finding by the A.O. that any part of the payment has come back to the appellant. In view of the above facts, the payment of consultancy charges is held to be genuine and the disallowance made by the A.O. is deleted. When the issue travelled to the Tribunal, it extensively dealt with the issue and concluded in favour of the assessee. It would be profitable to reproduce some of the relevant observations made by the Tribunal: 12. Now we examine the applicability of the judgment of Hon ble Gujarat High Court cited by ld. A.R. i.e. judgment rendered in the case of Heir and legal representatives of Late Laxmanbhai S Patel (supra). This judgment is with regard to not providing the assessee to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im such bogus expenditure more particularly when it is eligible for 100% deduction under section 80IA of the Act and even otherwise, on the basis of other material on record, the services rendered by N.M. Consultants were not found doubtful, doubt was only with regard to the quantum of service. However, when payment was through the channel of bank and tax also was deducted at source and N.M. Consultants is not found to be related to the respondent assessee, both the authorities concurrently and rightly addressed the issue. Essentially based on facts when no perversity is visible in the order, we find no question of law much less substantial question of law arises in this appeal. The same is therefore dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
