9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 851X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for consideration – Decided against Revenue. Disallowance of guarantee commission paid to the two Directors – Held that:- Tribunal found that the Accountant of the Company committed a mistake in paying the commission @ 3.51% to the Directors and the assessee conceded before the Tribunal that this was a mistake and the commission has been restricted not 1% as claimed by the Revenue but 1.77% - The total payment, therefore is not more than Rs.10,52,000 - the Tribunal did not commit any error in upholding the limited payment and particularly when it is not found to be unreasonable or excessive – thus, the order of the Tribunal is upheld – Decided against revenue. Disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act – Held that:- The Tribunal h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the ITAT in the given facts and circumstances raises a substantial question of law. The Business Promotion Expenses were disallowed. The Assessing Officer's order was upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In the assessee's Appeal before the ITAT, it was urged that the plea to bring on record additional evidence has been erroneously rejected. There is material to support the claim that both Assessing Officer and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) did not allow the substantiation or supporting material to be brought on record. That has caused the breach of the principles of natural justice. In the larger interest of justice and so as to furnish an opportunity to the assessee to substantiate and elaborate his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y error in upholding this limited payment and particularly when it is not found to be unreasonable or excessive. The parameters which this claim is considered are thus in tune with law. We do not find that the view taken is perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record resulting in this Court's intervention. The Appeal is therefore devoid of merits even with regard to this issue. 4. The third question projected as substantial question of law is the disallowance of deduction under section 80IB of the Income Tax Act amounting to Rs.28,07,464/- In paragraph no.6, 6.1 and 7 of the order of the Tribunal, the Tribunal has noted that the Assessing Officer should have given an opportunity to submit the audit rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
