9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 75X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmission has to be allowed - the Assessee stated that no such commission was paid in earlier or later year - the Assessee could have procured the bullion without assistance of any agent - the Tribunal in order to satisfy itself whether any services are rendered by this Company, which is in a distinct business, that the presence of it's Director, namely, Mr. Laxman Khemka was found necessary and it was stated that he was not cooperating. There is no supporting evidence to hold that Silver was imported by the Assessee at a lesser price from M/s Jerad Metal and that was possible only because of the contacts of Mr. Laxman Khemka with that entity and because of intervention of one Mr. Amar Singh, Manager of ICICI Bank - If the services were r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , as also, the Tribunal have termed the transaction as vitiated and it is termed as not genuine one. 3 In these circumstances and the question of law would arise because of the view taken in three decisions, namely, two rendered by the Delhi High Court and one by the Honourable Supreme Court that it is submitted that the Appeal should be admitted. 4 We are unable to agree with the learned counsel for the Assessee. This is nothing but an attempt of seeking reappreciation and reappraisal of the factual findings. The concurrent factual findings against the Assessee need not be reproduced. They are to be found in paragraph 3 of the order of the Tribunal. The Tribunal has found that the total commission of ₹ 85.32 lacs was paid. That ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... findings of fact consistent with the material placed on record are perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the record. 7 Reliance on the Delhi High Court judgment firstly, in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s Dalmia Cement Limited reported in (2002) 254 ITR 377 (Delhi) is misplaced. There, the manufacturer of cement, namely, Assessee claimed payment to its sole selling agent which is of commission. The Assessing Officer undertook an exercise of estimation of commission paid by the Assessee and held that the amount paid to the agent and which is subject matter of the transaction was on the higher scale. He determined what would be the permissible deduction and thus, disallowed the balance. That was clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
