9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was taxed at a lower rate than that of the assessee-firm and therefore, they had correctly held that the AO could not substitute the wisdom of the partners of the firm to hold that the salary was excessive and unreasonable. The findings which have been recorded are purely on facts arising out of the peculiar circumstances of the case and no question of law, as such, arises out of the facts of the case which would require adjudication as has been sought to be contended. - Decided against revenue. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the cases and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in deleting the disallowance u/s 40A(2)(b) made by the Assessing Officer, ignoring the fact that the profits of the firm and the individual for the Asstt. Year 2009-10 are not taxable at the same rate, as the profits of the firm for Asstt. Year 2009-10 are taxable at the flat rate of 30.90% and the individual assessee has the benefit of tax slabs? " The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) Circle-I, Ludhiana, being the Assessing Officer (for short, the 'AO'), vide order dated 16.12.2011 (Annexure A-I), noticed that the respondent-assessee/firm had paid an amount of ₹ 24 lacs to Shri R.S.Saluja, who is father of one of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Revenue filed an appeal against the said order of the CIT before the Tribunal, which came to the conclusion that the Revenue had failed to point out any motive of tax planning or tax advantage under the Act and what had to be seen is whether the said expenses were excessive or unreasonable with regard to the services or facilities being provided. It was, accordingly, held that except doubting the genuineness of the said expenditure, there was no other finding that the expenditure was excessive or unreasonable. Resultantly, the appeal of the revenue was dismissed, which led to the filing of the present appeal, challenging the said findings recorded. Counsel for the Revenue has argued that the monthly profits of the assessee/firm was only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rocesses, exploring and diversifying into new ventures. The group turnover is more than 1000 crores as on date. Keeping in view, his services and experience, contribution etc. the payment account of salary made to him quite reasonable." The justification, thus, would go on to show that the said person is successfully running the business of the group which had a return of more than thousand crores, on account of his experience. The main company he had established way back in 1969 and due to his experience of over four decades, he had also been able to help the respondent/assessee concern to achieve the sale level of ₹ 48 crores. Merely because the company was, at present, earning low monthly taxable profits, would not be a ground, as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
