9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 516X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the outcome of the adjudication by the Custom Authority. In view of the submissions made by the respective representative of the parties, we hereby restore this issue to the file of the AO to decide the issue after the adjudication order is passed by the custom authority. - Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes. Disallowance of freight and clearing and forwarding expenses u/s.40(a)(ia) - non-deduction of TDS - Held that:- Undisputedly, the ld.CIT(A) has not doubted the submission of the assessee that payment so made does not contain income/profit element. Despite that he proceeded to confirm the addition. Under the identical facts, in the AY 2007-08, however he restricted the disallowance to the extent of service charge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e involved in these appeals and cross-objections, these were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. First, we take up the Revenue s appeal in ITA No.272/Ahd/2011 for AY 2006-07. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- [1] On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of unexplained expenditure of ₹ 39,37,338/- u/s.69C. [2] On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. [3] It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the CIT(A) may be set aside and that of Assessing Officer may be restored t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein about undervaluation resorted by the assessee in respect of 22 consignments. 4 .1. On the contrary, ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the adjudication by the custom authority has not been done, therefore, the only basis to rely on the statement made before the DRI should not be the only ground for confirming the addition. He submitted that the finding by the custom authorities will have bearing upon the present case. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Both the parties have agreed that the finding of the custom authorities would have bearing on the present case. Therefore, the respective representatives of the parties ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not the income of the assessee. The payments were made merely as reimbursement, under these facts the ld.CIT(A) ought not to have confirmed the disallowance. 6.2. On the contrary, ld.Sr.DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. Undisputedly, the ld.CIT(A) has not doubted the submission of the assessee that payment so made does not contain income/profit element. Despite that he proceeded to confirm the addition. Under the identical facts, in the AY 2007-08, however he restricted the disallowance to the extent of service charges paid to the CHA. Therefore, in the year under consideration als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 of assessee s cross-objection is rejected. As a result, the Cross Objection No.61/Ahd/2011 filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 10. Now, we take up the Revenue s appeal in ITA No.273/Ahd/2011 for AY 2007-08. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- [1] On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of unexplained expenditure of ₹ 63,79,100/- u/s.69C. [2] On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. [3] It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the CIT(A) may be set aside and that of Assessing Officer may be restored to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
