9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 857X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vidence furnished during the appellate proceedings. 3. On this issue Assessing Officer had made the disallowance observing as under:- Vide this office show cause dated 22.12.2006 the assessee was asked to furnish the proof of payment of consultancy fees along with what sort of services have been taken from those persons and their relevance with the business of the assessee. In response to the same the assessee s counsel vide its letter dated 28.12.2006 has furnish a copy of the ledger account and vouchers of payment but no information as to what sort of services / consultancy was given by these persons and their relevance with business activities of the assessee company. In view of the same consultancy charges of ₹ 15,05,178/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he next issue raised is that Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in restoring the issue of verification of books of accounts to the desk of the Assessing Officer to decide afresh the issue of disallowance of expenses. 8. On this issue Assessing Officer had made the disallowance by holding as under:- During the course of hearing the assessee was time and again asked to produce books of accounts along with the supporting bills and vouchers, but the same were never produced by the assessee. In the absence of same it is difficult to examine the genuineness of the expenses claimed by the assessee which are very excessive as compare to the immediately preceding year. Under the circumstances, I am compel to disallow 50% of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oncluded as under:- We have considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. In our opinion, Ld. first appellate authority has not remanded any issue for adjudication to the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in principle agreed that exemption u/s 10(34) is available to the assessee on the dividend income. He felt a little handicap with regard to verification of a fact, whether the company who had given dividend has paid the tax on distributed profits or not. For this limited purpose, he directed the Assessing Officer to verify this claim. In our opinion, Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not exceeded to his jurisdiction. We do not find any error in the order of the Ld. fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
