9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 1189X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 32,92,313/- on account of Job Charges paid without appreciating the facts of the case of his own order in the assessee's own case for the A.Y. 2005-06, the addition on the same issue was confirmed observing that Under the circumstances, there is no evidence and material on the very important issue that separate manufacturing and business is being carried out by M/s KSM Export Pvt. Ltd., I find that the decision of the Assessing Officer as reproduced above is correct, supported by law and facts and justified. Similarly in I.T.A.No.473(Luc.)/2010, the only effective ground raised by the Revenue reads as under : That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur has erred i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mely, M/s. KSM Exports Ltd. The AO disallowed the above amounts stating that these payments are not genuine. 3. On appeal, the ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition for both the years following the order of the Tribunal dated 26.3.2010 in I.T.A.No.274(Luc.)/2009 passed in assessee s own case relating to the assessment year 2005-06. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the materials available on record. We find that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the I.T.A.T., A-Bench, Lucknow passed in assessee s own case in I.T.A. No.274(Luc.)/2009 relating to the assessment year 2005-06. While deciding a similar issue in A.Y. 2005-06, the Tribunal allowed the claim of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agreed to help M/s. K.S.M. Exports Ltd. by providing its workers to work (executing the work) for and on behalf of the assessee at assessee s premises D-20 and not at premises D-6. The Revenue just assumed that M/s. K.S.M. Exports Ltd. could carry on the job work for the assessee only at D-6 because the premises were owned by M/s. K.S.M. Exports Ltd. It never bothered to think or verify that workers of M/s. K.S.M. Exports Ltd. could carry on assessee s job work at assessee s premises also i.e. D-20,which as is evident from evidence placed in assessee s Paper Book, was a confirmed fact. In addition to above, there is another fact, which supports the assessee s plea and is borne out from question no.1 to be by the Revenue at the time of surv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
