9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 010-11 in detail in his favor. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A)-17, New Delhi has rightly followed the above decision and reject the ground raised by the Revenue - I.T.A. Nos.5858 And 5859/DEL/2015 - - - Dated:- 6-9-2017 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Sh. Shravan Gotru, Sr. DR For The Assessee : None ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed these two Appeals against the common impugned Order dated 26.8.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-17, New Delhi relevant to assessment year 2012-13 2011-12 respectively. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, except the difference in figure, hence, the appeals were heard together and are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19.9.2011 declaring total income of ₹ 37,72,458/-. The case of the assessee for AY 2010-11 was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) at an income of ₹ 1,00,67,907/- against return income of ₹ 34,67,890/- vide order dated 13.3.2013. During the assessment proceedings for AY 2010-11 the AO made addition of ₹ 30,03,946/- on account of advance commission which was booked by the assessee under the head sundry creditors for advance . The AO held that the assessee had inaccurately treated the Commission as Advance Commission for the year to defer the liability of tax and to adjust this willfully in future in the Profit and Loss account. Further, an addition of ₹ 18,55,000/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceedings from time to time and submitted relevant details. During the year, the assessee has shown income from Business or Profession and income from other sources. The assessee has also set off house property loss with the business income. During the assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee has shown advance commission as on 31.3.2011 amounting to ₹ 32,90,089/- and the same has been booked under the head Sundry Creditors for Advance . Since, this was one of the reasons for reopening of this case u/s. 147/148 of the Act, the assessee was specifically asked to furnish complete details of sundry creditors for advances and also asked to show cause as to why this should not be treated as income of the assessee during t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riginal Equipment Manufacturer (OEM). He gets commission for procuring orders from the customers on the behalf of OEM. The warranty of the equipment is binding on the OEM and in case of any defect, OEM is liable to rectify and make it good. OEMs have their own Customer Care Departments to take care of their of their post sales problems and assessee has no role in it. The assessee has no stake and has inaccurately treated the Commission as advance Commission for the year to defer the liability of tax and to adjust this will fully in future in the P L account. Accordingly addition on this issue was made by the Assessing Officer in AY 2010-11. 4.3 Further, from the perusal of Notes on Account, filed along with Form 3CD of the Auditor, it is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee and deleted the addition in dispute by respectfully following the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) in the case of assessee for the assessment year 2010-11. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Ld. Sr. DR relied upon the Order of the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal. 6. In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor his authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no use ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
