9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 13X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Judicial Member Assessee by : Shri G.S. Pikala ( AR ) Revenue by : Shri V. Justin ( DR ) ORDER Per Pawan Singh, Judicial Member 1. This appeal by assessee under section 253 of Income Tax Act is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai, [for short the ld. CIT(A)] dated 22.08.2016 for Assessment Year 1996-97. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1) Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in facts in dismissing the appeal and upholding the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. 2) The Learned CIT (Appeals) erred in not noticing the correct factual position that the first assessment order dated 31/12/1998, did not indicate the satisfaction of the officer for levy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich was filed with Learned CIT(Appeals). 7) On merits Learned CIT (Appeals) ignored the fact penalty proceedings are different from assessment proceedings and assessee had given the orders of the DRT and High Court indicating the counter parties Spectrum Synthetics and RSL Industries were not interrelated with the assessee and both parties were in liquidation hence could not be produced nor evidence obtained from them. 8) On merits it is submitted that assessee had submitted all his information and also submitted copies of the orders of DRT and High Court of the counter parties. Hence it is submitted there was no concealment of income as indicated by the assessee. But merely inaccurate particulars of income as the assessee was u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vs. ACIT in ITA No. 285/Rjt/2007 dated 23/12/2010 and decision of Mumbai Tribunal in M/s Tata Communications Transformation Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 3108/Mum/2016 dated 21/02/2018. On the contrary, the Ld. DR for the Revenue submits that the main addition on the basis of penalty was levied has been deleted. 3. We have considered the submission of Ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the record. We have noted that the submissions of ld. AR of the assessee are factually contradictory. The perusal of assessment order reveals that the assessee-company claimed the travelling expenses of ₹ 4,22,322/- on account of foreign travel of Mrs. Gauri Sheth W/of Vice- President Mr. Dinesh Sheth and Consultant Rajendra Shaha. The A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee furnished written submissions as recorded by Ld. CIT(A) in para 4 of the impugned order. On the basis of written submission of the assessee and the other written communication of the assessee, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed that the assessee claimed to have submitted the details of commission paid to Spectrum Synthetics Private Ltd., copy of details of PAN Number, address of the parties along with the statement showing complete dealings with the Radhika Synthetics Ltd. It was further observed that assessee vide its letter dated 05th Nov 2001 furnished the details of transaction, PAN Number of Radhika Synthetics Ltd. and the fact that Radhika Synthetics Ltd. was in liquidation and the assessee was not in a position ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the person from the Spectrum Synthetics Pvt. Ltd. is available as all the assets of said concern were attached by the DRT, Mumbai. The assessee furnished PAN Number and the details of transactions with Radhika Synthetics Ltd. The assessee also furnished the PAN Number and other details of commission payment to the Spectrum Synthetics Ltd. The Director of assessee company Shri Shivshankar Mishra have filed his affidavit, inter alia deposing therein that they have no relationship with the Radhika Synthetics Ltd. We have perused the contents of affidavit of Shri Shivkumar Mishra, Director of assessee-company. Shri Shivkumar Mishra contended in his affidavit that the assessee company have dealing with Radhika Synthetics Ltd. through its Dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of ₹ 13,64,76,885/- with Radhika Synthetic Ltd. The lower authority has not disputed the transaction of assessee with Radhika Synthetic Ltd. 9. In order to constitute an expenditure falling within the scope of r section 37(1) of the Act, the payer (assessee) must fulfil the conditions viz. (i) that the expenditure should not be in the nature described under section 32 to 36, (ii) it should have been incurred in the Financial Year, (iii) it should in respect of business which was carried out by the assessee and profit of the said business should be assessed, (iv) it should not be in the nature of personal expenses of the assessee, (v) it should have been made wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business and (vi) it should b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
