9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1475X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in the order of the CIT(A). Merely because the amount appears to be huge cannot be a ground to disallow the same on the ground of enduring benefit to the assessee when the corresponding revenue earned has been considered as income of the impugned year. - Decided in favour of assessee Addition of Provision for Consultancy Charges - addition on the ground that the assessee has not been able to furnish any cogent evidence in support of the provision claimed - Held that:- The assessee has filed the detailed list of consultants and the payments made to them during the period relevant to the assessment year 2010-11. The assessee has also filed sample copy of appointment letter to the consultant as additional evidence. Assessee has prayed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssued to the assessee on 30-08-2011. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made disallowances of ₹ 4,40,54,578/- on account of disallowance of enrollment expenses under Rashtriya Swasthya Bima Yojna (RSBY) Scheme and further disallowed professional charges ₹ 12,83,690/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 13-02-2013, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the findings of Assessing Officer with regard to addition of ₹ 4,40,54,578/-. However, in respect of disallowance of professional charges, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) restricted the disallowance to ₹ 6,91,190/- on acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year under appeal the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has taken a contrary view on same set of facts. In assessment year 2009-10 the Department carried the issue in appeal before the Tribunal in ITA No. 2585/PN/2012, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue and upheld the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The ld. AR placed on record a copy of the order of Tribunal in ITA No. 2585/PN/2012 decided on 10-07-2014. 4. With regard to disallowances of ₹ 6,91,190/- on account of Provision of Consultancy Charges, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has upheld the findings of Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee has fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... first issue in appeal is with regard to disallowance of enrollment expenditure ₹ 4,40,54,578/- under RSBY scheme. We find that similar disallowance was made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment year 2009-10. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had deleted the said addition. The Department carried the matter in appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the findings of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. The relevant grounds raised by the Revenue against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in assessment year 2009-10 before the Tribunal were : 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) grossly erred in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 1,71,20,559/-, be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... beneficiaries claimed on behalf of the insurance companies under the RSBY scheme could not be controverted by the Ld. Departmental Representative. Further, the Ld. Departmental Representative also could not controvert the finding given by the CIT(A) that the amount received during the year has been shown as income and the assessee has claimed the corresponding expenditure incurred on the printing and issue of smart cards. Under these circumstances and in view of the detailed reasoning given by the CIT(A) we find no infirmity in her order. The Ld. Departmental Representative also could not point out any other mistake in the order of the CIT(A). Merely because the amount appears to be huge cannot be a ground to disallow the same on the groun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
