9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1754X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s 40(a)(ia) - Appeal of assessee is partly allowed. - ITA No.3099/Del/2015 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2018 - SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv., Shri Deepesh Garg, Adv. For the Respondent : Shri Vijay Kr. Jiwani, Sr.DR ORDEER PER R. K. PANDA, AM : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.03.2015 of the CIT(A)- 17, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2008-09. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of commission and income from other sources. It filed its return of income on 31.03.2009 declaring total income of ₹ 58,57,760/-. During ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egate disallowance of ₹ 1,35,00,000/- 40(a)(ia) of the Act, is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in making the impugned disallowance and passing the impugned order which is contrary to law and facts and without providing adequate opportunity of hearing and without confronting the entire adverse material which was used against the assessee and by recording incorrect facts and findings and in violation of principles of natural justice and the and the same is not sustainable on various legal and factual grounds and which deserves to be quashed. 4. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case of Smt. Kanta Yadav vs. ITO. We find the Tribunal in ITA No.6312/Del/2016 order dated 12.05.2017 for assessment year 2012-13 has decided the identical issue and has observed as under :- 6. We have considered rival submissions and find that issue is covered in favour of the assessee by order of ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Shri Rajendra Yadav vs. ITO and Smt. Sonu Khandelwal vs. ITO. In these orders it was held that the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) to be restricted to 30% of the addition. In these orders the Tribunal has considered the amended provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act. In these orders the assessment year s involve was 2007-08 and 2008-09. In the present appeal the assessment year is 2012-13. Therefore fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
