9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation transactions determined in the assessment order and delete the balance addition. In the result, the appeal for A.Y 2008- 09 is Partly allowed. - ITA Nos. 2205 & 2206/Mum/2019 - - - Dated:- 17-9-2020 - Shri M Balaganesh, Accountant Member And Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Amit Pratap Singh, DR For the Respondent : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala C.A ORDER PER PAVANKUMAR GADALE JM: These are the appeals filed by the revenue against the common order of the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -29, Mumbai passed for the A.Y 2008-09 u/s 144 r.w.s 147 and 250 of the Act and for A.Y 2009-10 u/s 143 r.w.s 147 and 250 of the Act. For the sake of convenience both the appeals are clu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts and determined total income of ₹ 2,73,67,782/-dated 29.12.2017. 4. Aggrieved with the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with CIT(A). Whereas, in the appellate proceedings, the Ld. AR has filed the detailed submissions explaining the facts of the case and Miscellaneous Petition filed. The CIT (A) observed that the assessee has filed Miscellaneous Petition before the Hon ble ITAT to decide on the issue of estimation of commission income. Whereas, the Hon ble ITAT in Miscellaneous Application (MA) dated 23.07.2018 has directed the A.O to exclude the returned cheques, RTGS and interbank transfer in assessee s bank account and estimate the commission on remaining amount applying the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red. Accordingly, by considering all these relevant factors, we are of the view that the net commission income should be estimated at 0.10% and in our view, the same would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, we modify the order of Ld CIT(A) in respect of this issue in all the years under consideration and direct the assessing officer to work out the addition towards commission income in the lines discussed supra. The AO, after receipt of the MA order dated 2307.2018 had reworked the commission @ 01.10% f the net transaction value . 5. Whereas, the CIT(A) considered the facts in the Miscellaneous Application (MA) of the Hon.ble ITAT and order giving effect(OGE) of the A.O referred at page 6 of the Appellate order and observed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in MA order no. 101/Mum/2017 arising out of ITA No. 7766/Mum/2019 for A.Y 2009-10 had decided that the estimation of commission is to be made on applying decision of ITAT in the case of Ramesh Kumar Jain Vs. ACIT. It is observed that the coordinate bench of Mumbai ITAT at para No. 19 in the case of Ramesh Kumar Jain had decided that the net commission income should be estimated as 0.10% of the transaction value. In the order giving effect to Hon ble ITAT order, AO vide order dated 23.07.2018 had recomputed the income on estimating the commission @ 0.10% of transaction value. Accordingly, on providing the effect of Hon ble ITAT order by the AO the impugned appeal relating to A.Y 2009-10 would remain infructuous as the A.O had recompute ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ider appropriate to refer to the observations of the Ld. CIT(A) at page -8 para 5.3.2 of the order which is read as under: I have considered the facts of the case and documents placed before me. I find that the facts of the case related to A.Y 2008-09 are similar to the facts decided for A.Y 2009-10 and moresoever in both such assessment years the commission income was estimated by the A.O @ 1.50% of accommodation transactions. The Hon ble ITAT, in appellant s case, related to A.Y 200-10 had directed the A.O to estimate the commission income @ 0.10% on accommodation transaction and consequently the A.O vide order dated 2307.2018 had recomputed the commission @ 0.10% on accommodation transactions. Accordingly, I direct the A.O to e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
