9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12,43,170/- out of the purchases and therefore the learned AO should be directed to delete the said addition while computing the total income. 3. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of Rs. 1,65,71,352/- of Ld. Counsel Charges and therefore the learned AO should be directed to delete the said addition while computing the total income. 4. That the appellant craves liberty to add, amend alter and delete any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 3. In the first ground of appeal, the assessee has challenged the validity of the reassessment proceeding framed under section 147 of the Act. 4. The facts to adjudicate the issue on hand are that the assessee is a public limited company and engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of steel items. The assessee in the year under consideration filed return of income declaring loss which was accepted in assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 15th March 2013. Subsequently the AO received information from the VAT department, Maharashtra that the entities namely M/s. Induja Traders Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Kotsons Impex Pvt. Ltd. were engaged in the activity of is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason recorded were enough to reopen the assessment and therefore, the same cannot be held to be bad in law. The appellant has not provided any details and documents to state that any change of opinion has taken before issue of the notice u/s. 148 of the I.T Act. The appellant has not brought anything on record in support of its contention that the issue of purchase and sales to the respective parties was fully examined by the AO in the original assessment proceedings and no adverse view was warranted upon the same. 2.5 In view of the aforesaid discussion, the objections raised by the appellant are found untenable in the eyes of law, and hence the reopening and consequent reassessment completed are found in order. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT-A, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The learned AR before us challenged the validity of the reassessment framed under section 147 of the Act on 4 counts. The 1st submission of the learned AR is that the information gathered from the VAT department, Maharashtra was very much available with the AO at the time of the assessment proceedings carried out under section 143(3) of the Act which was concluded on 15th M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he bogus purchases have been shown under the head consumables stores. As such the AO has not acted in mechanical manner rather he applied his mind on the information gathered from the VAT department, Maharashtra for initiating the proceedings under section 147 of the Act. Thus it cannot be said that the reopening was made based on borrowed satisfaction. 6.6. There is no provision under the Act specifying that the AO is duty-bound to supply the reasons recorded for the reopening of the assessment under section 147 of the Act within a period of 60 days. Furthermore, there is no jurisdictional High Court judgment on this point for supplying the reasons recorded within a period of 60 days. The learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 7. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act, in the case on hand, has been challenged by the assessee on various counts. The 1st basis for challenging the assessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act was that the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was concluded on 15th March 2013 whereas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee. iii. Assessee should raise his objections within 60 days of receipt of the reasons. iv. AO shall dispose off the objections within 4 months of receipt of the objections.- v. The above time limits shall apply to AO where the assessee also adheres to the same.- vi. The procedure provided in GKN Drive Shafts shall apply notwithstanding whether the above time limit is followed or not.- vii. The Chief Commissioner of Income -tax and Cadre Controlling Authority of the Gujarat State, shall issue a circular to all the Assessing Officers for scrupulously carrying out the directions contained in this judgment. 7.3. However, it is pertinent to note that the aforesaid judgment was delivered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 31st March 2014 whereas the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued by the AO dated 15th May 2013 and objection raised by the assessee was disposed off vide separate order dated 14th February 2014. In other words, the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and objection was disposed off by the AO much prior to the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court. Thus it is concluded that it was not possible for the AO to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hase from the aforesaid entities shown in the books of accounts was exactly matching with the information received from the VAT department, Maharashtra. Thus what is inferred is this that the AO after application of his mind arrived on the reasons to believe that the income of the assessee has escaped assessment. Furthermore, the AO at the time of issuing notice under section 148 of the Act has to form prima facie opinion for the escapement of income rather than he has to reach to the conclusion that the income has escaped assessment. In this regard we draw support and guidance from the judgment of Hon'ble Allahabad High court in case of Pannala Mahesh Chandra Jewelers vs. DCIT reported in 188 Taxman 95 where the Hon'ble court observed as under: The expression 'reason to believe' in section 147 does not mean purely subjective satisfaction on the part of the Assessing Officer. The belief must be held in good faith; it cannot be merely a pretence. 8.1. In view of the above we are not impressed with the argument of the learned AR for the assessee. 9. The last contention of the learned AR for the assessee was that there was no disallowance made by the AO in the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . All the payments for the purchases and sales of the goods were carried out through the banking channel/letter of credit. Accordingly, such transactions of purchase and sales cannot be doubted merely on the basis of the statement, particularly in a situation where such transactions were duly recorded in the books. 12.2. However, the AO found that the assessee has shown sales of the goods to M/s. Color Shops Pvt. Ltd. which were purchased from M/s. Induja Traders private Ltd. Both the transactions of purchases and sales were recorded on the same day in the books of the assessee. In both these companies, Shri Jitendra Bi Salecha was the common director who accepted before the sales tax officials during search and filed affidavit during Vat proceeding that the assessee has approached to him for discounting the letter of credit by showing the transactions of purchase and sales for a commission at the rate of 0.05%. For this purpose, the assessee itself generated the bogus bills of the purchases and sales in the name of the entities as discussed above. 12.3. Likewise, the director of M/s. Kotson also accepted in the statement furnished before the sales tax officials and affidavit fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely M/s. Induja Traders Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Kotsons Impex Pvt. Ltd. at Rs. 87,84,167.00 which is 0.866% only whereas the assessee in the earlier year has shown the GP at the rate of 19.82% and 20.03% effectively. In other words, the assessee has shown losses with respect to the transactions with the aforesaid companies after taking into consideration the administrative expenses. ii. There was no evidence brought on record by the assessee regarding the physical movement of the goods. Therefore simply the payment was made through the banking channel cannot establish the genuineness of the transactions. iii. Since, the assessee failed to discharge the initial burden by substantiating the genuineness of the transactions based on documentary evidence, the plea of the assessee for providing the cross-examination opportunity cannot be entertained. iv. There was no doubt raised by the AO about the payments which were made through the account payees cheques. 14.1. In view of the above, the learned CIT(A) was of the opinion that the estimated disallowance at the rate of 25% of the purchases will provide justice to plug the leakage of revenue. Accordingly the learned CIT(A) confirmed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below to the extent favourable to them. 18. We heard the rival contention of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The facts of the case have already been elaborated in detail in the preceding paragraph. Therefore we are not inclined to repeat the same for the sake of brevity and convenience. The 1st issue that arises for our consideration is whether the transaction of purchase and sales shown by the assessee is bogus in nature. In this regard, we note that the primary onus lies upon the assessee to justify the transaction of the purchase and sales based on the documentary evidence. From the preceding discussion, we note certain undisputed facts as detailed under: i. The assessee has purchased the goods from the company namely M/s. Induja Traders Pvt. Ltd. for Rs. 54,34,97,318 and sold the same while the goods were in transit in most of the cases on same day to another company namely M/s. Color Shop Pvt. Ltd. for Rs. 54,49,05,854/- which was controlled and managed by same set of people who were controlling and managing the supplier company i.e. M/s. Induja Traders Pvt. Ltd. Similarly, the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in the assessment ought not to have been restored by the Tribunal. The view taken by the Tribunal in the case of Vijay Proteins Ltd. v. CIT [1996] 58 ITD 428 (Ahd.) has been approved. In that view of the matter, keeping in mind the fact that not the entire amount covered under such purchase, but the profit element embedded therein would be subject to tax, we find that it shall be appropriate to restrict the disallowance made in this regard to 25% of the cost of such purchases in each year. 18.3. In the light of the above stated discussion, now it has to be seen the income which has been generated to the assessee out of such bogus transaction of purchase and sales. There is no standard jacket formula to work-out the income from the bogus activity carried out by the assessee. Some element of guesswork is required to determine the income of the assessee which is embedded in the bogus activities carried out by the assessee. In deciding the element of income, we find that Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Vijay Trading Co. (supra) has taken 25% of the purchase cost as income of the assessee. Respectfully following the same we hold that there is no infirmity in the order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idence, but demanded for cross examination of the directors. From the facts as elaborated above what is inferred is that the AO not only relied on the statement of directors made during search proceeding carried out by the Maharashtra VAT officials for holding the purchase as bogus but also he had other evidences which were not rebutted by the Assessee. In such facts and circumstances in our considered view the action of the AO is not void though providing cross examination of witness is an important part of the judicial proceedings. In this regard we find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Kolkata reported in 62 taxmann.com 3, where the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that it is necessary where addition is solely based on the statement of third party. The relevant finding of the Hon'ble Apex Court reads as under: Not allowing the assessee to cross-examine the witnesses by the Adjudicating Authority though the statements of those witnesses were made the basis of the impugned order is a serious flaw which makes the order nullity inasmuch as it amounted to violation of principles of natural justice because ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... usively for the genuine other business activities of the appellant. Therefore, disallowance made by the AO is found correct and justified and hence, the same is confirmed. 22. Being aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 23. The Learned AR before us contended that the LC charges were incurred in the course of the business. These charges were paid to the bank and therefore the genuineness of such expenses cannot be doubted. 23.1. The learned AR alternatively contended that major part of the purchases have been admitted by the learned CIT(A), therefore if any disallowance needs to be made, then the same should be in proportion to the purchases disallowed by the learned CIT(A). 24. On the contrary, the Learned DR vehemently supported the order of the authorities below. 25. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. As we have already given a finding that the assessee carried out bogus transactions of purchase and sales, thus in our considered view such charges are not eligible for the deduction. It is because the assessee was not carrying out the bogus transactions. Hence, we do not fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion while computing the total income. 5. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of Rs. 56,94,49,965/- out of the purchases and therefore the learned AO should be directed to delete the addition while computing the total income. 6. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of Rs. 2,50,28,509/- of advertisement expanses and therefore the learned AO should be directed to delete the addition while computing the total income. 7. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,19,231/- of additional depreciation and therefore the learned AO should be directed to allow the said allowance while computing the total income. 8. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the disallowance of claim of Rs. 3,63,06,857/- made under section 35D of the Act and therefore the learned AO should be directed to allow the said c aim while computing the total income. 9. That the appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter and delete any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 29. The first issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such income will be taxed in India only in the case such party is having permanent establishment India. Accordingly the assessee submitted that there is tax treaty between India and UAE which has been notified vide notification number GSR 356(E) dated 21-04-1995. Therefore it was not liable to deduct tax on such payment of commission. 33. The learned CIT(A) after considering the facts in totality directed the AO to verify nature of services received and allow the claim accordingly by observing as under: It is the submission of the appellant before the AO that the agents do not have permanent establishment in India. It is also admitted facts as noted by AO in Para 4.2 of the assessment order that the appellant has claimed to have paid export commission to the foreign parties USA, UAE which is said to have been made for utilization of their services for procuring orders from overseas companies and services were said to have been offered to procure export sales orders However, the nature of actual services rendered seems to have not been examined by the AO. If the commission is paid to foreign agents for services rendered outside India merely for procuring sales orders and the age ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted the AO to verify the nature of services and allow the claim if commissions were paid for procurement of sales otherwise disallow the same if commission paid for services provided in nature of managerial or technical know-how as provided under section 9 of the Act. 38. At the outset we note the assessee before authorities below only contended that the agents have no establishment or business connection in India and payments were made outside India. As such the assessee has not substantiated the nature of services provided by the foreign agent. Accordingly we direct the assessee to provide the details of the services obtained from the commission agents to the AO. Therefore in such circumstances we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned CIT(A). Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed subject to verification. 39. Next issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 8,69,374/- on account late payment of EPF. 40. The AO during the assessment proceeding observed that the assessee has made delayed payment of Employee contribution to the PF account to the tune of Rs. 8,69,374/-. Accordingly the AO, in view of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount of expenses incurred for earning income not forming part of total income irrespective of the fact that such income is earned or not in year under consideration. Accordingly the AO computed the amount of disallowances under section 14A(2) read with rule 8D of income tax rule to the tune of Rs. 2,32,22,722/- being Rs. 2,0342,997 on account of interest expenses and Rs. 28,90,725/- on account of administrative expenses. 45. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal to the learned CIT(A). 46. The Assessee before the learned CIT(A) submitted that it had sufficient interest free fund to the tune of Rs. 10308.49 million in the form of shares, reserve & surplus and accumulated depreciation whereas the amount of investment stands as Rs. 72.69 million. Therefore no disallowances for interest expenses can be made. The assessee also submitted that the disallowances of administrative expenses can only be made @ 0.5% of the averages investment from which exempted income was earned. However, during the year it has not earned any dividend income on any of the investment. The assessee further contended that the disallowances under section 14A cannot be made over and above the exempt income. Henc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment of Hon'ble jurisdictional high court in the case of CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. reported in 363 ITR 474 where it was held as under: It was noted from records that the assessee was having shareholding funds to the extent of 2607.18 crores and the investment made by it was to the extent of Rs. 195.10 crores. In other words, the assessee had sufficient funds for making the investments and it had not used the borrowed funds for such purpose. This aspect of huge surplus funds is not disputed by the revenue which earned it the interest on bonds and dividend income. [Para 7] 50.2. Respectfully following the same we direct to the AO delete the addition made on the account of interest expenses. 50.3. Coming to the second fold of addition i.e. addition on account of administrative expenses. In this regard we note that the AR contended that during the year under consideration the assessee has not earned any exempt income. Therefore in absence of exempt income no such disallowances can be made. At the outset we note that the issue on hand has been covered by the order of the coordinate bench of this ITAT in case of Madhusudhan Industries Limited in ITA No-1715/Ahd/2011 where it wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s paid. 56. Aggrieved assessee carried the matter to the learned CIT(A) who sustained the addition by observing as under: The appellant submitted that payment of certain expenses are affected, benefit of which will be available over a period of time and accordingly, the said expenses are deferred over the period of benefit in books of accounts to match marketing concept. The explanation given by the appellant is very vague. It has not been properly explained about the business requirement of incurring the expenditure benefit to business of the appellant on incurring such expenditure, payment details and details of recipient of such expenditure was not satisfactory explained by the appellant during the assessment proceedings as well as during the appellate proceedings. Therefore, the additions made by the AO are found justified hence confirmed. 57. Being aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT-A, the assessee is in appeal before us. 58. The learned AR before us submitted that part of the advertisement expenses were admitted by the AO and part of the advertisement expenses which were treated as deferred revenue expenses by the assessee were disallowed. As per the learned AR the AO can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee is allowed for the statistical purposes. 61. Next issue raised by the assessee vide ground no- 7 is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowances of additional depreciation for Rs. 13,19,231/- only. 62. At the outset, the learned AR for the assessee submitted that he has been instructed by the assessee not to press this ground of appeal. Accordingly we dismiss the same as not pressed. 63. The last issue raised by the assessee vide ground no. 8 is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,63,06,857/- on account of claim made under section 35D of the Act. 64. The AO observed that the assessee in computation of income claimed deferred revenue expenses amounting to Rs. 3,63,06,857/- under section 35D of the Act. Accordingly the assessee was asked for explanation. 64.1. The assessee submitted that during the year it has claimed preliminary expenses of Rs. 4,11,16,813/- only and out of the same, an amount of Rs. 3,63,06,857/- pertain to earlier years. The assessee also submitted that these expenses were incurred with respect to Hybrid Bus T-cab project development. The assessee further claimed that in scrutiny assessment under section 143(3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... total income of the assessee. 65. Aggrieved assessee carried the matter before learned CIT(A) who also confirmed the disallowances made by the AO by observing as under: The submission filed by the appellant during assessment proceedings were considered by the AO, but did not find satisfactory for the reasons given in the assessment order. During the appellant proceedings, the appellant stated that this expenditure has been allowed while passing assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The contention of the appellant is found factually incorrect, as this is the first order u/s. 143(3). There is no previous order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act for this assessment year. Therefore, contention of the appellant is rejected, the additions made by the AO are found justified, hence confirmed. This ground of appeal dismissed. 66. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 67. The learned AR before us submitted that the deduction claimed under section 35D of the Act in the year under consideration amounting to Rs. 3,63,06,857/- relates to the expenses incurred in the earlier years which were admitted as deferred revenue expenses in the assessm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the 'Ld. CIT(A) ' ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. 71. The first issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,32,22,622/- made under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of Income Tax Rule. 72. At the outset we note that the issue raised by the Revenue has been decided along with the Assessee's appeal in ITA No. 2915/Ahd/2016 vide ground no-4 of assessee appeal. For detail discussion please refer the paragraph no. 50 of this order. Accordingly we hold that the same is not required to adjudicate separately again. Thus the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 73. The second issue raised the Revenue is that the learned CIT(A) erred in restricting the addition upto 25% made on account of bogus purchased of Rs. 227,77,99,860/-. 74. At the outset we note that the issue raised by the Revenue has been decided along the Assessee appeal in ITA No. 2915/Ahd/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in ground 3 and 4 by the assessee in its appeal are either premature to decide or consequential. Therefore we dismiss the same. 81.1. In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Coming to ITA No. 942/Ahd/2018 of Revenue's appeal for A.Y. 2012-13 82. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non deduction of tax on commission payable to foreign parties. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on fact in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 4,52,04,552/- made u/s. 14A r.w.r 8D by the Assessing Officer. 2.1 The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the onus lies on the assessee to demonstrate that it has interest free funds available with it for making such investment and not other way around. 2.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that as per Section 106 of Evidence Act, when any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of providing the fact is upon him. 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. 83. The first issue ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order. For detail discussion, please refer the above mentioned paragraph. Accordingly the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 90. The second issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,92,40,917/- on account claim made under section 35D of the Act. 91. At the outset we note that the similar ground raised by the assessee in ITA no. 2915/Ahd/2016 corresponding to A.Y. 2011-12 which is decided in favour of the assessee vide paragraph no 69 of this order subject to verification. For detailed discussion, please refer the above mentioned paragraph. Accordingly we allow the ground of the assessee here in this case also subject to verification. 92. The issues raised in ground 3 and 4 by the assessee in its appeal either are premature to decide or consequential. Therefore we dismiss the same. 93. In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Coming to ITA No. 943/Ahd/2018 of Revenue's appeal for A.Y. 2013-14 94. The Revenue has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Rs. 2,04,21,124/- 3. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of undisclosed income of Rs. 2,50,965/- on the basis of TDS reflected in 26AS and therefore the learned AO should be directed to allow the said claim of Rs. 2,50,965/- 4. The learned CIT(A) has erred by not dropping the penalty proceedings initiated under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. That the appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter and delete any grounds of appeal before the final hearing. 100. The first issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition made on account of late payment of EPF contribution for Rs. 52,93,615/-. 101. At the outset we note that the similar ground raised by the assessee in ITA no. 2915/Ahd/2016 corresponding to A.Y. 2011-12 which is decided against the assessee vide paragraph no 42 of this order. For detail discussion, please refer the above mentioned paragraph. Accordingly we dismiss the ground of the assessee's appeal. 102. The second issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,04,21,124/- on account claim made under section 35D of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount to double addition, and therefore is deleted. As the balance amount of Rs. 2,50,965/- which is not shown by the appellant as income is confirmed. 109. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. 110. The learned AR before us submitted that the income from the aforesaid parties do not belong to the assessee. Therefore, the same cannot be added to the total income of the assessee. The learned AR further prayed to restore the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. 111. On the other hand the learned DR raised no objection if the matter is set aside to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. 112. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, the onus lies upon the assessee to furnish the necessary details as desired by the AO during the assessment proceedings. However, in the case on hand, the revenue before rejecting the contention of the assessee should have verified the fact from the aforesaid parties whether they have paid any income to the assessee. It is for the reason that the form 26AS is generated by the income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 13,58,818/- under section 14A r.w.r. 8D of Income Tax rule. 119. At the outset we note that the similar ground raised by the Revenue in ITA no. 3195/Ahd/2016 corresponding to A.Y. 2011-12 where we have decided the issue against the Revenue vide paragraph no 72 of this order. For detail discussion refer the above mentioned paragraph. Accordingly we dismiss the ground of the revenue appeal. 119.1. In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Coming to ITA No. 1679/Ahd/2018, an appeal filed by the Assessee for A.Y. 2015-16 120. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of Rs. 36,629/- being the employee to ESI under section 36(1)(va) and therefore the learned AO should be directed to delete the said addition in full. 2. That the leaned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) has erred in law and facts by disallowing claim under section 35D of Rs. 1,48,84,140/- and therefore the learned AO should be directed to allow the said claim while computing total income. 3. That the appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter and delete any grounds of appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
