9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 1320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20 is treated as the lead matter. 3. This tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short "the Act, 1961") is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' dated 31.01.2020 in the ITA No.2350/Ahd/2015 for the A.Y.2010.11. 4. The Revenue has proposed the following questions for the consideration of this Court; "A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 34,14,124/- made u/s 40(a)(a) of the Act without appreciating that the assessee failed to bring any evidence on record to the effect that the payments made are covered under circular No.723 of 1995 and that the non-residents s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding? I) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in ignoring crucial findings of AO including that sister concern operates from tax exempt jurisdiction and assessee has incurred huge advertisement expenses in foreign markets? J) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in stating that net profit of 46.38% is not possible when the Hon'ble Karnataka HC has held in CIT vs. Vesesh Infotechnics Ltd. 210 Taxman 522 that even a profitability of 94.8% is possible?" 5. Having heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue and having gone through the materials on record, we are of the view that none of the questions as proposed by the revenue could be termed as the substantial questions of law. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee in both the captioned appeals is the same, those were taken up for hearing analogously and are disposed of by this common order. 2. We first take up Tax Appeal No.278 of 2020. 3. This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short "the Act, 1961") is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' dated 31.01.2020 in the ITA No.2350/Ahd/2015 for the A.Y.2010.11. 4. The Revenue has proposed the following questions for the consideration of this Court; "A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.34,14,124/- made u/s 40(a)(a) of the Act without appreciating th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pholding any part of the addition more particularly when AO has pointed out specific examples of under invoicing which has been dismissed by way of generic finding? I] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in ignoring crucial findings of AO including that sister concern operates from tax exempt jurisdiction and assessee has incurred huge advertisement expenses in foreign markets? J] Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in stating that net profit of 46.38% is not possible when the Hon'ble Karnataka HC has held in CIT vs. Vesesh Infotechnics Ltd. 210 Taxman 522 that even a profitability of 94.8% is possible?" 5 Having heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue and having gone throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reated as the lead matter. 3. This tax appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961(for short "the Act, 1961") is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' dated 31.01.2020 in the ITA No.2350/Ahd/2015 for the A.Y.2010.11. 4. The Revenue has proposed the following questions for the consideration of this Court; "A) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.34,14,124/- made u/s 40(a)(a) of the Act without appreciating that the assessee failed to bring any evidence on record to the effect that the payments made are covered under circular No.723 of 1995 and that the non-residents ship owne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in ignoring crucial findings of AO including that sister concern operates from tax exempt jurisdiction and assessee has incurred huge advertisement expenses in foreign markets? J) Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in stating that net profit of 46.38% is not possible when the Hon'ble Karnataka HC has held in CIT vs. Vesesh Infotechnics Ltd. 210 Taxman 522 that even a profitability of 94.8% is possible?" 5. Having heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the Revenue and having gone through the materials on record, we are of the view that none of the questions as proposed by the revenue could be termed as the substantial questions of law. All the question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
