9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1174X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not permissible for him to add any fictional income to the assessee's return. In the absence of any evidence to show either that the sales were sham transactions or that the market prices were in fact paid by the purchasers, the mere fact that the goods were sold at a concessional rate to benefit the purchasers at the expense of the company would not entitle the income-tax department to assess the difference between the market price and the price paid by the purchasers, as profit of the company. Thus direct the learned assessing officer to delete the addition made in this year being 20% of the expenditure incurred by the assessee. Accordingly, the order of the learned CIT A is confirmed and appeal of the learned assessing officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... professional services to the other party, that too by utilising its own funds whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) was justified in not appreciating the fact that the functions (by the assessee company involved not only highly technical and professional skill but also the expert eyes of its directors et cetera, which cannot be believed to have been carried out without charging any professional fees or service charges. 04. Brief facts of the case shows that assessee is a company engaged in providing marketing research in health insurance and healthcare services system. It filed its return of income on 29/11/2014 for assessment year 2014-15 declaring total income of ₹ 12,412,690/ . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed assessing officer further noted that there is an agreement between the assessee and the service receiver. As per the terms and condition contained in the agreement assessee has agreed to not to charge any service charges or any fees from that entity for development of initial infrastructure such as transfer of initial infrastructure from assessee to that company as its cost. The learned AO noted that though it is a commercial decision taken by the assessee and mutually agreed between the parties however in commercial decision there should necessarily be an element of income. The AO further noted that assessee has received advances from that entity which is less than 50% of the actual expenditure incurred by the assessee. Therefore the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 497/ . 05. The assessee is aggrieved with the above assessment order and preferred appeal before the learned CIT A. The learned CIT A noted that identical ground arose in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2013-14 wherein the identical addition on similar grounds for that assessment year was decided by the coordinate bench in favour of the assessee. Therefore accordingly, following the decision of the ITAT, the AO was directed to delete the addition. 06. The learned AO is aggrieved with the decision of learned CIT A and is in appeal. 07. The learned departmental representative reiterated the facts stated by the learned assessing officer and submitted that when the assessee is providing services to its sister conce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as well as the submission made before us. We find that in case of the assessee for assessment year 2013 14 coordinate bench has decided identical issue in ITA number 1117/M/2019 (A) 1650/M/2019 (By AO) by order dated 25/11/2020 wherein identical ground was raised by the revenue before the coordinate bench as per Para number 8. The coordinate bench in paragraph number 12 has categorically held as under:- 12. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. Giving that the assessee received development cost for developing and transferring the initial infrastructure to Cigna TTK, the transaction is not expenditure in the hands of the assessee. For the assessee (the recipient of the amount) the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nse of the company would not entitle the income-tax department to assess the difference between the market price and the price paid by the purchasers, as profit of the company. 12.1 In view of the above factual scenario and position of law we affirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition of Rs. 3,68,97,011/-made by the AO. 010. We find that there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case compared to assessment year 2013 14. As the issue has already been decided by the coordinate bench in assessee s own case for assessment year 2013 14, respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench we also direct the learned assessing officer to delete the addition made in this year being 20% of the expend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
