9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the income has already been taxed in the hands of Surya Food & Agro Ltd., we find no error or infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the protective addition made in the hands of the Assessee. Accordingly, finding no merits in the Grounds of Appeal of the Revenue, we dismiss the same. Addition u/s 37 - unexplained expenditure on commission -CIT(A) confirmed the above addition treating the Assessee as an entry operator and imposed the commission @ of 2.5% - HELD THAT:- In the absence of any contrary material or facts on record, we find no reason to interfere with the findings and conclusion of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition made on account of commission income. Findings no merits in the grounds of Appeal of the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IV, New Delhi ['the Ld. CIT(A)'], has erred in upholding the order of the Assistant Commission of Income tax, Central Circle-08, New Delhi (the Ld. Assessing Officer') in upholding the addition of Rs. 38,07,500/- made u/s 37 of the Act on account of alleged unexplained expenditure on commission." 3. None appeared for the Assessee, on perusal of the order sheet it is found that, right from filing of the present Appeals neither the Assessee nor its representatives have appeared even after service of notice. Therefore, we deem it fit to decide the above Appeals on hearing the Ld. Department's Representative and on perusing the material available on record. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ferred the Appeal on the Grounds of mentioned above. 6. The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) committed error in deleting the protective addition made by the A.O. and further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition made on account of commission income. Thus, the Ld. Department's Representative sought for allowing the Appeal of the Revenue and dismissal of the Appeal of the Assessee. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition held as under:- "5.3.14 In the light of the above observations I hold that M/s Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. is the ultimate beneficiary of the transfer of unexplained cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under:- "20. Learned DR has contended that the conclusion drawn by the ITAT in the order of stay is a wrong conclusion and should not be relied upon while deciding the appeals on merits. However, after considering the submissions of both the sides and the facts of the case and going through the orders of the lower authorities as well as Settlement Commission, we entirely agree with the above finding of the ITAT given in the stay petitions. From the assessment order, the relevant portion of which has already been reproduced above in this order, it is clear that the stand of the Assessing Officer throughout was that there was undisclosed income of the Surya Group which is routed in the form of share capital in the group companies by obtain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T passed in stay petition wherein the ITAT held that "the disclosure has been made by the company who has earned the undisclosed income and routed in books through the petitioner companies as unaccounted share capital. The application of the income is taxed in the hands of the petitioner companies apparently it seems and sources of income is taxed in the hands of Surya Food and Agro Ltd. Therefore prima facie the case of the assessee shows that there is double taxation, once the source of income and secondly the application of income". We entirely agree with the above finding of the ITAT in the order passed in the stay petition filed by M/s Surya Processed Food Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Surya Agrotech Infrastructure Ltd. In view of the above, since ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. the A.O. is fair enough to quantify and tax commission income of Rs. 38,07,500/- @ 2.5% of Rs. 15,23,00,000/-. The addition on account of commission income of Rs. 38,07,500/- is therefore confirmed. Thus, Ground No. 3 of Appeal is dismissed." 12. Considering the fact that the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the above addition treating the Assessee as an entry operator and imposed the commission @ of 2.5% on Rs. 15,23,00,000/-. In the absence of any contrary material or facts on record, we find no reason to interfere with the findings and conclusion of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 38,07,500/- made on account of commission income. Findings no merits in the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee, we dismiss the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
