Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Revenue was justified in disallowing commission expenditure on the ground that the recipients did not respond to notices or were not found at the addresses furnished, despite the assessee maintaining books of account, making payments by cheque, and deducting and depositing tax at source.
Analysis: The absence of replies to notices or non-service of notices by itself did not establish that the commission agents were nonexistent or that the payments were fictitious. Books of account maintained in the ordinary course of business have evidentiary value and cannot be ignored without cogent reasons. The record showed payment by cheque, deduction of tax at source, deposit of the deducted tax, and furnishing of the recipients' particulars. Those circumstances were sufficient to support the genuineness of the expenditure, and the cited authority on mere cheque payment not being conclusive did not assist the Revenue because additional supporting evidence was present.
Conclusion: The disallowance was not justified and the commission expenditure was rightly accepted; the Revenue's appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Genuineness of an expenditure cannot be rejected merely because notices to recipients remain unanswered or unserved when the assessee's books of account, cheque payments, tax deduction at source, deposit of deducted tax, and disclosed recipient particulars provide corroborative evidence of the transaction.