TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal upholds deletion of disallowed expenses and late deposits, citing legal principles</h1> <h3>ITO, Ward 12(4), New Delhi Versus M/s. Himalya International Ltd.</h3> ITO, Ward 12(4), New Delhi Versus M/s. Himalya International Ltd. - TMI Issues involved:1. Disallowance of USA expenses2. Deletion of late deposit of ESIC and PFAnalysis:1. Disallowance of USA expenses:The Revenue appealed against the deletion of a disallowance of Rs.4,78,76,044 on account of USA expenses for the assessment year 2002-03. The Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the disallowance, citing similar disallowances in the assessee's case for the assessment year 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Tribunal referred to previous orders and agreements between the assessee and M/s Global Reliance Inc., emphasizing that expenses were the responsibility of the assessee. The Tribunal analyzed various legal precedents, including the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and ITAT Mumbai, to conclude that the expenses claimed by the assessee were related to marketing and sales expenses. It was observed that the consignment agent did not render services in India, and thus, consignment commission was not taxable in India. The Tribunal also noted that the authorities had accepted the accounting method of the assessee. In light of these observations and legal principles, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal.2. Deletion of late deposit of ESIC and PF:The second issue pertained to the deletion of a sum of Rs.2,70,959 by the Ld. CIT(A) concerning the late deposit of ESIC and PF. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) based on the precedent set by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in a previous case. It was noted that the PF/ESIC amount was deposited before the due date of filing the return under section 139(1) of the Act. Following the legal precedent, the Tribunal dismissed this ground of appeal as well.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal based on the detailed analysis and application of legal principles to the issues at hand. The judgment provided a thorough examination of the facts, agreements, legal precedents, and decisions, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's grounds of appeal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
