Tribunal favors Assessee, allows additional evidence, disallows royalty payment. Disallowances remanded for proper verification.

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Assessee on various issues, including admitting additional evidence without AO's opportunity, disallowance of royalty payment, contingent liability, disallowance under sections 14A and 36(1)(xii). The Tribunal set aside the disallowances and remanded the case back to the AO for proper verification, citing lack of proper justification by the AO and CIT (A). Both appeals by the Revenue and Assessee were allowed for statistical purposes, with issues referred back to the AO for further examination in accordance with legal principles.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Admitting additional evidence without providing opportunity to AO.
2. Disallowance of royalty payment by AO.
3. Disallowance of contingent liability by CIT (A).
4. Disallowance under section 14A.
5. Disallowance under section 36(1)(xii).

Detailed Analysis:
1. Admitting additional evidence without providing opportunity to AO:
In the case for AY 2009-10, the Revenue challenged the admission of additional evidence by the CIT (A) in the form of a letter from DGH without giving the AO a chance to respond. The Tribunal found that the AO did not dispute the genuineness of the expenses and that the allowance of these expenses was revenue neutral. Therefore, the disallowance of the expenses was deemed unsustainable, and the case was remanded back to the AO for verification, setting aside the grounds raised by the Revenue.

2. Disallowance of royalty payment by AO:
Regarding the disallowance of royalty payment made by the AO, the Tribunal noted that the CIT (A) had deleted the disallowance based on letters from DGH responsible for ascertaining royalty payments to the State Governments. The Tribunal found it necessary to restore the case to the AO for verification of the expenses incurred by the Assessee Board on royalty payments, setting aside the grounds raised by both the Revenue and the Assessee.

3. Disallowance of contingent liability by CIT (A):
The Assessee challenged the disallowance of a contingent liability and other expenses under various sections. The Tribunal observed that the AO and CIT (A) disallowed certain amounts without proper justification. The Tribunal referred to relevant case law and decided to set aside the issues to the AO for proper examination and verification of the expenses claimed by the Assessee, allowing the grounds raised by the Assessee for statistical purposes.

4. Disallowance under section 14A:
The Tribunal addressed the disallowance under section 14A, noting that the Assessee had not earned any exempt income during the assessment year. Citing a decision by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the Assessee, setting aside the issue to the AO for further consideration in line with the court's decision.

5. Disallowance under section 36(1)(xii):
Regarding the disallowance under section 36(1)(xii), the Tribunal found that the Assessee had provided documentation to justify the expenses incurred. The Tribunal remanded the issue back to the AO for proper examination and verification of the expenses, allowing the grounds raised by the Assessee for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Assessee for statistical purposes, setting aside various issues to the AO for further examination and verification in line with the Tribunal's findings and relevant legal principles.

---