Commission expenses disallowed for lack of evidence. Agents' lack of experience cited. Decision upheld.

The appeals were dismissed, affirming the disallowance of commission expenses in assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11. The primary issue was the lack of evidence supporting the services rendered by the agents, leading to the conclusion that the commission payments were not genuine. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance based on the findings that the agents had no relevant experience or knowledge, and some admitted to returning the commission amount. The decision was grounded in factual evidence and legal analysis, resulting in the dismissal of the appeals.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Dispute over disallowance of commission expenses in assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11.

Analysis:
1. The appeals were filed against orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) concerning the disallowance of commission expenses.
2. The issue in both appeals was identical and thus heard together for a common decision.
3. The primary concern was the disallowance of Rs. 23,31,537/- as business expenditure on commission.
4. During assessment, it was found that commission paid on sale of power press machines was questionable.
5. The Assessing Officer concluded that the commission payments were bogus as agents had no relevant experience or knowledge, and some admitted to returning the commission amount.
6. The CIT (Appeals) upheld the disallowance due to lack of evidence of services rendered by the agents.
7. The appellant argued that commission expenses were genuine, citing TDS deductions and income tax returns of agents.
8. The Tribunal found no fault in the CIT (Appeals) order, supporting the disallowance of commission based on lack of evidence of services rendered.
9. The CIT (Appeals) had categorically stated that no work was done by agents justifying commission payments, a fact unchallenged by the appellant.
10. Lack of evidence contradicting the findings led to upholding the disallowance of commission expenses.
11. Consequently, both appeals were dismissed, affirming the disallowance of commission expenses.

This detailed analysis highlights the key aspects of the judgment, focusing on the disallowance of commission expenses due to lack of evidence supporting the services rendered by the agents. The decision was based on factual findings and legal reasoning, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeals.

---