Tribunal allows deduction of commission payments for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13

The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the disallowance of commission payments for both A.Y. 2010-11 and A.Y. 2012-13, allowing the assessee's appeals for both years. The Tribunal found the commission payments justified as they were made in the normal course of business for services rendered by the agents, supported by evidence establishing the genuineness of the payments and services provided.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance of commission payments to various agents.
2. Genuineness of services rendered by the commission agents.
3. Justification of commission payments in the normal course of business.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance of Commission Payments to Various Agents:
The primary issue raised by the assessee was the disallowance of commission payments amounting to Rs. 6,04,984 for A.Y. 2010-11 and Rs. 19,57,700 for A.Y. 2012-13. The Commissioner (Appeals) had confirmed these disallowances, which were challenged by the assessee. The assessee argued that the commission payments were made to agents for procuring and selling chemical gases, and these payments were made through crossed account-payee cheques after deducting TDS.

2. Genuineness of Services Rendered by the Commission Agents:
The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the commission payments on the grounds that the assessee failed to establish the genuineness of the commission paid and the nature of the services rendered. The assessee provided evidence in the form of names, addresses, PAN details, and payment details of the commission agents. Additionally, the assessee furnished confirmation letters, email correspondences, and other documents to prove that the agents had indeed rendered services. For instance, Mr. Sandeep More facilitated the procurement of gases from M/s. Linde India Limited, and Mr. Gautam Kamble assisted in procuring special mixture gases from M/s. Chemtron Science Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. Similar evidence was provided for other agents like Mr. R.B. Rahate, Mr. Narayan Hegde, Mr. Ketan Panchal, and Mr. Sandeep Sonar.

3. Justification of Commission Payments in the Normal Course of Business:
The Tribunal found that the assessee had been in the business of trading chemical gases for over 15 years and had consistently paid commissions to agents for their services. The Tribunal noted that in previous assessments, similar commission payments to some of the same agents had been allowed by the AO. For example, commissions paid to Mr. Sandeep More, Mr. R.B. Rahate, and Mr. Narayan Hegde in A.Y. 2009-10 were allowed in scrutiny assessments. The Tribunal concluded that the commission payments were justified as they were made in the normal course of business for services rendered by the agents.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal directed the AO to delete the disallowance of commission payments for both A.Y. 2010-11 and A.Y. 2012-13. The appeals of the assessee for both years were allowed. The Tribunal emphasized that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to establish the genuineness of the commission payments and the services rendered by the agents.

Order Pronounced:
The order was pronounced in the open court on 16/10/2017.

---