Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
ITAT upholds disallowance of franking charges due to insufficient evidence but remands commission payment matter for fresh verification The ITAT Mumbai confirmed the disallowance of franking charges as the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence proving these expenses were incurred ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
ITAT upholds disallowance of franking charges due to insufficient evidence but remands commission payment matter for fresh verification
The ITAT Mumbai confirmed the disallowance of franking charges as the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence proving these expenses were incurred wholly and exclusively for business purposes. While details of parties were furnished, additional supporting evidence was lacking. The CIT(A)'s confirmation of the AO's action was upheld. However, the matter regarding commission payment was remanded to the AO for fresh verification, requiring the assessee to submit relevant evidence. The AO must pass orders in accordance with law after providing proper hearing. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues involved: Appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi for AY. 2018-19 regarding additions of commission expenses and franking charges.
Commission Expenses Issue: The assessee, engaged in arranging finance, claimed commission expenses of Rs. 44,36,581/- and franking charges of Rs. 4,25,176%. The AO disallowed these expenses as the assessee failed to provide evidence of services rendered by the parties to whom the commission was paid. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision. The appellant contended that detailed information of the commission agents was provided, along with payment evidence, and argued that the commission expenses should be allowed as business expenditure. The ITAT directed the AO to verify the services rendered by the commission agents and their income disclosure, and if satisfied, allow the commission expenses.
Franking Charges Issue: The AO disallowed the franking charges incurred by the assessee as no evidence was provided to prove that the charges were borne by the assessee for business purposes. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed this decision. The ITAT upheld the disallowance of franking charges, as the assessee failed to provide sufficient evidence to support the business purpose of the charges.
In conclusion, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the commission payment issue was remanded back to the AO for verification based on the provided evidence.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
