https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175206 The revenue department appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of excessive remuneration paid to dealers for A.Y. 2006-07. The AO had disallowed a balance payment of Rs. 89,98,913 as unreasonable. The CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the addition based on the previous year's order, where it was deemed justified for business purposes. The department argued against comparing remuneration paid in previous years, leading to a remittance for fresh examination without past comparisons. Ultimately, the department's appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes, with the order pronounced on 30-11-2009. en-us Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Nov 2015 10:49:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175206 The revenue department appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of excessive remuneration paid to dealers for A.Y. 2006-07. The AO had disallowed a balance payment of Rs. 89,98,913 as unreasonable. The CIT(A) directed the AO to delete the addition based on the previous year's order, where it was deemed justified for business purposes. The department argued against comparing remuneration paid in previous years, leading to a remittance for fresh examination without past comparisons. Ultimately, the department's appeal was treated as allowed for statistical purposes, with the order pronounced on 30-11-2009. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175206