2014 (5) TMI 353

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lowing an amount of Rs. 3,42,094/- being 1/10th of total commission paid to various parties amounting to Rs. 34,20,947/- on the ground that the commission paid is excessive. The disallowance of Rs. 3,42,094/- being contrary to the facts and bad in law is prayed to allow the claim of expense. 2. The ld. CIT(A)-IV, Baroda has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,60,000/- treating the same as income from undisclosed sources, being peak of unaccounted transactions as per loose papers found during survey, out of the addition of Rs. 3,16,267/- made by the Ld. AO invoking the provisions of sec. 69D of the Act. The addition of Rs. 1,60,000/- is contrary to facts and bad in law and therefore is prayed to be deleted." 3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... holding that since there were some deficiencies on the part of the assessee in the details filed in support of commission payment and some commission receipts were not produced for verification, 10% disallowance out of total commission is justified. 6. Further aggrieved now the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. At the time of hearing learned counsel of the assessee at the outset relied on the submission made before Ld. CIT(A) that entire commission was paid by cheque and at the time of survey nothing adverse was found in respect of commission expenses. He also submitted that one of the reasons given by AO for making this disallowance was that profit shown by the assessee during the year under appeal as percentage of total turn-over....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....und during the survey held that assessee had borrowed following amount in cash in contravention of provisions of section 69D Name of party Date of borrowal Amount borrowed 1. Harish 30.01.2001 Rs. 50,000/- 2. M. Zala 2.12.2000 Rs. 50,000/- 3. M. Zala 3.01.2001 Rs. 50,000/- 4. N.K. Mahesh 2.12.2000 Rs. 1,00,000/- 5. Rakesh Mishra 23.2.2001 Rs. 42,000/- 6. Shailesh 18.02.2001 Rs. 9,267/- 7. Shailesh 22.03.2001 Rs. 15,000/- AO referred to reply by Shri Ashwinhbhai H Patel to question no.10 of his statement dated 24-01-2002 and question no. 2 of his statement dated 28- 01-2002 at the time of survey u/s. 133A and held that assessee-company was in the habit of borrowing am....