Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2015 (5) TMI 517

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....burden to prove that any expenditure respect of which payment is made to a person referred to in Section 40A(2)(b) is excessive or unreasonable within the meaning of Section 40A(2)(A) is on the assessing officer can and the Tribunal was justified in law in casting the burden upon the appellant to show that the conversion charge paid by it was equal to the market rate or was not excessive or unreasonable? ii) Whether the initial explanation offered by the assessee assuming that the burden lay on the assessee amounts to discharge of the burden and shifting of the onus on the assessing officer and in the facts and circumstances of the case could the assessing officer disagree with the offer without adequate materials to deny the explanation....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... corresponding to A.Y. 93-94 @ 1749.04 per Mt. but during the F.Y.93-94, relevant to A.Y. 94-95 assessee paid conversion charge to the same party @ 2766.76 per M.T. On query, the assessee firm submitted explanation vide letter dt.27.2.97, submitted before me on 28.2.97 that "assessee has not occupied any factory and all the production has been made by outsider to fulfil the contract in time high rate of conversion charge was paid". Considering the relationship between the assessee firm and concerned party (Marcandi Pd. Radha Pd (P) Ltd.) with whom assessee holding 37200 shares, it is more or less established that so far as expenditure or conversion charge is concerned, the assessee firm had made undue favour to said party by allowing conver....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the year under consideration there were conversions of railway sleeper scrap in addition to pig iron and C.I. Scrap though in earlier year there was a conversion of Pig iron and C.I. scrap only and that the melting loss of railway sleeper scrap is more than other cases we have carefully perused the statement of total quantity got converted by the assessee through M/s. Marcandy Pd. Radha Pd. P. Ltd. during the year under consideration as well as in the immediate preceeding assessment year. We find that during the year under consideration the assessee got converted pig iron and C.I. Scrap to the extent of 476.417 M.T. and 49.260 M.T. respectively The Assessee has not given any explanation as to why the conversion charges in respect of pig iro....