2017 (12) TMI 1361

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessment year 2009-10, claiming following substantial questions of law:- (i) "Whether the ITAT is correct in fact and law while ignoring that the payment of Rs. 72,52,052/- received by assessee from M/s Vodafone Essar Digilink Limited under contractual obligation after deduction of TDS under Section 194C/194H is a contract receipt/commission income in the hands of assessee which the assessee subsequently cannot justify as reimbursement of expenses to the sub dealers/retailers? (ii) Whether as per the terms and conditions of the contract, the payments were made or were due to the assessee, especially since the reimbursement to the sub-dealers made by the assessee is not envisaged explicitly in caluse-17 and therefore, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Rs. 2,36,281/- had been deducted under Sections 194C and 194H of the Act. The Assessing Officer noted that these receipts had not been reflected in the profit and loss account. Vide order dated 28.12.2011, Annexure A.I, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 72,52,052/-. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 24.07.2012, Annexure A.II, the CIT(A) deleted the whole addition of Rs. 72,52,052/- with the observation that receipt of Rs. 10,65,345/- from Vodafone was on account of reimbursement of salary, which had been clarified by the assessee in re-casted profit and loss account. It was further recorded that receipt of discount of Rs. 13,09,267/- f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y paid had been reimbursed, the assessee had not shown any item in this regard in the profit and loss account. However, this had been clarified by the assessee in the re-casted profit and loss account. Thus, it was rightly concluded by the CIT(A) that there was no justification for adding the said amount as suppressed receipts and, therefore, deleted the same. It was further recorded that the incentive of Rs. 48,77,440/- by M/s Vodafone had been made directly to the retailers. Since the said amount was neither due nor received by the assessee, the question of adding the same as suppressed receipts did not arise and, therefore, the same was deleted. As the amount of Rs. 48,77,440/- did not form part of the receipts of the assessee, credit fo....