2018 (12) TMI 1398

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appellant   P.C.: 1. These two appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act ("the Act" for short) challenge the common order dated 23.1.2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("the Tribunal" for short). The common impugned order relates to A.Ys. 2007-08 and 2009-10. Thus, the two appeals. 2. The Revenue has urged the following identical question of law in the two appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e respondent was made to the subbrokers and their associates for bringing the customers who required the liaisoning services of the assessee. The respondent arranged loans and advances to the corporate bodies for fees computed as commission. 5. The assessing officer disallowed the entire expenses of Rs. 1.78 crores claimed by the respondent on the ground that the above payments to sub-brokers w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10. The Tribunal further found that in those years, the genuineness of the expenditure was not doubted. In fact, for A.Y. 2008-09, no disallowance was made. It also noted the fact that the expenses were disallowed to the extent of 20% of the amount paid to the sub-brokers for A.Y. 2010-11. The Tribunal was of the view that 20% disallowance made in the assessment ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2010-11 was not comparable to the volume of the business in these years. Thus, the disallowance cannot be at the same level. Besides the Tribunal noted that for A.Y. 2008-09, the Revenue accepted the expenditure in full without any disallowance. In the above circumstances, taking into consideration the volume of the business, the assessing officer was directed to recompute disallownace at 10% of s....