TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1398
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 appeals for our consideration:- "(i) Whether ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ir 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 was not genuine. This by an assessment order dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urther 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 year 2010-11 cannot be applied in view of difference ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....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 sub-brokers expenses claimed by the assessee in its books ....