TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (2) TMI 906
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs of the CIT(A). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of interior decoration and manufacturing of modular furniture as per the specification of its customers. During the period under consideration, the assessee had entered into contract works with various clients including M/s. Cognizant Technologies & Solutions Pvt. Ltd. The said company had treated the work undertaken by the assessee under the head "Professional charges" whereas, other clients of the assessee treated the work done by the assessee as "Contract Receipts" and deducted tax at source at the rates applicable thereto. 3. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2004-05 declari....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue relied on the grounds of appeal and prayed that the appeal of the Revenue be allowed. 5. On the other hand, Shri V.S.Jayakumar appearing on behalf of the assessee stated that the order of the CIT(A) is a well-reasoned and detailed and the same should be upheld. The learned AR submitted that there is no suppression of sale of furniture. The assessee has shown the sale/supply of goods under the head 'Contract Receipts' in the profit and loss account. The amount under the said head includes both; the amount received on account of interior decoration as well as supply of furniture to the same customer according to their specification. As regards foreign travel expenditure, the learned A.R. s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to the tune of Rs. 10,40,421/-, the assessee was able to demonstrate before the CIT(A) that the expenditure was incurred for importing machineries for the purpose of business. For the purchase of machineries, the Directors had to visit Srilanka, Dubai and Germany. The contract was entered into for purchase of machineries with the German company and machineries were imported during the financial year 2004-05 relevant to the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee had claimed expenditure under foreign travel expenses as revenue expenditure. The CIT(A) held that there is no dispute about the company having incurred expenditure and import of machineries for the business purpose. The Directors of the company had visited foreign countries for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled the order of the CIT(A) in second appeal before the Tribunal primarily on the following grounds:- (i) The CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition to the tune of Rs. 7,95,44,742/- on account of suppression of professional receipts from M/s. Cognizant Technology Solutions Ltd. (ii) The CIT(A) allowed the entire sum of premium paid on Keyman Insurance. The assessee was eligible only for a sum assured value of Rs. 4,62,63,645/- for which premium is Rs. 46,26,334/- whereas the assessee paid a sum of Rs. 2,35,34,723/-. 10. The learned DR assailing the order of the CIT(A) relied on the grounds of appeal. On the other hand, the learned A.R. submitted that the order of CIT(A) is a well-reasoned, detailed and speaking orde....