TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 507
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (A) is bad in law and against the principles of natural justice. 2. The order passed by learned CIT (A) is based on surmises and unnatural assumptions. 3. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and further as per the explanation offered the learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the payment of commission amounting to Rs.12,50,000/- to Mr. Alliance Intermediaries & Network P. Ltd. for use of their account. 4. The learned CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the order of AO towards addition of commission paid to M/s. Alliance Intermediaries & Network Pvt. Ltd. amounting to Rs.12.50.000/-. 5. The leamed CIT (A) ought to have given due consideration to the fact that amount was paid to M/s. Alliance Inte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The learned CIT(A) erred in concluding the genuineness of salary paid on the ground that the recipient has disclosed the income under the head "Business Income and not as "Salary Income". 12. The learned CIT (A) ought to have appreciated the fact that basis for allowing any expense is its genuineness and not the nature of disclosure by the recipient. The fact that the recipient had shown the amount received in his return of income proves the genuineness of the payment made by the assesse and hence be allowed. 13. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that for running any business there are certain expenses involved. The payee may account those expenses under head that is suitable to his business while reci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me of Rs.35,00,000/- which was the disclosure made at the time of the search action for the relevant year. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA), however, the same was dismissed. Aggrieved by the order of the FAA, the assessee preferred further appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. Before the Hon'ble ITAT, the assessee filed additional evidences in support of his claim of the various expenses which were allowed to be admitted. Thereafter, the Hon'ble ITAT restored the matter to the file of the AO to make fresh assessment after giving opportunity to the assessee and allowing cross-examination of Shri Mukesh Choksi. 4. In accordance with the directions of the Hon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oint out that subsequent to the said reassessment order, information was received that the assessee was operating 2 benami bank accounts. On the basis of this information, the assessment was again reopened and 2nd re-assessment order completed at reassessed income of Rs.55,40,000/- after making further additions of Rs.20,40,000/-. The AO therefore again assessed the income of the assessee pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble ITAT at Rs.55,40,000/-. 5. Upon the assessee's appeal, the ld. CIT(A) noted that in the appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that he had made a declaration of gross receipts of Rs.35,00,000/- and not of the taxable income. He had duly honoured the declaration by offering the said gross receipts of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....age payment of Rs.12,50,000/- to one of his concerns.. In view of the reconfirmation of Shri Mukesh Choksi, in course of the cross-examination about the dubious nature of the transactions carried out through the said bank account by charging commission 0.15%, the action of the AO of concluding that the assessee's claim of sub-brokerage payment of Rs.12,50,000/- is bogus, cannot be faulted. Moreover, the contention of the assessee that Shri Jayesh Sampath, one of the another Directors of the said concern of Shri Mukesh Choksi, had filed an affidavit accepting having received the said sub-brokerage payment, is not very relevant since it is an open secret that Shri Mukesh Choksi was the mastermind and all the others only worked under his c....