TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 391
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the impugned orders even dated 19.03.2022 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC) [Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi] (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] qua the assessment years 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 on identically worded grounds except the difference in figure of disallowance/addition (grounds of A.Y. 2004-05 are taken in order to dispose of the aforesaid appeals) inter-alia that: "1. The learned assessing officer and CIT (A) has erred in law and in facts while passing the order to allow transfer of funds to the sister concerns. 2. The learned assessing officer and CIT (A) has erred in law and in facts while passing the order u/s. 154 by not allowing the expenses even thou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tarian grounds also expenses should be allowed. 9. The learned Income Tax officer has erred in law and in facts that the subsequent order passed by the honorable ITAT "B" bench on 13/12/2017 accepting the claim of the assessee to allow 50% of the expenses claimed. 10. The learned Income Tax officer has erred in law and in facts that the ratio of the order passed in the case of sister concerns should be applied Mutatis Mutandis in the case of the assessee. 11. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend and / or delete in all the foregoing grounds of appeal." 3. Briefly stated facts necessary for adjudication of the issue at hand are: on the basis of search and seizure operation carried out under section 132(1) of the Income Ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filing a miscellaneous application before the Tribunal sought to decide the issue as to allowance of 50% of expenses which was rejected vide order dated 07.04.2017 in MA No.51 to 57/M/2017. 7. Thereafter, the assessee moved rectification application before AO under section 154 of the Act in order to claim the allowance of 50% of the expenses against the commission income which was dismissed vide order dated 01.06.2017 under section 154 of the Act. 8. Again the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) by way of filing appeals challenging the order passed by the AO under section 154 of the Act who has dismissed the same. Feeling aggrieved assessee has come up before the Tribunal by way of filing present appeals. 9. We have heard ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s found that the assessee and the Group companies of the assessee were engaged in the business of accommodation entries and laundering of black money. The assessee himself was the mastermind behind formation of all these companies. Various other details and modus operandi have been noted by him along with the statement on oath of the assessee and the seized documents. Thus, on the basis of his detail discussions and material on record, the AO held that, the assessee and the Group companies run by him were receiving commission income from for all these activities. Such a commission income was ranging between 1.5% to 3.5%. The AO accordingly rejected the books of account of the assessee and estimated the net profit rate of the commission @ 2%....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nts have been placed on other grounds of appeal, the same are not being adjudicated upon. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 7. In all the appeals, exactly similar issue are involved for our consideration, our finding given above will apply mutatis mutandis to the impugned appeals also, therefore, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as partly allowed." 11. It is also not in dispute that against the aforesaid order dated 04.05.2016 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in case of the assessee qua the same assessment years i.e. for A.Y. 2004-05 to A.Y 2010-11, miscellaneous petition was filed before the Tribunal which was also dismissed vide order dated 07.04.2017 as duly recorded by the Ld. CI....