TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 907
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of Assessing Officer in disallowing the commission expense of Rs. 8,18,150/-. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in disallowing the salary expense of Rs. 5,16,000/-. 3. It is prayed that the disallowance made by the assessing Officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted or matter may please be set aside to the file of CIT(A). 4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal." 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and while filing return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 declared income of Rs. 3,96,880/-. The case of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s as doubtful and allowed salary expenses of two person @ Rs. 10,000/- per month thereby allowed only Rs. 2.40 lacs and worked out the disallowance of Rs. 5,16,000/- (7,56,000 - 2,40,000). 4. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed detailed written submission. In the submission, the assessee stated that she is engaged in the business of financial consultancy in the name of "Jeet Financial Services". The assesse is "Direct Sales Agent" (DSA). The assessee received commission income from bank and finance companies. The assessee earned commission income of Rs. 22,97,500/- and against such income, the assessee incurred commission expenses of Rs. 8,18,150/-. The details of persons with their name and PAN number and address were furn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....persons some of them did not respond. Thus, the Assessing Officer allowed only Rs. 2.40 lacs and remaining of salary expenses of Rs. 5,16,000/- was disallowed. The ld. CIT(A) held that action of Assessing Officer is justifiable. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. 6. I have heard the submission of learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee and the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue and have perused the orders of the lower authorities carefully. Ground No. 1 of the appeal relates to disallowance of commission payment. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee is in the business and profession of financial consultancy working under ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....discharged his primary onus in furnishing complete details. The commission was paid wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. Similar commission was paid in earlier years which was not disputed. To support her submission, the ld. AR of the assessee has relied upon the decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sassoon J. David & Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT (1979) 118 ITR 261 (SC), CIT Vs Walchand and Co (P) Ltd. (supra) and Travancore Titanium Product Ltd. Vs CIT (supra). 7. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR for the revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities. The ld. Sr.DR submits that no agreement or terms and conditions of such contract for payment of commission or procurement of business was furnished. Merely furnishing nam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The Assessing Officer has not investigated the matter except sending notice to two parties, who ultimately responded and filed their reply confirming the receipt of commission. No adverse material was brought on record even against such person, therefore, in absence of any adverse evidence, I do not find any justification of disallowance of commission payment, accordingly, I direct to delete the same. Hence, ground No. 1 of the appeal is allowed. 9. Ground No. 2 of the appeal relates to disallowance of salary expenses. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee has employed six persons and paid salary of Rs. 7,56,000/-. The assessee furnished complete names and address, PAN and amount of salary. The Assessing Officer issued noti....