TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 1444
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Years, AY-2011-12 and AY-2012-13 in ITA Nos.329/AHD/2017 and 1211/AHD/2018 respectively. 2. Following substantial questions of law are proposed for each of the Assessment Year. "Assessment Year 2011-12 1] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 44,77,69,621/- made on account of disallowance of fictitious loss? 2] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 32,79,68,772/- made as unexplained expenses on account of debit note? 3] Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 52.01 crores made b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Tribunal deleted the same and held as under: "23. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that there is exchange correspondence between assessee and N. Κ. Proteins Ltd. and Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between both the parties. The entire transaction was commercial transaction and N. Κ. Proteins Ltd. was entitled to export incentives of Rs. 60.38 crores as the same is a Star Trading Export House and therefore, the buyers will be able to buy from assessee's company. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee company has entered into Memorandum of Understanding for export of its FSG Oil and borne the export expenses as the debit note has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sses, it cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that the debit notes were raised to reduce the taxable income of the assessee-company as alleged by the authorities below. There was a Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the assessee-company & NKPL and the same was acted upon by both the sides by raising debit/credit notes for the difference in price charged by the assessee to NKPL and the price actually realized by NKPL from corresponding exports as the same was to be transferred to the assesseecompany. Keeping in view all these facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to accept the claim of the assessee that the amount of debit notes in question was its business expenditure being the difference in sal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the effect that the amount of Rs.52.01 crore has already been paid, carried over to the next year by the assessee and the same was paid by the assessee to its sister concerned NKPL in the subsequent years as found by the Assessing Officer on verification. The Tribunal has observed in para no.34 for the order passed for the Assessment Year 2011-12 as under: "34. We have heard both the sides and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is observed that the amount of Rs.244.98 crores received by the assessee-company from NSEL client against sale was substantially paid towards the purchases made. Since such payment to the extent of Rs.192.97 crores was made by the assessee during the year under consideration as found b....