TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 601
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... arising from the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 2. The assessee has filed this appeal on the following grounds:- 1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ("CIT(A)") erred in law and on facts in confirming the assessment order passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the "Act") dated 19.03.2024 ("assessment order") without appreciating that the assessment order is beyond jurisdiction, bad in law and void-ab-initio. 2. That the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts, in treating the assessment order as valid even when the statutory requirement to refer the international transactions ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts that irrespective of whether or not the CSR expenditure has been incurred or not, the same is not an allowable deduction unless it is an eligible donation under section 80G of the Act. 10. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in initiating penalty under section 271AAC (1) and section 270A of the Act. 11. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in charging interest under section 234B of the Act and has further erred in incorrectly computing the cumulative interest levied under sections 234A, 234B, 234C, 234D and 234F of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing of pressure gauges and temp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure in computation of income and grant consequential relief if the claim was found correct. 6. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that Ground No.2 and Ground No.10 are not pressed. Accordingly, the same are dismissed as not pressed. 7. As regards Ground Nos.3 to 6, the Ld. AR submitted that the impugned amount of Rs. 8,77,07,756/- comprised royalty of Rs. 1,93,77,831/-, commission of Rs. 60,68,683/- and fees for technical services of Rs. 6,22,61,242/- paid to Associated Enterprises. The Ld. AR submitted that royalty was paid under Trademark License and Management Agreement for use of "Baumer" trademark and technology marks. The commission was paid towards referral fee under service level agreement for business sourced through overseas gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ablish actual receipt of services and corresponding business benefit derived therefrom. 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The short issue before us is whether expenditure duly recorded in books of account and paid through banking channels can be treated as unexplained expenditure u/s. 69C merely because the Assessing Officer was not satisfied regarding commercial expediency or actual rendition of services. 12. We find that the impugned expenditure is duly reflected in audited books of account and audited financial statements of the assessee. The payments have admittedly been made through banking channels after deduction of tax at source and supported by Form 15CA/15CB, agreements and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the year under consideration. Though principle of res judicata does not strictly apply to income tax proceedings, rule of consistency as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Excel Industries Ltd. (supra) supports the case of the assessee. 16. Considering the totality of facts and judicial precedents discussed hereinabove, we are of the considered view that addition of Rs. 8,77,07,756/- made u/s. 69C of the Act is unsustainable. Accordingly, same is directed to be deleted. Ground Nos.3 to 6 are allowed. 17. As regards Ground Nos.7 to 9 relating to CSR expenditure of Rs. 40,44,000/-, we find from the computation of income filed by the assessee that the said amount has already been added back by the assessee as disallowance u/s. 37 of....