TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1340
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3/2021, passed under Section144(3) read with Sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'] for the Assessment Year 2018- 2019. The present appeal was initially disposed by way of Order, dated 25/11/2025. However in this MA No.06/AHD/2026 filed by the Assessee, the aforesaid order was recalled vide Order dated, 25/11/2025 and appeal was fixed for hearing. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances the present appeal had come up for hearing before this Tribunal. 2. The Assessee has raised following ground of appeal: "1.1 Ld. AO & Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in disallowance of transportation expense of Rs. 41,48,000 actually incurred by the Appellant. 1.2 Ld. AO and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....actor is a mutual agreement which has been altered subsequently with the oral consent of both the parties. Appellant therefore pleads that the disallowance of sublet expense of Rs. 5,19,692 be deleted." 3. The Assessee is a joint venture company with Miral Infrastructure (a partnership firm) and M/s. PK and Sons (a proprietorship concern) as joint venture partners. The aforesaid joint venture came into existence by way of Joint Venture Agreement, dated 17.04.2017. For the Assessment Year 2018-2019, the Assessee filed return of income return of income 08/08/2018 declaring total income of INR.18,00,440/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under for low profit margin and high refund amount. During the assessment proceedings the As....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ground No.1.1 to 1.4 5. We would first take up Ground No.1 to 1.4 raised by the Assessee directed against the disallowance of Transportation Expenses of INR.41,48,000/-. On perusal order passed by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) we find that is admitted position that the Assessee was awarded tender work by Western Railways which was sub-contracted to another party. The Assessee retained a margin of 2% and 3.8% on work related to Tender 75 and 76, respectively. The Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) were of the view, having retained a small margin and having subcontracted the work to third party, the Assessee could not claim further deduction Transportation Expenses of INR.41,48,000/-. We note that the Assessee had furnished before the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rney's fees and court costs shall be paid by the defendant in the event that judgment must be, and is, obtained to enforce this agreement or any breach thereof IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto set their hands and seals the day and year written above" (Emphasis Supplied) 6. During the course of hearing it was explained by the Learned Authorised Representative for Assessee that expenditure pertained to two contracts, dated 17.03.2017 and 28.03.2017, awarded to the Assessee covering earthwork, support work for bridges and construction of minor bridges in connection with installation of New BG line between Chhotaudepur and Dhar covering aggregate distance of 5 KM of railway line. In view of the urgency of completion of thi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Per contra, the stand of the Revenue is that the Assessee has not been able to corroborate the submission as the Memorandum of Understanding is undated and therefore, cannot be relied upon. 8. On perusal of record we find that Memorandum of Understanding, records that an arrangement that was reached between the parties on 10/04/2017. We find that the said as per the stamp with handwritten entry on the said Memorandum of Understanding, the same was notarized on 10/05/2017. The fact that the definitive agreement, being the Sub-Contract Agreement is dated 18/04/2017 led the Assessing Officer to disbelieve the sanctity of the Memorandum of Understanding. In our view, the Memorandum of Understanding is to be read as a document clarifying the ....