CIT vs. INTERWORLD CARGO CARE PVT LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 1258/2011 . . . CIT ..... Appellant . Through Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, sr. standing counsel . . . versus . . . INTERWORLD CARGO CARE PVT LTD ..... Respondent . Through . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 16.12.2011 . . . In this appeal filed by the Revenue, which pertains to assessment year 2007-08 in the case of Interworld Cargo Care Pvt. Ltd., the following questions of law have been raised : . a. Whether learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in deleting the addition of Rs.37,16,441/- on account of commission paid without appreciating that it is not a genuine payment? . b. Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the addition of Rs.1,80,000/- made on account of salary paid without appreciating that it is not a genuine payment? . c. Whether the order of the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse on both the accounts as it has not considered the relevant material on record? . . . 2. The additions, mentioned in question a and b above, made by the Assessing Officer were deleted by the CIT(Appeals) and the said order has been affirmed by the tribunal in their order dated 10th June, 2011. . 3. As far as payment of commission is concerned the tribunal has recorded the factual matrix of the case. It is noticed that the assessee has been regularly paying commission for procurement of business of air cargo bookings and this is usual and normal practice in the said trade. It has been recorded that similar percentage of commission has been paid in earlier years and no addition in the said years has been made. The finding of the Assessing Officer that the percentage of commission had gone up, has been found to be factually incorrect. It is further noticed that commission or discount was paid to 177 persons but addition has been made by the Assessing Officer in respect of 19 parties to whom . Rs.37,16,441/- was paid. The assessee had deducted TDS while making said payments. Name, addresses of the said 19 parties along with the PAN numbers were furnished. The Assessing Officer did not conduct any further enquiry and did not issue summons or ask the respondent-assessee to produce the said person for verification and investigation. Once the stand of the respondent-assessee that commission/discounts were normal commercial practice in the trade in question is accepted and full details are furnished about the identity of the recipients with proof of payment, TDS certificates, etc., the Assessing Officer was not justified in making additions without any material and basis to doubt the claim. . 4. We do not find that the order passed by the tribunal on question No.a is perverse. . 5. With regard to the payment of Rs.1,80,000/- to Deepika Kapoor, the tribunal has specifically recorded that she was an employee and had remained on maternity leave for the months of August and September. Form No.16 along with the income tax return filed by her were produced. Last year also she was paid commission. We do not think the order passed by the tribunal on the said aspect can be categorized as perverse. . 6. No substantial question of law arises. The appeal is dismissed. . SANJIV KHANNA,J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . DECEMBER 16, 2011/vld . . . 28 . $ .