Loading judgment…
Facts
The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition of Rs. 2,49,15,582/- made by the AO. The addition was on account of commission paid to M/s. Amikong Pte Limited. The assessee claimed to have provided all supporting documents to the AO.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the facts of the present appeal were identical to a previous case for AY-2016-17, which was decided by a Coordinate Bench. In respectful compliance with that decision, the Tribunal held that there was no need for intervention in the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the deletion of addition by the CIT(A) was justified, considering the assessee provided supporting documents and the case was covered by a previous tribunal decision.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA
Years: 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Ganges International Private Limited, Corporate Ward-2(1)(ic), No.163/1 KSONS Complex, 3rd Floor, Broadway, Chennai Chennai- 600 108. [PAN: AAACG4177F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms. E.Pavuna Sundari, Addl.CIT सुिवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 09.01.2025 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 07.02.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :
This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA / NFAC / S / 250 / 2023-24 / 1063002376(1) dated 20.03.2024 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment years 2017-18. Through the aforesaid appeal the Revenue has challenged order u/s 250 dated 20.03.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi.
Page - 1 - of 3 2.0 The only issue arising in the appeal through 8 grounds of appeal is regarding the deletion of addition of Rs. 2,49,15,582/- by the Ld. CIT(A) made by the Ld.AO on account of commission paid to one M/s.Amikong Pte Limited. 3.0 We have heard rival submission in the light of material available on records. The Ld. DR has vehemently argued in favour of the order of the Ld. AO. It was contended that the addition was made by the Ld. AO since the assessee failed to give supporting documents. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had submitted all the requested details before the Ld. AO. In support thereof the Ld. Counsel for the assessee produced a letter written to the Ld. AO having document reference ID ITBA/AST/F/17/2019-20/1020877919(1) dated 27.11.2019 whereby copies of agreement, invoices of commission paid etc were provided to the Ld. AO. The Ld. DR could not controvert this factual evidence. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that its case is squarely covered by the decision of a Coordinate Bench of this tribunal, in its own case for AY-2016-17 delivered by ITA 3370/Chny/2019 dated 09.04.2021. It was accordingly prayed that the appeal of the Revenue be dismissed. 4.0 We have noted that the facts of the present appeal are identical to those of assessee’s case for AY-2016-17. We do not feel any need Page - 2 - of 3 to differ from the decision taken by the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench supra in the light of the fact that, no change in facts of the present case have been brought to our notice. Accordingly, in respectful compliance to the decision in ITA 3370/Chny/2019 dated 09.04.2021 supra we hold that there is no need for any intervention to the order of the Ld.CIT(A) at this stage. Accordingly, all the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 6.0 In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced on 7th , Februaty-2025 at Chennai.