Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Mr. Chandrakant Deshmukh, filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [NFAC] and the Assessment Order. The appeal was filed regarding commission expenses claimed for the Financial Year 2019-20, which were related to payments to a hospital. The assessee had requested to withdraw the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had filed a letter requesting to withdraw the appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The grounds of appeal were dismissed as withdrawn.
Key Issues
Whether the commission expenses are allowable as a deductible business expenditure under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and whether the assessee can withdraw the appeal.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 37, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: As per Form No.36 filed by Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh, this is an appeal filed by the Assessee Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Act, dated 09.12.2024 emanating from Assessment Order u/s.143(3) of the Act. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
On facts and circumstances and in law, The Order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. 1961 bearing order no ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055274563(1) dated 04/07/2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax NFAC & further order passed for giving effect to the commissioner of income tax, NFAC, Delhi's order under section 250 of the income tax Act 1961 Dated 09/12/2024, and order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 31.08.2022 passed by the learned Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(3), Pune is bad in law.
Without considering the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, has erred in passing an order having Order No. /DIN ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055274563(1) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 21/08/2023. & Order for giving effect to the commissioner of income tax, NFAC, Delhi's order under section 250 of the income tax act 1961. Dated 09/12/2024 3 The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC and the Assessing Officer have erred in confirming/making the addition without considering the facts of the case, and provisions of section. In the given case The Commission expenses are related to Payment to Hospital ie. Principal Healthcare & Wellness Pvt. Ltd. In the business of operating hospital under name and style "Jehangir Specialty Hospital", for giving them business. The same provision has been made as per agreement with them. Hence the same is valid claim and deductible expense. 4 The nature of expense is related to sales. It has been in accordance with agreement between parties. This is the allowable business expenditure under Section 37 of Income Tax Act, 1961 and cannot be disallowed. The Contract agreement between parties is attached for your reference (Annexure 1).
Due to financial loss and inadequate capital, we were planning to close down the operation so, we made provision of entire commission expense in the FY 2019-20. We were not in a position to identify actual amount of commission for the reasons: A. Invoices are not raised by the other party to us as per agreement B. There were differences with regard to sale return between parties hence not able to arrive at proper commission expense amount. Hence [A] provisional expense working is as under made on the basis of available data and claimed as expense in books of account. Disputed commission for FY 2017-18 hence rationally made provision in FY 2019-20. Particular FY 2017- FY 2018- FY 2019-20 18 19 Sales 30,71,031 1,37,81,136 1,16,27,861 Commission Expense 7,37,047 33,07,473 27,90,687 Need to be claimed (24%) Commission Expense - 32,64,262 32,96,436 Claimed Short /(Excess) 7,37,047 43,211 (5,05,749) Claimed 6. The Assessee prays for any other relief to be allowed in its case under provisions of law.
The assessee craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify, delete all or any of the grounds of appeal
. Findings & Analysis :
2. We have heard ld.DR for the Revenue and perused the records. It is observed that no one had appeared on behalf of Assessee Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh on 04.06.2025, hence, the case was adjourned to 15.07.2025. Again, on 15.07.2025 no one appeared on behalf of assessee.
2.1 It is observed that Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh had filed written submission dated 30.05.2025 received by ITAT Pune on 23.06.2025. In paragraph 5 of the said submission, Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh has stated as under :
(b) The appellant may be granted any other relief which is legally tenable.
I Chandrakant Deshmukh son of vasantrao Deshmukh solemnly declare that to the best of my knowledge and belief, the information given in the return and schedules thereto is correct and complete and is in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
I further declare that I am filling withdrawl in my capacity as Self and I am also competent to make this withdrawl of appeal I am holding permanent account number ADKPN9403H And I further declare that the critical assumptions specified above are true & correct.”
2.2 It is also observed that in the Appeal Memo, Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh had filed along with Form No.36, copy of order passed by ld.CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act, for A.Y.2020-21 which was in the name of “AASHISH MEDICAL”, copy of Assessment Order u/s.144 dated 31.08.2022 which was in the name of “AASHISH MEDICAL”.
3. Since Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh has filed a letter requesting to withdraw the appeal, accordingly, we allow Mr.Chandrakant Deshmukh to withdraw the appeal in . Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed as withdrawn. Order pronounced in the open Court on 08 Aug, 2025.