Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
आदेश/Order
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 24.01.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), Hisar [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’].
The Revenue is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by the Assessing officer into the income of the assessee of Rs. 87,32,000/- on account of disallowance of commission.
The brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee during the year has been working as a Marketing Agent with M/s Daulphin Tower
ITA No. 597-Chd-2017- Smt. Urmila Devi, Jind 2
Network (P) Ltd. Out of the commission received of Rs. 1,11,00,000/- the
assessee claimed that she had paid the commission amounting of Rs.
87,32,000/-to nine agents / persons for introducing new business for
joining multi-level marketing system of sales. The Assessing officer
disallowed the said commission paid to the persons on the plea that the
above said persons were not having any nexus with the business activity
that was carried on by the assessee.
In appeal before the CIT(A, the assessee pleaded that the aforesaid
persons introduced to the assessee new persons who become members in
the multi-level marketing chain business. To verify the facts, the Assessing
officer summoned four persons / agents to whom the assessee had paid
commission and recorded their statements u/s 131 of the Income-tax Act,
1961 (in short 'the Act'), wherein, they confirmed that they have received
the aforesaid commission from the assessee.
The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the above facts and the admission
of the persons that they had actually received the commission from the
assessee and also further considering the nature of the activity carried on
by the assessee, held that the commission payments were made by the
assessee in the course of obtaining order for the assessee’s line of
business. He, according deleted the additions so made by the Assessing
officer.
ITA No. 597-Chd-2017- Smt. Urmila Devi, Jind 3
After considering the rival contentions of the Ld. representatives of the parties, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the CIT(A) and the same is accordingly upheld. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13.12.2018
Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 13.12. 2018 “आर.के.” आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
1.