No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH’A’, CHANDIGARH
BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 343/Chd/2016 Assessment Year: 2011-12
M/s Chittosho Motors, Vs. The Addl. CIT Sirhind Road, Patiala Patiala Range, Patiala PAN No. AACFC8334M
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee By : Shri. Tej Mohan Singh Revenue By : Smt. Chandrakanta Date of hearing : 07/03/2018 Date of Pronouncement : 22/05/2018
ORDER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR:
The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), Patiala dt. 26/03/2016.
In the appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds:
That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance of the expenditure of Rs. 27,44,688/- claimed under the head commission / discount in utter disregard of the explanations rendered which is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in upholding the disallowance of 1/8th of the expenses claimed at Rs. 14,90,911/- under the heads Telephone, Car repair and Maintenance, Depreciation resulting in an addition of Rs. 1,83,363/- which is arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 6,68,601/- being 10% of the expenses as against Rs. 13,37,202/- being 20% of the expenses claimed under the heads Business Promotion, Festival, Staff Welfare, Tea & Cold Drink, Tour & Travelling, General & Misc. Expenses, Misc. & General Expenses, Repair and Maintenance, Vehicles Running & Maintenance and Workshop Expenses totaling Rs. 66,86,011/- which is arbitrary and unjustified. 3. Disallowance of expenditure – commission / discount 3.1 During the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer observed that
the assessee has paid commission of Rs. 27,44,688/-. On enquiry regarding the
company name and address of the person to whom the commission was paid
the assessee could not submit complete details on the ground that the
dealership at Mohali Branch was disposed off due to recurring losses and owing
to the closure the assessee is not in touch with the employees working at the
Branch. Since complete address genuineness of the commission paid remain
unverifiable, the commission payment was disallowed.
3.2 Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition on the grounds that the assessee could
not prove the genuineness of his claim.
3.3 Before us the Ld. AR argued that out of Rs. 27,44,688/- an amount of Rs.
9,40,072/- was on account of discount / subvention to customers and Rs.
18,04,616/- is on account of sales commission to employees and the assessee
has duly deducted TDS on the sales commission paid as per section 194H. The
Ld. AR has also filed the details of TDS deducted before us (Paper Book- Page
380-387). In most of the cases the addresses have also been given.
3.4 Ld. AR argued that in automobile trade it has been buyer’s market for the
last many years. More and more options are available for the customer as
international auto majors have flooded the market with their products.
Customers shop around for the best deals. The auto companies have been
offering new dealership in the already served areas to retain customer base.
3.5 In the case of assessee, there were only three Maruti dealers in and
around Mohali and all three discouraged discount on sales. However in year
2010-11, Maruti Suzuki Ltd. allowed four more dealership in the area within a
radius of 8-10 kms. namely Autopace, Tricity, Berkely, Mohali and CM Auto
Kharar. There was race to wrangle business away from competitors. All the
dealers offered discounts / incentives out of their margins to customers in one
form or other. In tough times, temporary price cuts attract more customers than
sales promotion like advertisement etc.
3.6 It was argued that the assessee had to offer price cut in the form of
discount on sale and subvention on finance charge ranging between Rs.
2000.00- Rs. 3500.00 in the interest of business. The discount and subvention has
been allowed against sale and routed through respective a/cs of customers.
There is no cash or cheque payment to customer. Copy of individual a/cs of
customer was enclosed.
3.7 As regards commission to employees, it is submitted that practice was
introduced keeping in view the interest of business as well to cement their loyalty
to the organization. Paying commission provided employees with an excellent
incentive to focus on increasing firm’s profitability.
3.8 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
3.9 Now the issue, is whether commission is payable and discounts on
account of subvention paid to the customers and if so whether the assessee
has produced sufficient documents to prove the same.
3.10 Having gone through the record we find that the commission payment
and subvention discounts are a part of the business practice followed in the
automobile industry. Regarding the evidences to prove sufficiently the
payments, the assessee has submitted list of customers to whom subvention
discounts have been given. Further the assessee has also submitted the details
of the employees alongiwth the addresses before the Assessing authorities. The
Assessing Officer has not examined any of the employee pertaining to the
receipt of commission nor any of the customer pertaining to subvention. The
disallowance of this amount grossly, consisting of two parts i.e; payment to
employees and discount to customers cannot be held to be valid in the
absence of bringing any proof or enquiry details by the Assessing Officer.
3.11 The Assessing Officer’s/ Ld. CIT(A) contention that the complete details
like addresses have not been given, genuineness of the payments have not
been proved is contrary to the facts on record as addresses of most of the sales
persons and also details of the TDS deducted and list of customers is available
with the assessing authorities. Hence the disallowance made by the Assessing
Officer on this ground is liable to be deleted.
3.12 Appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed.
Disallowance – Telephone, Car, Repair & Maintenance
4.1 The Assessing Officer has disallowed 1/8 of expenses claimed under the
head Telephone, Car , Repair & Maintenance which was upheld by the Ld.
CIT(A).
4.2 Before us, the Ld. AR and Ld. DR fairly conceded for 10% of disallowance.
Hence, the disallowance stands modified to the extent of 10%.
4.3 Appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed for statistical purposes.
Disallowance – Festival, Staff welfare etc.
5.1 The Assessing Officer made disallowance of 20% of the business
promotion, festival, staff welfare, tea and drink, tour & travel and general
expenses on adhoc basis, which the CIT(A) restricted to 10%.
5.2 It was argued before us by the Ld. AR , that the books of accounts have
been properly audited hence no disallowance is called for and pleaded that
the disallowance is highly excessive.
5.3 Before us, the Ld. AR and Ld. DR fairly conceded for 5% of disallowance.
Hence, the disallowance stands modified to the extent of 5%.
5.4 Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
As a result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 22/05/2018 AG Copy to: 1.The Appellant, 2. The Respondent, 3. The CIT(A), 4. The CIT, 5. The DR