PRASANTA KARMAKAR,KOLKATA vs. JCIT, RANGE - 26, KOLKATA, KOLKATA
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed
ITA 258/KOL/2016[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2018AY 2011-2012
Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.258/Kol/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Prasanta Karmakar Vs. Jcit, Range-26, Kolkata R-26, Kol, Aykar Bhawan, 41, Bose Para Road, Barisha, Dakshin, Dhakuria, Kolkata – Kolkata – 700 008. 700 068. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. : Agapk 0496 Q (Assessee) .. (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Monoj Dutta, Fca, S.K. Roy, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/11/2017 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10/01/2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Year 2011-12, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)–7, Kolkata, In Appeal No.359/Cit(A)-7/Range- 26/14-15, Dated 28.01.2016, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S.144/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 17.03.2014. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.That The Ld. Cit(A) Totally Erred In Law & On Facts In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs.10,98,184/- U/S.40(A)(Ia)/194H Which Was Not The Issue In The Original Asst. Order Wherein The A.O. Made The Total Disallowance As Bogus Commission Payment & Rejected Books U/S.145(3) & Such Addition Has To Be Deleted Being Totally Injudicious & Out Of Context Especially When The Cit(A) Himself Has Admitted That Commission Payment Is Genuine & Is Required To Be Allowed. 2.That The Disallowance Of Rs.10,98,184/- Is Totally Bad & Uncalled For In View Of The Findings In The Asst. Order Dt. 20.01.2016 Of The Assessee U/S. 143(3) For The Asst. Year 2013-2014 & Hence Cannot Be Sustained. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That The Retailer'S Commission Is Determined & Communicated By The Principal Ttsl Through E-Mail Every Month
For Appellant: Shri Monoj Dutta, FCA, S.K. Roy, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Soumyajit Dasgupta, Addl. CIT
Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 40
TDS already had been deducted on the total sum of Rs.16,02,272/-. The assessee transferred/Passover, the said commission of Rs.10,98,184/-, as per agreement with the Tata Tele Services Ltd., therefore, there is no any violation of the provisions of section
