AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In this appeal u/s 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (''the Act'') the Revenue is aggrieved by an order dt. 6th July, 2005 passed by the Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal''), Delhi Bench ""B"", New Delhi in ITA No. 730/Del/2005 relevant for the asst. yr. 2001-02.
The assessed had claimed payment of a sum of Rs. 38.25 lakhs as commission expenses. Out of this, Rs. 32.75 lakhs was stated to have been
paid to Upendra Kumar Sharma, Rs. 4 lakhs to M/s Mysty International of which Upendra Kumar Sharma was the proprietor and Rs. 1.50 lakhs
to Pradeep Saraswat.
The view of the AO that the assessed was unable to satisfactorily explain the payments made or the work done by the commission agents to
whom the commission was paid, was concurred with by the CIT(A).
The Tribunal has, in the impugned order, examined the evidence on record which included the correspondence between the parties and certain
bills that were raised on the assessed for work done by the commission agents in respect of the assessed''s contracts with public sector
undertakings such as BHEL, ONGC, IOCL, etc.
On an appreciation of the evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that there was an agreement, though not a written agreement, between
the parties and that the work was done by the commission agents pursuant thereto, thus justifying the payments made to them by the assessed.
No substantial question of law arises from the impugned order since it is based only on appreciation of the evidence. No perversity has been
shown in the view taken by the Tribunal.
No substantial question of law arises.
Dismissed.