M/S Laxmi Engineering Industries v. Incometax Officer Ward 1 Jaipur

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ------------------------------------------------- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 99 of 2006 M/S LAXMI ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES V/S INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD 1 JAIPUR Mr. SANJEEV JOHARI, for the appellant. Mr. KK BISSA, for the respondent. Date of Order : 28.8.2008 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. HON'BLE SHRI KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI,J. ORDER ----- This appeal of the assessee was admitted on 12.9.2006, by framing following substantialquestion of law, and was ordered, to be connectedwith IT Appeal No. 58/03. “Whether the learned ITATcould on the basis of material beforeit sustain disallowance of Rs.2,44,000/- claimed to have been paidby erection and installation chargesto M/s Laxmi Stones Pvt. Ltd.?” From the look at the order of the tribunal, itis clear, that the tribunal has allowed the appealof the revenue, only on the basis of commissionpayment to M/s Laxmi Stone Pvt. Ltd., which washeld by the assessing officer, to be bogus, and wasdisallowed, which was upheld up to the Tribunal, onthe basis, that order of the Tribunal, upholdingdisallowance, had not been set aside. This appealNo. 58/03 is one of the bunch of appeals of thepresent assessee, wherein the disallowance of thecommission is assailed, and the three appeals beingthe Appeals No. 57/03, 58/03 and 59/03, havealready been allowed, by this court, vide judgmentdated 13.12.2007, and, disallowance of thecommission, by the authorities below, was setaside. Since, it has been found by the learnedTribunal, that the only basis for making other addition, by the assessing officer, is the disallowance of the commission, to the same party,which has been upheld up to the tribunal, in our view, when the disallowance has been set aside by 3 this court, by the aforesaid judgment dated13.12.2007, for the same reasons, rather of necessity, disallowance in this case, has also to be set aside. Accordingly, the question, as framed is answered in favour of the assessee, and against the revenue, and the appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the learned tribunal is set aside, anddisallowance of the erection charges, amounting toRs.2,44,000/- is set aside. ( KISHAN SWAROOP CHAUDHARI ),J. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /ns./