Case Law Details
Brief of the case:
ITAT Jaipur held in DCIT Vs. M/s Ashiana Ispat Ltd that if the facts and circumstances were same in the assesse’s own case of earlier years then, disallowance could not be made if the same was allowed in the earlier years by any appellate authority. It could not be the case that on one hand the revenue was accepting the facts and circumstances as genuine and on the other hand in the later years the same facts and circumstances were considered as non –genuine.
Facts of the case:
The assessee company was engaged in manufacturing and trading of TMT bars and MS ingots. The assessee had claimed expenses under the head brokerage and commission at Rs. 95,44,810/- which AO considered as non-genuine because assessee failed to put on examination the brokers and commission agents and made addition of the above amount which assessee argued by filing an appeal with CIT(A) because it had presented all the agreements and confirmation letters of the brokers and commission agents. So, CIT(A) allowed the appeal of assessee which revenue challenged the same with ITAT.
Contention of the assessee:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
