ITAT allows Sub-Brokerage expenses against Real Estate Commission Income

ITAT “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

BEFORE SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM

I.T.A. No. 1455 TO 1459/MUM/2010 -Assessment Years: 2001-02 TO 2005-06)

Smt. Renu Sudesh Kapoor

Vs.

The DCIT

Date of Hearing: 21/05/2013

Date of Pronouncement: 21/05/2013

ORDER

PER I.P.BANSAL, J.M:

All these appeals are filed by the assessee. They are directed against five separate orders passed by Ld. CIT(A)-39, Mumbai dated 2 1/12/2009 in respect of assessment years 2001-02 to 2005-06. All the impugned assessments have been framed under section 153A(1) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The grounds of appeal in all the years are identical and read as under:

“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law the 1d. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) erred in confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer holding that the claim of sub-brokerage paid by the appellant is not supported by any evidence.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) failed to appreciate the fact that it is a common practice in the broking business to take the help of sub-brokers to whom the amount of sub-brokerage are paid.