Ingram Micro India Ltd vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 30 November, 2011
PAN Numbers of the aforesaid parties with the lower
authorities, therefore, merely for the stand alone reason that the
confirmations of the said parties for transactions pertaining to a
period relating to 7 years ago were not filed by the assessee with the
A.O, would not justify disallowance of the commission expenditure so
claimed by it. Interestingly, we find that on the basis of similar details
filed by the assessee in respect of the parties to whom commission
below Rs. 1 lac per party, aggregating to Rs. 62,91,155/-, was paid,
the claim of the assessee towards commission expenditure to the said
P a g e | 26
ITA No. 8793/Mum/2011 AY. 2005-06
Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, OSD- II
extent was accepted by the DRP. In fact, we find that the order of the
DRP allowing the assesses claim of commission expenditure of Rs.
62,91,155/- without any qualification, had been accepted by the
revenue and had not been assailed any further. In our considered
view, if on the basis of the same set of documentary evidence the
A.O/DRP had accepted the assesses claim for commission expenditure
of Rs. 62,91,155/-, then there could have been no justifiable reason
for the said authorities to have adopted a different yardstick for
considering the allowability of the balance commission expenditure of
Rs. 1,62,05,703/-. As a matter of fact, as can be gathered from the
DRP order, though the assessee had furnished with it the PAN details
of the parties to whom commission of Rs. one lac and above was paid
during the year, however, no such details were ever filed as regards
the remaining parties. Accordingly, we are of the considered view, that
keeping in view the aforesaid facts, it would not have been permissible
for the lower authorities to have adopted an inconsistent approach
while considering the allowability of the commission paid by the
assessee to various parties.