ITO, Ward - 13(4), , Kolkata V. M/s. Sangkaj Logysys Private Limited , Kolkata

ITA 2092/KOL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5170 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 05-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Assessment record; TDS; FORM 26AS
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA C BENCH, KOLKATA (BEFORE SRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA NO. 2092/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-13(4), KOLKATA..........................................................APPELLANT VS. M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED..........................................RESPONDENT 20, TARA CHAND DUTTA STREET BURRA BAZAR KOLKATA 700 073 [PAN : AAOCS 5281 J] APPEARANCES BY: SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT SR. D/R, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. SHRI S.K. SANGANERIA, DIRECTOR, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : JANUARY 27 TH , 2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : FEBRUARY 19 TH , 2020 ORDER PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM :- THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 5, KOLKATA, (HEREINAFTER THE LD.CIT(A)), PASSED U/S. 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT), DT. 14/05/2018, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS A DOMESTIC COMPANY AND IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF PROVIDING SERVICES OF CLEARING AND FORWARDING AGENTS TO VARIOUS COMPANIES. THE ASSESSING OFFICER COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 31/03/2016 DETERMINING THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,85,27,916/- INTERALIA MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.1,85,27,916/-, BEING THE DIFFERENCE OF TURNOVER DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE TURNOVER CALCULATED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS PER THE SERVICE TAX RETURN (ITS) I.E. THE ACTUAL GROSS VALUE OF SERVICES AS PER SERVICE TAX RETURN. ON APPEAL, THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, DELETED THE SAME. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AFTER HEARING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES AS FOLLOWS:- I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT RECORDS. THE MAIN ISSUE IN THE APPEAL IS THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE TURNOVER AND AS PER FORM 26AS AND AS PER THE I T RETURN OF THE APPELLANT. THE AO HAD ADDED BACK THE D ISCREPANCY OF RSJ,85,27,916/ SUBMISSION HAD SUBMITTED THAT THE DISCREPANCIES OCCURRED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING REASONS: (I) SERVICE TAX RS.82,18,216.99 (II) INCOME OF PREVIOUS F.Y. I.E. 2012 (III) INCOME OF F.Y. I.E. 2013 (IV) TDS DEDUCTED ON REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED OF RS.1,17,33,857/ ON VERIFICATION FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED DURING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPE HAD SHOWN TOTAL TURNOVER OF RS.66,494,375.19 IN ITS BALANCE SHEET. THIS AMOUNT IS MINUS SERVICE TAX OF RS.82,18,216.34. HOWEVER, TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED ON THE GROSS AMOUNT OF RS.74,712,591.53 BY THE DEDUCTORS. AS PER AGREEMENT OF THE AP THE PRINCIPALS SERVICE TAX, ALL SERVICE TAX WILL BE REIMBURSED BY THE COMPANY BUT C&F AGENT WILL PRODUCE THE PROPER CHALLANS/RECEIPT OF THE SERVICE TAX DEPOSITED. THE APPELLANT IS UNIFORMLY ACCOUNTING FOR PURCHASE AND SALES MINUS SERVICE TAX I PREVIOUS YEARS AND HAS NOT DEBITED SERVICE TAX PAID IN THE P&L ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANT AS PER BOOKS IS REFLECTING SERVICE TAX SEPARATELY. THE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT IN THE CASE OF ITO WD 37(2) VS. M/S. SARAD INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS I.T.A NO. 19171KOL/2012 KOLKATA HAS HELD THAT V AT SHOULD NOT BE PART OF SALES AND PURCHASES. AS REGARDS INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 19,11,409/ RS.1,11,679/- HAD BEEN DEDUCTED AND REPORTED IN FORM 26AS, ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORD, IT IS FOUND THAT ON M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT. LTD AND RS.1,11.,679/ LUPIN LTD. BOTH THE BILLS WERE RAISED ON 31.03.2012. THE APPELLANT IN HIS SUBMISSION SUBMITTED THAT THESE AMO THE RECORDS, IT IS FOUND THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED BY THE APPELLANT IN AY. 2013- 14. THE BILLS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON 31.03.2012. HOWEVER, BOTH M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD A DEDUCT TDS @ 10%. THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT HAD SUBMITTED THAT TDS ON INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS.5,80,052/- HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED BY M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT. LTD WHICH RELATES TO AY . 2013- 14. THE AMOUNT RETURN. HOWEVER, M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD HAS ACCOUNTED IN THE SAME IN THE AY. 2014- 15 AS REFLECTED IN FORM 26AS. ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORDS, IT IS FOUND THAT THIS SUBMISSION OF THE APPEL OF RS.5,80,052/- IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 LTD HAS PAID THE AMOUNT IN AY. 2014 THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL AM WAS PAID AS REIMBURSEMENT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES BY THEIR CUSTOMERS M/S LUPIN LTD AND M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD. THE CUSTOMERS HAD DEDUCTED TDS ON THE THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT HAD SUBMITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT IS NOT PART IS PURELY REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES PAYMENT MADE VARIOUS PEOPLE INCURRED ON BEHALF OF OUR PRINCIPLE. THE PAYMENTS HAVE BE NULLIFIED WITH RELEVANT REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED. 2 M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED ISCREPANCY OF RSJ,85,27,916/ - . THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT IN HIS DETAILED SUBMISSION HAD SUBMITTED THAT THE DISCREPANCIES OCCURRED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING (I) SERVICE TAX RS.82,18,216.99 (II) INCOME OF PREVIOUS F.Y. I.E. 2012 -13OF RS.19,11,409/- (III) INCOME OF F.Y. I.E. 2013 -14 OF RS.5,80,052/- (IV) TDS DEDUCTED ON REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED OF RS.1,17,33,857/ - ON VERIFICATION FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED DURING APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, THERE IS MERIT IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPE LLANT. THE APPELLANT HAD SHOWN TOTAL TURNOVER OF RS.66,494,375.19 IN ITS BALANCE SHEET. THIS AMOUNT IS MINUS SERVICE TAX OF RS.82,18,216.34. HOWEVER, TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED ON THE GROSS AMOUNT OF RS.74,712,591.53 BY THE DEDUCTORS. AS PER AGREEMENT OF THE AP THE PRINCIPALS SERVICE TAX, ALL SERVICE TAX WILL BE REIMBURSED BY THE COMPANY BUT C&F AGENT WILL PRODUCE THE PROPER CHALLANS/RECEIPT OF THE SERVICE TAX DEPOSITED. THE APPELLANT IS UNIFORMLY ACCOUNTING FOR PURCHASE AND SALES MINUS SERVICE TAX I PREVIOUS YEARS AND HAS NOT DEBITED SERVICE TAX PAID IN THE P&L ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANT AS PER BOOKS IS REFLECTING SERVICE TAX SEPARATELY. THE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT IN THE CASE OF ITO WD 37(2) VS. M/S. SARAD INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS I.T.A NO. 19171KOL/2012 HAS HELD THAT V AT SHOULD NOT BE PART OF SALES AND PURCHASES. AS REGARDS INCOME AMOUNTING TO RS. 19,11,409/ - ON WHICH TDS AMOUNTING TO HAD BEEN DEDUCTED AND REPORTED IN FORM 26AS, ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORD, IT IS FOUND THAT BILLS AMOUNTING TO RS.17,99,7301- WAS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT. LTD AND RS.1,11.,679/ - WAS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON M/S LUPIN LTD. BOTH THE BILLS WERE RAISED ON 31.03.2012. THE APPELLANT IN HIS SUBMISSION SUBMITTED THAT THESE AMO UNTS HAVE BEEN REFLECTED IN AY. 2012- 13. ON VERIFICATION FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS FOUND THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED BY THE APPELLANT IN AY. 14. THE BILLS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON 31.03.2012. HOWEVER, BOTH M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD A ND M/S LUPIN LTD MADE THE PAYMENTS IN THE AY 2013 THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT HAD SUBMITTED THAT TDS ON INCOME AMOUNTING TO HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED BY M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT. LTD WHICH RELATES TO 14. THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN REFLECTED BY THE APPELLANT ON ACCRUAL BASIS IN THEIR RETURN. HOWEVER, M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD HAS ACCOUNTED IN THE SAME IN THE AY. 15 AS REFLECTED IN FORM 26AS. ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORDS, IT IS FOUND THAT THIS SUBMISSION OF THE APPEL LANT HAS MERIT. THE APPELLANT HAD REFLECTED THE ABOVE AMOUNT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14. THE CUSTOMER M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD HAS PAID THE AMOUNT IN AY. 2014 -15 AND DEDUCTED THE TDS. THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT THE TOTAL AM OUNT OF RS.1,17,33,857/ WAS PAID AS REIMBURSEMENT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES BY THEIR CUSTOMERS M/S LUPIN LTD AND M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD. THE CUSTOMERS HAD DEDUCTED TDS ON THE THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT HAD SUBMITTED THAT THIS AMOUNT IS NOT PART OF THE INCOME AND IS PURELY REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES PAYMENT MADE VARIOUS PEOPLE INCURRED ON BEHALF OF OUR PRINCIPLE. THE PAYMENTS HAVE BE NULLIFIED WITH RELEVANT REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED. ITA NO. 2092/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED . THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT IN HIS DETAILED SUBMISSION HAD SUBMITTED THAT THE DISCREPANCIES OCCURRED BECAUSE OF THE FOLLOWING ON VERIFICATION FROM THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED DURING LLANT. THE APPELLANT HAD SHOWN TOTAL TURNOVER OF RS.66,494,375.19 IN ITS BALANCE SHEET. THIS AMOUNT IS MINUS SERVICE TAX OF RS.82,18,216.34. HOWEVER, TDS HAS BEEN DEDUCTED ON THE GROSS AMOUNT OF RS.74,712,591.53 BY THE DEDUCTORS. AS PER AGREEMENT OF THE AP PELLANT WITH THE PRINCIPALS SERVICE TAX, ALL SERVICE TAX WILL BE REIMBURSED BY THE COMPANY BUT C&F AGENT WILL PRODUCE THE PROPER CHALLANS/RECEIPT OF THE SERVICE TAX DEPOSITED. THE APPELLANT IS UNIFORMLY ACCOUNTING FOR PURCHASE AND SALES MINUS SERVICE TAX I N THE PREVIOUS YEARS AND HAS NOT DEBITED SERVICE TAX PAID IN THE P&L ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANT AS PER BOOKS IS REFLECTING SERVICE TAX SEPARATELY. THE JURISDICTIONAL ITAT IN THE CASE OF ITO WD 37(2) VS. M/S. SARAD INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS I.T.A NO. 19171KOL/2012 - ITAT ON WHICH TDS AMOUNTING TO HAD BEEN DEDUCTED AND REPORTED IN FORM 26AS, ON VERIFICATION OF THE WAS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT WAS RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON M/S LUPIN LTD. BOTH THE BILLS WERE RAISED ON 31.03.2012. THE APPELLANT IN HIS SUBMISSION 13. ON VERIFICATION FROM THE RECORDS, IT IS FOUND THAT THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN ACCOUNTED BY THE APPELLANT IN AY. 14. THE BILLS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE APPELLANT ON 31.03.2012. HOWEVER, BOTH M/S ND M/S LUPIN LTD MADE THE PAYMENTS IN THE AY 2013 -14 AND THE A/R OF THE APPELLANT HAD SUBMITTED THAT TDS ON INCOME AMOUNTING TO HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED BY M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT. LTD WHICH RELATES TO HAS BEEN REFLECTED BY THE APPELLANT ON ACCRUAL BASIS IN THEIR RETURN. HOWEVER, M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT LTD HAS ACCOUNTED IN THE SAME IN THE AY. 15 AS REFLECTED IN FORM 26AS. ON VERIFICATION OF THE RECORDS, IT IS FOUND THAT THIS LANT HAS MERIT. THE APPELLANT HAD REFLECTED THE ABOVE AMOUNT 14. THE CUSTOMER M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE PVT OUNT OF RS.1,17,33,857/ - WAS PAID AS REIMBURSEMENT OF VARIOUS EXPENSES BY THEIR CUSTOMERS M/S LUPIN LTD AND REIMBURSEMENT. OF THE INCOME AND IS PURELY REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES PAYMENT MADE VARIOUS PEOPLE INCURRED ON BEHALF OF OUR PRINCIPLE. THE PAYMENTS HAVE BE NULLIFIED WITH RELEVANT REIMBURSEMENT RECEIVED. THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT WAS EXAMINED. AS PER AGREEMENT REND SANGKAJ LOGISYS PVT LTD WITH M/S LUPIN INDIA, THE FOLLOWING CHARGES WOULD BE REIMBURSED UNDER C & F A: TRANSIT/STORAGE INSURANCE NON RECOVERABLE SURCHARGE/TOT (IF ANY) FREIGHT, HAMALI & OCTROI ON INCOMING CONSIGNMENTS POSTAGE AND COURIER TO SEND DOCUMENTS/REPORT TO HEAD OFFICE, OTHER DEPOTS AND FIELD TELEPHONE/FAX/EMAIL TO HEAD OFFICE, OTHER DEPOTS AND FIELD STOCKS/RECEIVABLES FOLLOW UP TELEPHONE EXPENSES OF COMPANY FIELD STAFF (OFFICIALS) LOCAL CLEARING HAMALI & SECONDARY FREIGHT FOR DES PROMO MATERIALS TO FIELD HAMALI & FREIGHT ON INTER DEPOT DESPATCHES (FINISHED GOODS AND SAMPLES) FREIGHT ON EXPIRY, BREAKAGE RETURNS RETURN FREIGHT ON SALEABLE RETURNS (IF NOT DUE TO C&F AGENT FAULT). STATIONERY CONSUMPTI ON FOR SENDING REPORTS TO FIELD. ALL PRINTED STATIONER REPACKING MATERIAL (CORRUGATED BOXES & BUM TAPE) THE TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT MADE BY M/S LUPIN LTD IN A. 94,72,949/-. AS PER THE AGREEMENT WITH M/S KUEHNE+NAGLE PVT REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSES OF WAREHOUSING, MANPOWER, SECURITIES, UTILITIES A MEASUREMENT FEES. THE TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT MADE BY M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE P THE A.Y. 2013- 14 AMOUNTING TO RS.22,60,908/ BEEN PAID BY THE PRINCIPLE ON THESE REIMBURSEMENT. THESE EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,17,33,857/ APPELLANT ON BEHALF OF THE PRINCIPLE WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY WAS REIMBURSED. THE REIMBURSEMENTS ARE REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCO YEARS, THE PRINCIPAL WOULD REIMBU BEHALF THESE REIMBURSEMENT INCOME AT THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. THE DEDUCTION T WOULD NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE PAYMENTS. THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. WITHOUT APPLICATION MIND, SOLELY ON FORM 26AS AND AS PER RETURN INCOME. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF J HAVE HELD THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENDITURE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE INCOME ASSESSABLE TO TAX. THE DECISIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: (I) CIT VS. DUNLOP RUBBER COMPANY LTD. (1983) 142 ITR 493 (CAL) 3 M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT WAS EXAMINED. AS PER AGREEMENT REND SANGKAJ LOGISYS PVT LTD WITH M/S LUPIN INDIA, THE FOLLOWING CHARGES WOULD BE REIMBURSED UNDER C & F A: TRANSIT/STORAGE INSURANCE NON RECOVERABLE SURCHARGE/TOT (IF ANY) FREIGHT, HAMALI & OCTROI ON INCOMING CONSIGNMENTS SEND DOCUMENTS/REPORT TO HEAD OFFICE, OTHER DEPOTS AND FIELD TELEPHONE/FAX/EMAIL TO HEAD OFFICE, OTHER DEPOTS AND FIELD STOCKS/RECEIVABLES FOLLOW TELEPHONE EXPENSES OF COMPANY FIELD STAFF (OFFICIALS) LOCAL CLEARING HAMALI & SECONDARY FREIGHT FOR DES PATCHING SAMPLES, STATIONERY & PROMO MATERIALS TO FIELD HAMALI & FREIGHT ON INTER DEPOT DESPATCHES (FINISHED GOODS AND SAMPLES) FREIGHT ON EXPIRY, BREAKAGE RETURNS RETURN FREIGHT ON SALEABLE RETURNS (IF NOT DUE TO C&F AGENT FAULT). ON FOR SENDING REPORTS TO FIELD. REPACKING MATERIAL (CORRUGATED BOXES & BUM TAPE) THE TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT MADE BY M/S LUPIN LTD IN A. Y. 2013- 14 AMOUNTING AS PER THE AGREEMENT WITH M/S KUEHNE+NAGLE PVT LTD, THE COMPANY WOU REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSES OF WAREHOUSING, MANPOWER, SECURITIES, UTILITIES A MEASUREMENT FEES. THE TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT MADE BY M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE P 14 AMOUNTING TO RS.22,60,908/ -. IT MAY BE NOTED TH AT BEEN PAID BY THE PRINCIPLE ON THESE REIMBURSEMENT. THESE EXPENSES AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,17,33,857/ - HAVE BEEN INCURRED BY T APPELLANT ON BEHALF OF THE PRINCIPLE WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY WAS REIMBURSED. THE REIMBURSEMENTS ARE REFLECTED IN THE BOOKS OF ACCO UNTS. IT APPEARS THAT EVEN PREVIOUS YEARS, THE PRINCIPAL WOULD REIMBU RSE THE APPELLANT FOR EXPENDITURE BEHALF THESE REIMBURSEMENT S UNDER NO STRETCH OF IMAGINATION CAN BE CONSIDERED TO BE INCOME AT THE HANDS OF THE APPELLANT. THE DEDUCTION T DS ON EXPENDITURE REIMBURSED WOULD NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE PAYMENTS. THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. MIND, SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TURNOVER AS PER AND AS PER RETURN INCOME. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF J UDICIAL DECISIONS WHICH HAVE HELD THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENDITURE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE INCOME ASSESSABLE TO TAX. THE DECISIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS: - CIT VS. DUNLOP RUBBER COMPANY LTD. (1983) 142 ITR 493 (CAL) ITA NO. 2092/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT WAS EXAMINED. AS PER AGREEMENT REND ERED BY M/S SANGKAJ LOGISYS PVT LTD WITH M/S LUPIN INDIA, THE FOLLOWING CHARGES WOULD BE SEND DOCUMENTS/REPORT TO HEAD OFFICE, OTHER DEPOTS AND FIELD TELEPHONE/FAX/EMAIL TO HEAD OFFICE, OTHER DEPOTS AND FIELD STOCKS/RECEIVABLES FOLLOW - PATCHING SAMPLES, STATIONERY & HAMALI & FREIGHT ON INTER DEPOT DESPATCHES (FINISHED GOODS AND SAMPLES) 14 AMOUNTING RS. LTD, THE COMPANY WOU LD REIMBURSEMENT EXPENSES OF WAREHOUSING, MANPOWER, SECURITIES, UTILITIES A ND MEASUREMENT FEES. THE TOTAL REIMBURSEMENT MADE BY M/S KUEHNE + NAGLE P VT. LTD IN AT SERVICE TAX HAS HAVE BEEN INCURRED BY T HE APPELLANT ON BEHALF OF THE PRINCIPLE WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY WAS REIMBURSED. THE UNTS. IT APPEARS THAT EVEN PREVIOUS RSE THE APPELLANT FOR EXPENDITURE INCURRED ON ITS CAN BE CONSIDERED TO BE DS ON EXPENDITURE REIMBURSED WOULD NOT CHANGE THE NATURE OF THE PAYMENTS. THE ADDITION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. THE BASIS OF DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TURNOVER AS PER UDICIAL DECISIONS WHICH HAVE HELD THE REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENDITURE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE INCOME ASSESSABLE TO CIT VS. DUNLOP RUBBER COMPANY LTD. (1983) 142 ITR 493 (CAL) (II) CIT VS. EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) (P) LTD. (2 TAXMANN.COM 76 (DEL) AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND PERUSAL OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS, THE ADDITION OF RS.1,85,27,916/- 5. THE LD. D/R COULD NOT CONTROVERT THESE WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. KOLKATA, THE SD/- [ABY T. VARKEY] JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 19.02.2020 {SC SPS} COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED 20, TARA CHAND DUTTA STREET BURRA BAZAR KOLKATA 700 073 2. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 13(4), KOLKATA 3.CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. 4 M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED CIT VS. EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) (P) LTD. (2 TAXMANN.COM 76 (DEL) AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND PERUSAL OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS, THE ADDITION THE LD. D/R COULD NOT CONTROVERT THESE FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE WE UPHOLD THE SAME AND DISMISS THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. KOLKATA, THE 19 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 20 20 [ J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED 13(4), KOLKATA 5. CIT(DR), KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES ITA NO. 2092/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S. SANGKAJ LOGYSYS PRIVATE LIMITED CIT VS. EXPEDITORS INTERNATIONAL (INDIA) (P) LTD. (2 012) 24 AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT AND PERUSAL OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT RECORDS AND DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURTS, THE ADDITION FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). HENCE 20 . SD/- J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES