The Hon’ble Tribunal upheld the disallowance, agreeing with the CIT(A) that there was no evidence to support that the liability crystallized in the current year. As regards commission payment the Hon’ble Tribunal upheld the disallowance agreeing with the CIT(A) that there were contradictions in recipient’s income declaration and lack of evidence for services rendered. (AY. 2010-11)
Raj Auto Wheels P Ltd v. ACIT (No.1) (2024) 111 ITR 199 (Jaipur)(Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Prior period expense-Method of accounting-Not proved with necessary evidence-Commission-Lack of evidence-Disallowance is affirmed. [S. 145]