MADHU MAHESHWARI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been admitted in terms of the following questions :

(2.) THE appellant is LIC agent and existing assessee since 1974-75 with the IT Department. THE appellant filed its income-tax return on 29th Jan., 1991, for the asst. yr. 1989-90 declaring an income for tax at Rs. 45,870. THE appellant also received an income of Rs. 1,73,715 from LIC as commission during this year and claimed rebate of 50 per cent on this commission income to the tune of Rs. 87,813. THE case was selected for scrutiny by the Department and notice under s. 143 (2) was issued. In response to the notice and as required by the AO, necessary details required were filed and placed on record, which were discussed and expenses on commission was allowed only Rs. 30,000 taking Rs. 60,000 for allowances under the circular. In appeal, CIT(A) has taken the view that assessee is entitled to claim 50 per cent deduction on the entire commission i.e., Rs. 1,73,715. In appeal before the Tribunal, Tribunal has placed reliance on the Circular No. 648, dt. 30th March, 1993, according to that the ceiling for allowing the expenses on commission income from the LIC is 20,000. THErefore, he directed that assessee is entitled for deduction only for Rs. 20,000.

(3.) IN appeal, we cannot go into the question as what details are furnished and what details are not furnished. But in the assessment order itself, in the opening para, the AO has mentioned that in compliance of the notice under s. 143(2) of the Act, necessary details, as asked for, have been filed and placed on record. We are not concerned at this stage, as what was the expenditure, that is a question of fact.