2003 (7) TMI 36 - HC - Income Tax

Whether the High Court right in observing that both the authorities have recorded concurrent findings of facts that the expenditures were incurred by the assessee for the purposes of its business and similar expenses had been allowed in the past are essentially findings of fact? Held yes - Both the authorities have recorded concurrent findings of facts that the said expenditures were incurred by the assessee for the purposes of its business and similar expenses had been allowed in the past. The said findings are essentially findings of fact. - The inferences drawn by the Tribunal are from factual aspects noted by the Commissioner and in our view cannot be said to be based on irrelevant material - Accordingly we decline to entertain this Revenue s appeal. Dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of expenditure on salary to directors' wives
2. Deletion of amount paid as salary to directors' wives
3. Deletion of addition on account of bogus purchases
4. Proof of genuineness of purchases

Issue 1 - Disallowance of expenditure on salary to directors' wives:
The case involved the disallowance of payments made as salary to the wives of two directors of a private limited company. The Assessing Officer disallowed the expenditure, stating it was not wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) later deleted the addition, noting that the salaries were lower than usual for assistants and had been allowed in previous years. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing no new evidence justified a deviation from past conclusions.

Issue 2 - Deletion of amount paid as salary to directors' wives:
The second issue concerned the deletion of the amount paid as salary to directors' wives. The Tribunal observed the assessee had maintained detailed records of purchases doubted by the Assessing Officer, which were verified and found to be genuine. The Tribunal also considered the difficulty in producing suppliers after a significant time gap. Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, highlighting the absence of new evidence to warrant a change in the decision.

Issue 3 - Deletion of addition on account of bogus purchases:
Regarding the deletion of the addition on account of bogus purchases, the Commissioner found that the purchases were genuine, supported by vouchers, accounts, and payment evidence. The Tribunal concurred, noting the difficulty in producing suppliers years after the transactions. Both authorities emphasized the adequacy of evidence provided within the limited time frame, leading to the deletion of the addition.

Issue 4 - Proof of genuineness of purchases:
The final issue focused on proving the genuineness of purchases totaling a significant amount. The authorities found the assessee had sufficiently demonstrated the authenticity of the purchases through documentation and payment records. Despite the Revenue's argument of insufficient evidence, the Tribunal and Commissioner upheld the genuineness based on the materials presented.

In the judgment, the High Court clarified the concept of "substantial question of law" and outlined tests to determine its existence. Applying these tests to the case at hand, the Court concluded that no substantial question of law arose. The Court highlighted that the findings regarding the disputed expenditures and purchases were factual in nature, supported by evidence and past practices. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the appeal, deeming it misconceived and declined to entertain it.