9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the interpretation of section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding the allowance of expenditure incurred for the education of a partner in the U.S.A. as business expenditure for assessment years 1983-84 to 1985-86. R. A. No. 93/Ind. of 1993 - Assessment Year 1983-84: The Tribunal allowed the deduction of Rs. 64,360 spent on the education of a partner in the U.S.A. as business expenditure, considering it beneficial for the firm after completion of studies. R. A. No. 94/Ind. of 1993 - Assessment Year 1984-85: The Tribunal justified allowing Rs. 42,974 spent on the education of a partner in the U.S.A. as business expenditure, stating it was for the advancement of the business. R. A. No. 95/Ind. of 1993 - Assessment Year 1985-86: The Tribunal deemed Rs. 1,25,573 spent on the education of a partner in the U.S.A. as business expenditure, as it proved beneficial to the firm after completion of studies. The Tribunal held that expenditure incurred for training personnel for business advancement is revenue expenditure, citing relevant case laws. The Tribunal found that the education and experience gained by the partner in the U.S.A. were beneficial to the firm, justifying the allowance of the expenditure as revenue expenditure. The High Court concluded that the expenditure was not capital expenditure or personal expenses but was wholly and exclusively for the business purpose, aligning with section 37(1) of the Act. The Court found no error in the Tribunal's decision, stating it was not perverse and based on factual appreciation, which does not give rise to questions of law. Based on the factual matrix and legal position, the Court held that the questions raised were not referable questions of law, leading to the dismissal of the miscellaneous civil cases with no costs awarded. The counsel fee for each side was fixed at Rs. 750, if certified, and the order was retained in the record of the case and copies were placed in other related cases.
|
