2011 (1) TMI 426 - HC - Income Tax

Deleting the Addition - Capital or Revenue Expenses - Repair and maintenance expenses - the CIT (A) deleted the said addition - The Tribunal upheld the view of the CIT(A) while observing that the said expenditure was in the nature of current repairs deductible under Section 30 of the Act - Held that the impugned expenditure was deductible in computing the income. Staff Welfare Expenses - the assessee distributed VIP bags mixer blenders watches etc. to staff. It also purchased dry fruits during Christmas period. The assessee also purchased 264 pairs of shoes for its staff members - These expenses were for the welfare of employees and therefore the expenses were deductible as such - Therefore it is held that the impugned expenditure was deductible in computing the income. Personal use of the car and telephone expenses The CIT (A) deleted both the additions - The Tribunal upheld the view of the CIT(A) by holding that the said expenditure was relatable to be taken as business expenditure in view of the decision of Gujarat High Court reported in Sauyaji Iron & Engineering Company v. Commissioner of Income Tax. Foreign travelling expenses - The CIT(A) deleted the addition - The Tribunal while upholding the view of the CIT (A) observed that the continuous training was essential for the functioning of the company and such expenditure was deductible in computing the income.

Summary

Issues:
Adjudication of expenses on repair and maintenance, staff welfare, personal use of car and telephone, and foreign traveling expenses under the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Adjudication of Repair and Maintenance Expenses:
The appeal concerned the deletion of expenses on repair and maintenance by the CIT(A) and upheld by the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.12,27,611 as capital expenditure, but the CIT(A) allowed it as current repairs under Section 30 of the Act. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the expenditure was for improvement of existing assets and deductible. No new asset was created, just existing assets were improved.

Adjudication of Staff Welfare Expenses:
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete Rs.5,54,868 on staff welfare expenses. The Tribunal referred to a previous order related to staff welfare expenses for another assessment year and concluded that the expenses were deductible as they were for the welfare of employees, including distribution of items like VIP bags, mixer, blenders, watches, dry fruits, and shoes. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the deletion of these expenses.

Adjudication of Personal Use of Car and Telephone Expenses:
The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs.1,46,024 and Rs.34,824 for personal use of car and telephone, respectively. The CIT(A) deleted these additions, stating they were made on an ad hoc basis without specific instances. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, considering the expenses as business expenditure based on a decision of the Gujarat High Court.

Adjudication of Foreign Traveling Expenses:
The Assessing Officer added Rs.25,73,283 for foreign traveling expenses, treating it as capital expenditure. The CIT(A) deleted this addition, stating the expenditure was not related to any capital asset and was allowable as revenue expenditure. The Tribunal agreed, noting that continuous training was essential for the company's functioning, making such expenses deductible.

The revenue argued that the expenses were excessive and unreasonable under Sections 38(2) and 40A of the Act, citing judgments in support. However, the Court found no illegality or perversity in the CIT(A) and Tribunal's findings. The Court held that the allowed expenses were not excessive or unreasonable, dismissing the appeal as no substantial question of law arose. The judgments cited by the revenue were deemed not applicable to the case's specific facts.