1980 (5) TMI 48 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of deduction claimed for messing expenses by the assessee.
2. Interpretation of whether the claimed expenses were reimbursement to partners or remuneration.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The assessee, a registered firm deriving income from handloom cloth and yarn business, filed a return of income for the relevant assessment year showing total income at Rs. 1,28,879. The firm claimed a deduction of Rs. 4,000 for messing expenses. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) disallowed the claim, considering it as remuneration paid to partners and hence disallowable under section 40(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. The assessee appealed to the CIT (A) but failed, as the CIT (A) upheld the disallowance, stating that the payments to partners were in the nature of remuneration and not reimbursement of actual expenses. The CIT (A) required evidence to prove that the payments were for reimbursement of actual expenses and not for entertainment purposes. The CIT (A) concluded that the payments were in the nature of remuneration to partners and should be added back to the assessment.
3. The counsel for the assessee contended that the claimed expenses were incurred on messing provided to customers by the firm through partners, making it reimbursement to partners and not remuneration. The turnover of the firm was approximately Rs. 25 lakhs, and the income was Rs. 1,28,879, indicating the possibility of incurring Rs. 4,000 on messing expenses. The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' conclusions.
4. The Appellate Tribunal analyzed the records and held that the turnover and income figures supported the possibility of incurring messing expenses. The Tribunal found that the claim for Rs. 4,000 as messing expenses was substantiated, considering the lack of hotels or restaurants at the firm's location. Affidavits supported that partners provided messing to customers. The Tribunal concluded that the amount paid to partners was reimbursement for expenses incurred in providing messing to customers, not remuneration. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and allowed the deduction of Rs. 4,000, deleting the addition made by the authorities.
5. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the disallowed deduction for messing expenses was allowed based on the Tribunal's findings.