2005 (8) TMI 75 - HC - Income Tax

Expenses u/s 37 - Whether, Tribunal was right in law in allowing the assessee s claim in respect of foreign travel expenses of Smt. L.R. Patel, who accompanied her husband Shri R.M. Patel, the director of the assessee-company? - findings recorded by the Tribunal are in accordance with law as such the question referred to should be answered in favour of the assessee

Summary

Issues:
- Whether the Tribunal was right in allowing the assessee's claim in respect of foreign travel expenses of a director's wife for business purposes.

Analysis:
The case involved a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, regarding the allowance of foreign travel expenses of the director's wife for business purposes. The facts revealed that the director had undertaken foreign travel for purchasing machinery and export promotion, with the Assessing Officer initially disallowing the whole expenditure. The Commissioner (Appeals) apportioned the expenditure, allowing 4/5ths as revenue and 1/5th as capital. The Tribunal found that the machinery was for a new project and not related to the existing business line. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the 1/5th disallowance, as the machinery purchase was not linked to the current business operations.

During the director's foreign travel, his wife accompanied him, claiming that her journey was also for business purposes. The Tribunal accepted this claim, treating the wife's travel expenditure as revenue expenditure similar to her husband's. The issue in question arose from these facts.

The Revenue's counsel argued that the wife's travel expenditure lacked a business purpose, as per the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s finding, and thus should have been fully disallowed. Additionally, the counsel contended that the Tribunal erred in allowing 4/5ths of the wife's travel expenditure as revenue. On the other hand, the assessee's counsel cited a previous case where similar expenditure was deemed revenue in nature, supporting the Tribunal's decision. The counsel argued that the Tribunal's findings aligned with the law, urging the court to rule in favor of the assessee based on precedent.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the contentious issue of allowing the director's wife's foreign travel expenses for business purposes. The court considered the purpose of the travel and the connection to the business activities, ultimately upholding the Tribunal's decision to treat the wife's expenditure as revenue in line with the husband's travel expenses.