9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of CIT v. M/S. Walchand & Co. (Pvt.) Ltd.[2013 (9) TMI 450 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] – Expenditure allowed – Decided against the Revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No.-117 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 20-8-2013 - Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma And Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,JJ. For the Appellant : D. D. Chopra For the Respondent : Surendra Kr. Garg JUDGMENT (Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra) Present appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act 1961, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 14.07.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in ITA No.2/Luc/2010 for the Assessment Year 2004-05. On 18.08.2011, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has admitted the instant appeal on the following substantia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned order passed by the A.O. He submits that the assessee is running a coaching institute for Engineering and Medical Examinations. To attract more students, the assessee has launched Scholarship Scheme. Under the Scheme, the financial assistance was provided to the students for getting education in India and abroad after qualifying entrance examination. He submits that Sri Akash Kumar was a brilliant student. He got very good score in the TOFFLE and SET examination. On merit, he got the admission in USA. So, he was selected by the Board of Directors for granting the foreign Scholarship. As per the terms and conditions, the candidate was bound to complete the course, otherwise, the amount was to be refunded with interest @10%. The bond was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tuation or not. This aspect will have to be examined by the businessman and not by the department as per the ratio laid down in the case of Kewal Chand Bagri vs. CIT; 183 ITR 207, 211. Similar views were expressed in the case of Sassoon J. David and Co. vs. CIT [1979) 118 ITR 261 SC. In the instant case, it appears that by providing Scholarship, the business of the assessee has increased. So, it can be considered as a business strategy and the same is allowable as business expenditure. Hence, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Tribunal. The same is hereby sustained along with the reasons mentioned therein. The answer to the substantial question of law is in favour of the assessee and against the reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
