9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (1) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late Tribunal, Delhi Bench-B (in short "the Tribunal"), has referred the following question under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), for the opinion of this court : " Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that add backs of Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 2,983 as made by the Income-tax Officer were rightly deleted by the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 742.00 (c) Expenses incurred for press show 1,368.10 (d) Taxi hire charges of film stars, producer, director, etc., during their stay at Delhi at the time of premier 2,850.00 --------- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the head "Business promotion expenses". Disallowance in respect of the said amount as made by the Assessing Officer was nullified by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). This deletion was also questioned in the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Tribunal held that the amounts were relatable to expenses incurred on advertisement so far as the claim of Rs. 5,000 is concerned and so far as the su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being factual, no question of law arises. So far as the second expenditure is concerned the matter is clearly covered by a decision of the apex court in CIT v. Patel Brothers and Co. Ltd. [1995] 215 ITR 165, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. That being the position, we answer the question referred in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. - - TaxT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
