9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (8) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following three questions to this court, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for its opinion : " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amount of Rs. 69,076 being expenses incurred on current repairs of the guest house Villa 7 at Porbandar is not disallowable under section 37(4) of the Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ditures were disallowed by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that the first expenditure being in the nature of entertainment was required to be disallowed under section 37(2B) and the other expenditure was not allowable under section 37(4). The Appellate Assistant Commissioner disagreed with this view of the Income-tax Officer and allowed both the claims. The Revenue, therefore, approached ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew of the two decisions of this court in CIT v. Kaira District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Ltd. [1991] 192 ITR 608 and CIT v. Ahmedabad Mfg. and Calico Printing Co. Ltd. [1992] 197 ITR 538. The view taken by this court is that the expenditure which is referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (4) of section 37 is one which would be allowable as deduction under section 37(1). In order to attr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and visitors were quite simple. The Tribunal has specifically stated that the expenditure, which was incurred by the assessee in this behalf was not on a lavish scale. Thus, there was no element of entertainment expenditure in it and in view of the decision of this court in CIT v. Patel Brothers and Co. Ltd. [1977] 106 ITR 424, the same was rightly held as allowable expenditure as it was not hit b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
