9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (2) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal erred in law in valuing the sugarcane purchased by the applicants at its agricultural farms and crushed at its Sakarwadi and Laxmiwadi at Rs. 53.10 per tonne and Rs. 52.20 per tonne instead of Rs. 54.10 per tonne and Rs. 53.20 per tonne, respectively, claimed by the applicants ?" The assessee had thereafter taken out a notice of motion, being No. 155 of 1977 dated February 27, 1977. By order dated March 3, 1982, the notice of motion was made absolute as regards questions Nos. 2, 3 and 6 only in terms of prayer clause (c). This resulted in the reference of the following three further questions of law. However, the Tribunal was not directed to draw up a supplementary statement of the case as these questions, it was felt, could be a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding Corporation Ltd. v. CIT [1984] 145 ITR 793. The renumbered third question pertains to advertisement expenses. The Income-tax Officer has referred to the details of advertisement expenses in the assessment order. He disallowed the claim in entirety observing that the expenses were not in the nature of advertisement at all. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner, on the other hand, held that the advertisements given in various souvenirs required to be treated as advertisement-cum-donation. Observing further that the payments did not bring in a commensurate return by way of advertisement, he held that the entire amount spent on advertisement could not be allowed as deduction. In his view, it would be in order if 50 per cent of the same was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement was in fact incurred and if the conditions laid down in rule 6B of the Income-tax Rules were satisfied, the expenditure should be allowed as deduction. We have considered the rival contentions. In our judgment, the view taken by the Tribunal cannot be said to be perverse inasmuch as the names of some of the souvenirs do indicate on the face of it that the advertisements therein were more with the motive of charity than that of publicity. However, in view of the Board's circulars relied upon, the manner in which the departmental authorities as well as the Tribunal have considered the expenditure on advertisement as being one and indivisible sum and in view of the Supreme Court judgment in Sassoon J. David and Co. P. Ltd. V. CIT [1979] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther new ground are two independent concepts. The Tribunal may have jurisdiction and yet, in appropriate cases, it may not admit the new ground in its judicial discretion. However, the facts in this regard may be stated in brief. The assessee had constructed a sugar godown during the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1962-63. On the ground that it was a shed and a temporary structure, it claimed the expenditure incurred thereon as revenue expenditure. In view of the stand taken, even though the shed was destroyed in the succeeding previous year, that is, in the previous year under reference, the assessee could not claim deduction under section 32(1)(iii). The assessee's stand for the earlier year was not accepted. The Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
