9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (8) TMI 30X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd was allowable as expenditure following their decision for the assessment year 1973-74 which has not been accepted by the Department ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the entire expenditure of Rs. 5,95,923 was expenditure of revenue nature following their decision for the assessment year 1973-74 which has not been accepted by the Department ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the contingent liability of Rs. 2,30,077 for leave salary was an allowable deduction following their decision for the assessment year 1975-76 which has not been accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cles which were presented as gifts to customers, dealers, etc., was an allowable deduction by ignoring the material facts that the assessee could not give the names of the persons to whom these articles were presented and could not establish that these presents were connected with the carrying on of his business ? 9. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that a sum of Rs. 1,45,000 disallowed by the Income-tax Officer as representing capital expenditure incurred on pipelines which never belonged to the assessee was an allowable revenue expenditure ? 10. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was cor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the expenditure incurred is of revenue nature and not capital expenditure, we feel that the said question is a question of law. As far as question No. 8 is concerned, learned counsel for the Revenue refers to Gannon Dunkerley's case [1987] 167 ITR 637 (SC) and submits that, because the names of the persons to whom presents were given had not been disclosed, the amount was not allowable as a revenue deduction. We find that the Tribunal has found as a fact that "full details of the expenditure incurred through the employees of the assessee-company has been filed. The expenses have been incurred on account of dealers and agents, etc., at different places. The only purpose of incurring this expenditure is to increase the business". In view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re of Rs. 11,928 incurred on repairs of Shiv Temple at Nagda was incidental to the assessee's business and thereby directing that this amount should be allowed as an expenditure ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in reducing the disallowance of Rs. 20,000 confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to Rs. 7,000 under the head 'Entertainment expenses' ? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct both on facts and in law in directing that weighted deduction on a sum of Rs. 4,60,171 should be allowed in this case by ignoring the material fact that this was an expenditure of capital n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
