9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (2) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, is: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that out of Rs. 2,76,182 claimed as storage expenses, the assessee was entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of Rs. 1,95,818 and was disentitled to such weighted deduction only in respect of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that extent. In respect of the balance Rs. 1,95,818, the Tribunal held the view that the expenditure has been incurred after the goods have been brought to their destination for sale and so the assessee is entitled to a deduction under section 35B of the Act. This finding of the Tribunal is attacked by the Revenue on two grounds. It is submitted that the Tribunal has not localised the expenditu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee's behalf and, therefore, it is clear that the storage charged is for the agent's cold storage. The storage expenses thus incurred by the assessee has been distinguished from storage expenses in transit in the course of the carriage of goods. So long as these facts cannot be disputed, the claim would squarely fall under sub-clause (iii) of section 35B(1)(b), the content of which had bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... still be carriage of the assessee's goods to destinations outside India not qualifying for weighted deduction and that the expenditure incurred for storage and by way of handling charges outside India would qualify for weighted deduction since they are expenses incurred in respect of distribution of goods outside India. This decision has been referred to by the Tribunal which followed the princip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
