Commissioner of Income Tax -I Agra vs Amar Ujala Publications

In the present appeal filed u/s 260A of the income tax Act, 1951 the revenue has raised as many as five questions said to be the substantial questions of law arising out of the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25th January, 2006. The present appeal relates to the Assessment Year 1996-97.

We have heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, and have perused the orders passed by the authority and the Tribunal.

So far as the first question is concerned, on a plain reading, we find that whether the expenditure incurred by an assessee should be allowed or not depends on various factors and the Tribunal on the basis of the appreciation of evidence and material on record had held that the expenditure of Rs. 32,083 incurred by the assessee on hiring of a flat at Kanpur was justified. The second question also relates to the first question.

So far as the fourth question is concerned, we find that the Tribunal has deleted the addition of Rs. 1,00,000 made by the Assessing Officer towards alleged suppression of sale of waste newsprint by recording the finding is based on appreciation of evidence and material on record and does not give rise to any substantial question of law.

So far as the fourth question is concerned the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that the amount towards contribution to Employees Provident Fund and Employees State Insurance were deposited by the assessee before the due date of filing of turn. That being the position, the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, , 1 would be fully attracted. Thus, fourth question also cannot be said to be a substantial question of law.

So far as the fifth question regarding deletion of Rs. 2,73,260 added by the Assessing Officer is concerned the Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that the expenses were actually incurred and it was no possible for the assessee to arrange for taxi at short notice looking into the nature of the business. In our considered opinion all the questions raised by the Revenue cannot be said to the substantial questions of law. The appeal fails and is dismissed in limine.