D. J. Works v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax
High Court
25 Jan 2001 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
D. J. Works v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax
Date of order
25 Jan 2001
Assessment year(s)
1980-81
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In D. J. Works v. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, the High Court (2001) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- D.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 215 of 1986
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO
to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO
of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO
--------------------------------------------------------------
D. J. WORKS
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
MR NR DIVETIA for Petitioner
MR BB NAIK for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL
and
MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
Date of decision: 25/01/2001
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)
�In this reference at the instance of the
assessee, the following question is referred to us in
respect of assessment year 1980-81 :-
"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of
the case, the Tribunal is right in law in disallowing Rs.6,630/- out of foreign tour
expenses ?"
2.�We have heard Mr SN Divatia, learned counsel for
the assessee and Mr BB Naik, learned counsel for the
revenue.
3.�Out of the total expenditure of Rs.16,630/-, the Tribunal disallowed only Rs.6,630/- on the ground that while a partner of the assessee firm had visited the textile machinery fair in West Germany and the same was connected with the business of the assessee firm for the purpose of keeping acquaintance with the latest technology and methods in production of textile spare-parts, the partner did not confine his tour to see the fair, but went to other cities and countries like Rome, Paris, London, Amsterdam, etc. which fact justified the assertion of the department that the entire expenditure was not incurred for the business of the
assessee.
4.�The finding given by the Tribunal is also justified in view of absence of any tour report. The decision of the Tribunal is thus based entirely on the facts of the case. We are unable to see any infirmity with the said finding. We accordingly hold that the Tribunal was right in law in disallowing Rs.6,630/- out of foreign tour expenses and we answer the question in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.
��(J.M. Panchal, J.)�(M.S. Shah, J.)
sundar/-
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.