Ita/200/2000 Of M/S. K.t.c. Calicut v. The Commissioner Of Incometax, Ekm

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 10TH JANUARY 2008 / 20TH POUSHA 1929 ITA.No. 200 of 2000() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.5.2000 IN ITA.100/1995 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH .................... APPELLANT : ----------------- M/S. KERALA TRANSPORT CO., CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.C.KOCHUNNY NAIR SRI.DALE P.KURIEN RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.R.MENON(SR.),SC FOR IT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. Ramachandran Nair &T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 10[th] day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. This is an appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Actagainst the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal challenging variousdisallowances of expenditure made in the assessment for the year 1990-91,sustained by the Tribunal. 2. We heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned StandingCounsel for the respondent. We do not think any substantial question oflaw arises from the Tribunal's order, because the findings on the items ofdisallowances are essentially on facts. The first item of disallowancechallenged is entertainment disallowance. We are of the view that theTribunal rightly treated the expenditure incurred for giving gifts in the formof liquor, cashew, etc. as entertainment expenditure. Consequently,disallowance has to be made in excess of the limit provided under Section37(2A) of the Act. The appellant got the allowance to the expenditurepermissible under the Act and disallowance is only in excess of the limitprovided. Therefore, there is no ground to interfere with the same. So far ITA 200/2000 as the disallowance of travelling expenses are concerned, we find that the Tribunal found it excessive and specific cases are pointed out to sustain thedisallowance. Similarly, the other item of disallowance is payments madeby the appellant to police and check post authorities which are actually inthe nature of bribe. As it is against public policy, the Tribunal rightlydisallowed the same. The next item of disallowance challenged is motortransport expenses. We find, disallowance is only to the extent providedunder the Act. Since the findings are only based on facts, no substantialquestion of law arises for consideration. The appeal is therefore dismissed as devoid of any merit. (C.N. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/ ITA 200/2000 -3- C.N. Ramachandran Nair & &T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -I.T.A. No.200 of 2000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JUDGMENT 10[th] January, 2008.