9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (2) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30-9-1977. It had filed return of income disclosing a total income of Rs. 3,98,480. During the course of the assessment proceedings, a sum of Rs. 12,400 was claimed as deduction towards travelling expenses. There are five partners in the firm. Out of them except Mrs. Sheela R. Ahuja all others are residents of different places outside Hyderabad. The outside partners, according to the ITO, frequently visited Hyderabad with a view to safeguard their interest in the firm. According to him a perusal of the particulars of the travelling expenses revealed that the expenditure incurred consisted of that incurred for air fare to Hyderabad as well as stay in Hyderabad. The ITO found that such expenditure cannot be said to have been incurred by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision in Revell v. Directors of Elworthy Bros. & Co. Ltd. 3 TC 12 wherein it was held that in a case where the directors of the company had to travel from the residence to the meeting place of the company it was held that the travelling expenses were not an allowable deduction from their income. The underlying principle of the said decision was that such expenditure cannot be regarded as laid out for purposes of carrying on business. Therefore, he felt that the disallowance was justified and he dismissed the appeal. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 16-7-1981, the assessee has come up in further appeal before this Tribunal and thus the matter stands for our consideration. We have heard Shri Y.R. Ratnakar, lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITR 147. We have perused the decision in Owen's case but in the said decision no mention was made to Revell's case. The facts of the case Owen disclose that the taxpayer had shown that he performed the duties of his office in two places, namely, the hospital and the place where he received the telephone call and so expenses incurred in travelling from one place to the other were held to have been incurred in the performance of his duties. But in this case, there is no evidence of similar sort. Firstly, we do not know whether the partners living in places outside Hyderabad were active partners or sleeping partners and whether they were entrusted with any duty for managing the affairs of the firm or not. The partnership deed relating to the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll's case it is held that the travelling expenses incurred by the directors of a company from their place of residence to the meeting place of the company cannot be allowed as deduction from their income. In Ricketts v. Colquhoun [1925] 10 TC 118 (HL) the facts are that the assessee was a Barrister residing and practising in London. He held the Recordership of Portsmouth. He was assessed to income-tax under schedule E in respect of the emoluments of that office. He claimed the cost of travelling between London and Portsmouth in order to attend the quarter sessions, his hotel expenses at Portsmouth or the cost of the conveyance of his robes to the Court there. The House of Lords held that he was not entitled to any of the said deductions for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
