Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2005 (1) TMI 30

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Appellate Tribunal was not right in holding that the assessee was not entitled to weighted deduction under section 35C of the Act in respect of the entire expenditure incurred on the transport of fertilisers. - - - - - Dated:- 7-1-2005 - Judge(s) : N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN., MRS. A. BANUMATHI. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by N.V. Balasubramanian J. - Pursuant to the directions of this court in T.C.P. No. 766 of 1997 dated June 25, 1998, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law for consideration: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not entitled to weighted deduction u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... challenged the order of the Appellate Tribunal and on the basis of the directions of this court, the case has been stated on the question of law mentioned earlier. The submission of Mr. P.P.S. Janarthana Raja, learned counsel for the assessee is that the entire expenditure incurred by the assessee on the maintenance of motor vehicles in the cane department would qualify for deduction. He also submitted that the entire travelling expenses incurred by the assessee in the cane department would also qualify for deduction, and the Assessing Officer was not correct in disallowing 60 per cent, of the travelling expenses. Learned counsel submitted that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for the transport of fertiliser would also qualify fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (2) of section 40A] who is a cultivator, grower or producer of such product in India, the company or cooperative society shall, subject to the provisions of this section, be allowed a deduction of the amount of such expenditure incurred during the previous year. (b) The goods, services or facilities referred to in clause (a) are the following: (i) fertilizers, seeds, pesticides, concentrates for cattle and poultry feed, tools or implements for use by such cultivator, grower or producer; (ii) dissemination of information on, or demonstration of modern techniques or methods of agriculture, animal husbandry, or dairy or poultry farming, or advice on such techniques or methods; (iii) such other goods, services or facilities as may be p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... see has not placed any material to show that the entire expenditure incurred on the maintenance of motor vehicles in the cane department would qualify for weighted deduction under section 35C of the Act. In other words, there was no material placed before the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Appellate Tribunal to establish that the entire expenditure incurred on the maintenance of motor vehicles in the cane department would qualify for weighted deduction. We are of the view that in the absence of any material placed by the assessee, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the disallowance of 50 per cent, of the expenditure on maintenance of motor vehicles in the cane department and it cannot be assumed that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... otor vehicles in the cane department as well as the travelling expenditure incurred in the cane department would come within the qualifying expenditure as mentioned in clause (b) of section 35C of the Act, the Assessing Officer was justified in apportioning the expenditure and disallowing a portion thereof and the disallowance was, in our view, rightly upheld by the Appellate Tribunal. Further, the assessee has not challenged the finding of the Appellate Tribunal by raising a separate question. In so far as the expenditure on transport of fertiliser is concerned, the assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 42,155 to qualify for weighted deduction under section 35C of the Act. The Assessing Officer disallowed the entire amount which was confirmed by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates