TMI Blog2002 (6) TMI 17X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was delivered by K.A. Puj J.- In this reference at the instance of the Revenue, the following three questions were referred to this court for our opinion: "(i) Whether, the expenditure on account of accident insurance and medical expenses in respect of the two managing directors of the company was includible for purposes of computing the disallowance under section 40A(5)?" (ii) Whether, the receipt of Rs. 47,64,070 on account of cash compensatory support (CCS) was a revenue receipt and therefore exigible to tax? (iii) Whether, the expenditure of Rs. 22,000 incurred by way of fees to an advocate was allowable as revenue expenditure?" So far as the first question is concerned, it covers two items, namely, expenditure incurred on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re concerned, the same issue arose in the case of Ambica Mills Ltd. [1999] 235 ITR 264 (Guj) wherein it is held that reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by the director is a benefit of the director within the meaning of section 40(c)(i) of the Act, and is not an allowable expenditure. Following this decision, we answer question No. 1 partly in favour of the assessee so far as the insurance premium is concerned and partly against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue so far as the reimbursement of the medical expenses is concerned. As far as the second question is concerned, the Tribunal has merely relied on the Full Bench decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal and the said decision was reversed by the Delhi High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal in its order that the assessee had advanced certain sums of money to acquire premises in the property known as Neptune Tower. However, the said transaction was not materialised and the assessee had to incur an expenditure of Rs. 22,000 by way of fees paid to an advocate for recovering the sums so invested. The Assessing Officer has taken the view that the expenditure was a capital loss suffered in connection with the capital asset and the said finding was confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals). The matter was taken to the Tribunal and it was contended before the Tribunal that the expenditure so incurred has no direct connection with the acquisition of the capital asset but it was in fact connected with the recovery of the amoun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
