TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing question, set out at page 2 of the paper, book for our opinion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in directing the Assessing Officer not to take into account the sum of Rs.4,45,305 being expenditure on repair of motor cars for computing the disallowance under section 37(3A)/(3B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" The assessee-compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited (No. 1) [1989] 177 ITR 124, and the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal published in Enkay (I.) Rubber Co. (P.) Ltd. v. IAC [1992] 40 ITD 114. Following the view taken by the Bombay High Court, the Tribunal held that the expenses relating to repair of motor cars are covered by section 31 and, therefore, did not come within the ambit of section 37(1) read with section 37(3A) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act and when the expenditure is not allowed under section 37(1), the provisions of section 37(3A)/(3B) are not attracted for any disallowance. He placed reliance on the decisions of this court in the cases of CIT v. Orient Paper and Industries Ltd. [1995] 214 ITR 473; CIT v. Tungabhadra Industries Ltd. [1994] 207 ITR 553; CIT v. Price Waterhouse [1994] 207 ITR 564 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
