9911796707
TMI Blog1994 (12) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Bench "C", Bombay ("the Tribunal"), has referred the following question of law to us for our opinion under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), at the instance of the Revenue : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was eligible for the export markets development allowance in respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the director of Kirkwood Ind. Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, U. S. A., of which the assessee-company was a collaborator. Mr. Kirkwood used to visit India occasionally and bring export orders from the U. S. A. and other countries. The expense for his air passage was borne by the assessee-company. The travelling expense incurred on him to visit India during the relevant previous year amounted to Rs. 27,70 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. We have carefully considered the controversy in this case. Section 35B of the Act provides for grant of export markets development allowance (weighted deduction) in respect of expenditures specified therein incurred by an assessee during the previous year. The various expenditures in respect of which weighted deduction is allowed are specified in clause (b) thereof. Section 35B, so far as is r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn to India and not vice versa. It does not deal with expenses incurred on travelling from abroad to India. In the instant case, the expenditure in question was incurred on travelling of Mr. W. P. Kirkwood from Cleveland to Bombay and back. This expenditure evidently does not fall within sub-clause (vii) of clause (b) of section 35B of the Act. The Tribunal was, therefore, not justified in hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
