TMI Blog1993 (9) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. We are concerned with the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83. The following seven common questions of law have been referred for all the four years by the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee for the decision of this court : "(1) In view of section 5(j) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, whether the Tribunal is legally justified in disallowing a portion of the travelling expenses, allowable as per section 5(j) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act ? (2) In view of section 5(j) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1950, whether the Tribunal is legally correct in disallowing legal charges, allowable under section 5(j) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act ? (3) Whether the fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority. The assessments were modified to that extent. The common order passed by the first appellate authority is annexure C. Not satisfied with the relief granted by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee filed four appeals before the Appellate Tribunal as A. I. T. A. Nos. 6, 7, 8 and 9 of 1986. The main plea was against the disallowance of certain expenses made by the lower authorities. In the common order dated May 25, 1987, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the disallowances made by the lower authorities. It is thereafter at the instance of the assessee that the Agricultural Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Additional Bench, Palakkad, has referred the above seven questions of law for the decision of this court. The common order p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... effect that the expenses were met for personal purposes and in some cases, the purpose of the journey was not ascertainable. After noticing that the company is maintaining a jeep and car and that the details of the expenses under "travelling expenses" are not separately made out and that the disallowance of 20 per cent. on that count is proper, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the disallowance affirmed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner is contained in pages 17 and 24 of the paper book. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner has also stated that no satisfactory explanation was offered to admit the claim in full and the purpose of the journey was not available from the accounts. We are of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the jeep will be taken in by the expression " motor car" in entry III-B(i) read with rule 9 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1951. Following an earlier Bench decision of this court in Commr. of Agrl. I. T. v. Good Hope Plantation [1988] 170 ITR 173, Bench of this court in Commr. of Agrl. I. T v. Good Hope Enterprises [1992] 197 ITR 236, has held that the expression "motor car" in entry IIIB(i) of the statement of rule 9 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-,tax Rules, 1951, includes a "jeep" for the purpose of deduction under section 5 of the Kerala Agricultural Income-tax Act. Depreciation is allowable at 20 per cent. The Tribunal was in error in taking a contrary view. We answer question No. (3) referred to this court in the nega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ital asset. So it should be considered as a revenue expenditure. The disallowance made under "building repairs" should have been allowed in so far as they related only to the cost of materials for construction or replacement, etc., of the existing set up in the buildings. The materials were admittedly purchased for the construction of latrines and bathrooms. They are to be allowed in full. Question No. (4) referred to this court is answered in the negative, against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. V. Miscellaneous Rs. 2,500 : The Appellate Tribunal has stated that this relates to expenses incurred for police personnel. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner has allowed the claims for the years 1979-80, 1980-81 and 1982-83. He ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilar to an earlier item considered by us under "building repairs". Since the stores consumed and the cost of pipes were only for the purchase of materials for replacement and no new assets or additional assets came into existence, the claim is allowable in full. Questions Nos. (6) and (7) referred 'to this court are answered in the negative. Both the items are revenue expenditures. They have been dealt with in paragraph 11 of the common order of the Tribunal. We hold that the assessee is entitled to the deduction of those amounts in full. Question Nos. (6) and (7) are answered in the negative, against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The references are disposed of as above. A copy of this judgment, under the seal of this court a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
