ACIT RG 5(2), MUMBAI v. MID DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 2726/MUM/2010 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 272619914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACM7512L
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 2726/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
Appellant ACIT RG 5(2), MUMBAI
Respondent MID DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 22-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 11-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 11-07-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 08-04-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH B MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL A.M. AND SHRI V. DURGA RAO J.M. ITA NO. 2630/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. . APPELLANT PENINSULA CENTRE DR. SS RAO ROAD PAREL MUMBAI 400 012. (PAN AAACM7512L) VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX RESPONDENT RANGE 5(2) MUMBAI 400 020. ITA NO. 2726/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPELLANT RANGE 5(2) MUMBAI 400 020. VS. MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. . RESPONDENT PENINSULA CENTRE DR. SS RAO ROAD PAREL MUMBAI 400 012. (PAN AAACM7512L) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : MR. R.K. GUPTA ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO J.M.: THESE ARE THE CROSS APPEALS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER OF CIT(A)-9 MUMBAI PASSED ON 08/02/2010 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2006-07. ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 2 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AT THE T IME OF HEARING BEFORE US. HOWEVER WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL S AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND ON MERITS. ITA NO. 2630/M/2010 APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE 3. GROUND NO. 1 IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF FINANC E CHARGES PAID OF RS. 52 48 328/- ON BORROWED FUND. 4. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS RELATING TO RAISE THIS GROUND ARE THAT ON EXAMINATION OF BALANCE SHEET THE AO OBSERVED THAT DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD INVES TED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 52 13 26 800/- IN THE FORM OF EQUITY AND ADV ANCEMENT OF LOANS TO SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES. ON THESE INVESTMENTS AND A DVANCES NO INCOME HAD BEEN EARNED DURING THE YEAR. IT WAS FURT HER NOTICED THAT THE BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE HAD INTEREST BEAR ING FUNDS TO THE TUNE OF RS. 19 20 67 163/- AND THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HAD DEBITED INTEREST AND FINANCE CHARGES TO THE TUNE OF RS. 1 3 5 36 298/-. ON BEING ASKED TO EXPLAIN THE ALLOWABILITY OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE BY THE AO THE ASSESSEE STATED THAT THE ADVANCES AND INVES TMENTS WERE MADE IN SUBSIDIARY AND ASSOCIATE COMPANIES OVER THE YEAR S AND IN THE YEAR 1999 THE ASSESSEE HAD RAISED RS. 10 CRORES BY FRESH ISSUE OF CAPITAL SPECIALLY TO FUND THE SUBSIDIARY PROJECTS. IT WAS F URTHER SUBMITTED THAT INVESTMENTS AND LOANS WERE GIVEN/MADE IN SUBSI DIARIES FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS THEREFORE INTEREST COST IS NO T BE DISALLOWED AND IT SHOULD FULLY BE ALLOWED AS BUSINESS EXPENSES. AF TER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THE AO WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE IS GENERAL IN NATURE AN D AGAINST THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AS NO PRUDENT BUSINESS MAN WILL PARK SUCH HUGE FUNDS WITHOUT EARNING ANY INCOME THEREON. AFTER REL YING ON FEW CASE LAWS MENTIONED AT PAGE 3 OF HIS ORDER THE AO HELD THAT IN EVERY YEAR THERE WERE CERTAIN INCREASE IN CAPITAL INTEREST BE ARING BORROWINGS AND PROFITS OF THE YEAR. THERE IS BLENDING OF FUNDS BEC AUSE THERE ARE ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 3 NUMEROUS TRANSACTIONS AND ASSESSEE HAS NOT MAINTAIN ED ANY SEPARATE PARTICULAR ACCOUNT FROM WHERE THESE ADVANCES WERE M ADE TO SUBSIDIARIES WITHOUT CHARGING INTEREST. BLENDING OF FUNDS LOGICALLY LEADS TO HOLD THAT INTEREST BEARING FUNDS WERE USED FOR ADVANCING TO SUBSIDIARIES ON PROPORTIONATE BASIS. AFTER APPORTIO NING THE INTEREST BEARING FUNDS FOR INVESTMENTS IN SUBSIDIARIES AT PA GE NO3 & 4 OF HIS ORDER THE AO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE INTER EST PAYMENT OF RS. 48 32 133/- FOR INVESTMENT OF RS. 52 13 26 800/ - OUT OF BORROWED FUND AND HENCE AN AMOUNT OF RS. 48 32 133/- IS BE ING DISALLOWED OUT OF TOTAL INTEREST CLAIMED. THEREFORE HE DISALL OWED AN AMOUNT OF RS. 48 32 133/- OUT OF INTEREST CLAIM OF THE ASSESS EE. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CI T(A). 5. BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSE E SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OWN FUNDS OF RS. 126.83 CRORES AND INVESTMENT MADE IN EQUITIES AND LOANS GIVEN TO SUBSIDIARIES WE RE ONLY RS. 108.75 CRORES. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ITS OWN FUND FAR EXCEEDS THE INVESTMENT MADE AND LOANS GIVEN TO SUBSIDIARY COMPA NIES. IN THIS CONNECTION THE ASSESSEE FILED CERTIFICATES OF CHAR TERED ACCOUNTANTS TO PROVE THAT ALL BORROWED FUNDS WERE USED FOR THE BUS INESS OF THE ASSESSEE. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECIS IONS OF THE CIT(A) IN THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 & 2005-06 TO CLAIM THAT SIMILAR ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO IN THOSE YEARS WERE NOT UP HELD BY THE CIT(A). AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE AS SESSEE THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO OBSERVING THAT THE A SSESSEE PREVENTED THE AO FROM FINDING OUT THE SOURCE OF FUNDS USED FO R LOANS THE AO IS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE USED OWN FUN DS AND BORROWED FUNDS FOR GIVING LOANS ON PRORATE BASIS AND AMOUNT USED FOR GIVING INTEREST FREE ADVANCES IS NOT USED FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND HENCE INTEREST BURDEN OF THE ASSESSEE ON SUCH LOANS ADVANCED TO SUBSIDIARY CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS DEDUCTION U/S 36(1) (III) OF THE ACT. THE CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO RECTIFY THE DISALLOWA NCE AMOUNT AS RS. 52 48 328/- NOT AS 48 32 133/- AS THE AMOUNT OF LO ANS ADVANCED TO ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 4 SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES IS RS. 56.62 CRORE AND NOT RS. 52.13 AS TAKEN BY AO. STILL AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSING THE RE LEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD AS WELL AS GOING THROUGH THE ORDERS OF TH E AUTHORITIES BELOW WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE BEFORE THE CIT(A) SUBMITTED T HAT IT HAD OWN FUNDS OF RS. 126.83 CRORES AND INVESTMENT MADE IN E QUITIES AND LOANS GIVEN TO SUBSIDIARIES WERE ONLY RS. 108.75 CRORES. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ITS OWN FUND FAR EXCEEDS THE INVESTM ENT MADE AND LOANS GIVEN TO SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES. IN THIS CONNEC TION THE ASSESSEE FILED CERTIFICATES OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS TO PROV E THAT ALL BORROWED FUNDS WERE USED FOR THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE. F URTHER THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECISIONS OF THE CIT(A) IN T HE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 & 2005-06 TO CLAIM THAT SIMILAR ADDITIONS M ADE BY THE AO IN THOSE YEARS WERE NOT UPHELD BY THE CIT(A). IN THIS CONNECTION WE REFER TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RELIANCE UTILITIES AND POWER LTD. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (BOM.) HELD THAT IF THERE WERE FUNDS AVAILABLE BOTH INTEREST-FREE AN D OVERDRAFT AND/OR LOANS TAKEN THEN A PRESUMPTION WOULD ARISE THAT INVESTMENTS WOULD BE OUT OF INTEREST FREE FUNDS GENERATED OR AV AILABLE WITH THE COMPANY IF THE INTEREST FREE FUNDS WERE SUFFICIENT TO MEET THE INVESTMENTS. WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD SUFFICIENT OWN FUNDS WHICH EXCEEDS THE INVESTMENT MADE AND LOANS GIVEN T O SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES AND ASSESSEE FILED CERTIFICATES OF CHARTE RED ACCOUNTS TO PROVE THAT ALL BORROWED FUNDS WERE USED FOR THE BUS INESS OF THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RELIANCE UTILITIES AND PO WER LTD.(SUPRA) WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND ALLOW THIS GRO UND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 7. GROUND NO. 2 IS PERTAINING TO DISALLOWANCE OF RS . 61 87 099/- U/S 14A OF THE ACT. ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 5 8. THE ASSESSEE HAD EARNED DIVIDEND OF RS. 14 81 58 1/- AND THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT IT HAD NOT INCURRED ANY EXPEN SE TO EARN DIVIDEND. THE AO APPLIED THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE ACT AND MADE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 61 87 099/- UNDER RULE 8D OF INCOME TAX RULES 1962. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE AO HAD NOT ESTABLISHED ANY NEXUS BETWEEN E ARNING OF DIVIDEND AND BORROWED FUND AND THEREFORE NO DISALLO WANCE CAN BE MADE AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14A OF THE AC T FOR WHICH HE RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF P&H HIGH COURT IN THE C ASE OF HERO CYCLES LTD. 2009 TIOL 604. THE SUBMISSIONS WERE NOT FOUND FAVOUR WITH CIT(A) THEREFORE HE CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE. A GGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL. 9. AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DR AND PERUSING THE R ECORD WE FIND THAT THIS ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE HONBLE JURISDICT IONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. [2010] 32 8 ITR 81 (BOM.) WHEREIN THE HONBLE COURT HELD AS UNDER:- THAT THE PROVISIONS OF RULE 8D OF THE RULES WHICH H AVE BEEN NOTIFIED WITH EFFECT FROM MARCH 24 2008 WOULD APP LY WITH EFFECT FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. EVEN PRIOR TO ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2008-09 WHEN RULE 8D WAS NOT APPLICABLE THE AO HA D TO ENFORCE THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 14A. F OR THAT PURPOSE THE AO IS DUTY BOUND TO DETERMINE THE EXPENDITURE W HICH HAS BEEN INCURRED IN RELATION TO INCOME WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME UNDER THE ACT. THE AO MUST ADOPT A REASONABLE BASIS OR METHOD CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE RELEVANT FA CTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AFTER FURNISHING A REASONABLE OPPORTU NITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO PLACE ALL GERMANE MATERIAL ON THE RECOR D. THE PROCEEDINGS FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 WOULD STAND REMANDED TO THE AO. THE AO SHOULD DETERMINE AS TO WHETHER TH E ASSESSEE HAD INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE (DIRECT OR INDIRECT) I N RELATION TO DIVIDEND INCOME/INCOME FROM MUTUAL FUNDS WHICH DOES NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL INCOME AS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECT ION 14A. THE AO CAN ADOPT A REASONABLE BASIS FOR EFFECTING THE A PPORTIONMENT. WHILE MAKING THAT DETERMINATION THE AO SHOULD PROV IDE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE OF PRODUCING ITS ACCOUNTS AND RELEVANT OR GERMANE MATERIAL HAVING A BEARING O N THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 6 10. IN VIEW OF THE RATIO LAID DOWN BY THE HONBLE J URISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF GODREJ & BOYCE MFG. CO. LTD. ( SUPRA) WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO WITH A DIRECTION DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF THE SAID JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AFTER PROVIDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY O F BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 11. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATE D AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ITA NO. 2726/M/10 APPEAL BY THE REVENUE 12. THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS IN RESPECT OF DELETION OF ADDITION OF RS. 19 59 000/- OUT OF TOTAL FOREIGN TR AVELING EXPENSES INCURRED. 13. THE ASSESSEE COMPANY INCURRED EXPENSES OF RS. 2 9 38 510/- ON THE FOREIGN TRAVEL OF ITS CHAIRMAN KHALID ANSARI AN D ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. TARIQUE ANSARI. THE AO ASKED TO EXPLAI N AS TO HOW THESE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSIN ESS IN REPLY THE ASSESSEE EXPLAINED THAT ALL FOREIGN TRAVEL WERE CAR RIED OUT BY THE EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE P RODUCED ALL PAPER CUTTING WHERE DIRECTOR OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY VISI TED TO GIVE COVERAGE TO VARIOUS EVENTS. THE AO REJECTED THE EXP LANATION AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT GIVEN PURPOSE OF EACH FOR EIGN VISIT AND THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT BEEN ABLE TO CORRELATE PAPER CUTTI NG WITH EACH FOREIGN VISIT AND THE NOT FILED EVIDENCE IN THE FOR M OF INVITATION OF VISIT FROM THE ORGANIZER OF THE EVENTS. THE AO RELIED UPO N THE DECISION OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF DURGA PRAS AD MORE 82 ITR 540. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 7 14. BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ALL THE EXPENSES WERE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE BUSINESS PURP OSE. HE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT ONLY DIRECTORS OF THE ASSESSEE AND O THER EMPLOYEES OF THE ASSESSEE HAD UNDERTAKEN THE FOREIGN VISIT AND I T HAD PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO PAPER CUTTING OF ALL EVENTS WHICH WER E COVERED BY THESE PERSONS. THE ASSESSEE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE BEFORE THE CIT(A) THAT SIMILAR ADDITION MADE BY THE AO IN THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2004-05 AND 2005-06 HAD BEEN DELETED BY THE CIT(A). AFTER CONSI DERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE THE CIT(A) DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 3.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND R EASONING GIVEN BY THE AO IN MAKING THE ADDITION. I DO NOT AG REE WITH THE AO THAT THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF PHOTO COPIES AND CUTTINGS OF OLD NEWSPAPER ARE SELF-SERVI NG DOCUMENTS AND HAVE NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE. THE APPELLANT IS IN THE BUSINESS OF PUBLISHING ITS OWN NEWSPAPERS AND INDIVIDUALIZED ITEMS NEED TO BE PUBLISHED IN ITS OWN NEWSPAPERS WHICH IS THE MAIN SOURCE OF REVENUE GENERATION FOR THE APPELLANT. THE ARTICL ES PUBLISHED IN THIS NEWSPAPER HAVE THE NAMES OF AUTHORS AND THAT E STABLISHES THE FACT THAT PARTICULAR AUTHORS ARE WRITING PARTIC ULAR ARTICLES/NEWS-ITEMS ON PARTICULAR PLACE IN THE NEWS PAPER FROM THE PARTICULAR PLACE IN THE WORLD. THE APPELLANT HA S UNDERTAKEN FOREIGN TRAVEL TO COVER IMPORTANT EVENT IN THE WORL D. THIS IS EVIDENT FROM THE PUBLISHED ARTICLES CANNOT BE SAID TO BE NOT INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR BUSINESS PURPOS ES AT LEAST IN THE SPECIFIC BUSINESS OF THE APPELLANT. THE FACT SH OULD ALSO NOT BE IGNORED THAT THE COVERAGE OF THE EVENTS HAD HELPED THE APPELLANT TO MAINTAIN THE CIRCULATION DURING THE YEAR UNDER C ONSIDERATION. THUS I DO NOT FIND ANY COGENT REASON FOR WHICH THE IMPUGNED ADDITION SHOULD BE SUSTAINED IN ABSENCE OF ANY DEFE CT IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT TO ATTRACT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTI ON 145 OF THE ACT. THERE ARE CLINCHING EVIDENCES TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ABOVE DISCUSSION THE FOREIGN TRAVELING EXPENSES ARE FOUND TO HAVE BEEN INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF BUSINESS AND ARE ALL OWABLE. ACCORDINGLY THE IMPUGNED ADDITION IS DELETED IN TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE INSTANCE CASE. THE APPEAL SUCC EEDS ON THIS GROUND. ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 8 15. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT(A) THE REVENUE I S IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 16. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORIT IES. THE AO HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT GIVEN PURPOSE OF EACH FOR EIGN VISIT AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CORRELATE PAPER CUTTI NG WITH EACH FOREIGN VISIT. THE CIT(A) HELD THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH THE AO THAT THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE IN THE FORM OF PHOT O COPIES AND CUTTINGS OF OLD NEWSPAPER ARE SELF-SERVING DOCUMENT S AND HAVE NO EVIDENTIARY VALUE. HE FURTHER HELD THAT THE ASSESSE E IS IN THE BUSINESS OF PUBLISHING ITS OWN NEWSPAPERS AND INDIVIDUALIZED ITEMS NEED TO BE PUBLISHED IN ITS OWN NEWSPAPERS WHICH IS THE MAIN SOURCE OF REVENUE GENERATION FOR THE APPELLANT. THE ARTICLES PUBLISHE D IN THIS NEWSPAPER HAVE THE NAMES OF AUTHORS AND THAT ESTABLISHES THE FACT THAT PARTICULAR AUTHORS ARE WRITING PARTICULAR ARTICLES/ NEWS-ITEMS ON PARTICULAR PLACE IN THE NEWSPAPER FROM THE PARTICUL AR PLACE IN THE WORLD. THE APPELLANT HAS UNDERTAKEN FOREIGN TRAVEL TO COVER IMPORTANT EVENT IN THE WORLD. THIS IS EVIDENT FROM THE PUBLIS HED ARTICLES CANNOT BE SAID TO BE NOT INCURRED WHOLLY AND EXCLUSIVELY F OR BUSINESS PURPOSES AT LEAST IN THE SPECIFIC BUSINESS OF THE A PPELLANT. THE FACT SHOULD ALSO NOT BE IGNORED THAT THE COVERAGE OF THE EVENTS HAD HELPED THE APPELLANT TO MAINTAIN THE CIRCULATION DURING TH E YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN DELETI NG THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 19.59 000/- MADE BY THE AO OUT OF FOREIGN TRAVE L EXPENSES. ACCORDINGLY WE UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 17. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISS ED. ITA NOS. 2630 & 2726/M/2010 MID-DAY MULTIMEDIA LTD. 9 18. TO SUM UP APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 22 ND DAY OF JULY 2011. SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL) (V. DUR GA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDI CIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATED: 22 ND JULY 2011 KV COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A) CONCERNED. 4) THE CIT CONCERNED. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE B BENCH I.T .A.T. MUMBAI. BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASST. REGISTRAR I.T.A.T. MUMBAI.